Judicial Nominations:
After months of promising to break the Senate??¢â???¬â???¢s impasse over judicial nominations, Republicans are nearing the point at which they must deliver. But as Republicans signal increasingly that they are united on the issue, Democrats??¢â???¬â???¢ unity is beginning to break.
1) In many ways, the Democrats have outclassed the Republicans in their public relations campaign on this issue. This is thanks especially to disagreements among key Senate staffers over what sort of compromise can be reached. While Frist insists that he will settle for nothing less than a floor vote for every nominee that emerges from committee, there is word that some moderates would settle for less - perhaps for a Democratic promise of votes on a list of twenty judges. Other conservative staffers hope to preserve the filibuster for Republicans in the future through two forced rule-changes that would have the effect of requiring real filibusters, as in ??¢â???¬?????Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,??¢â???¬ until all Democrats have spoken twice.
2) But the debate does not appear to be moving in either of these directions. As of this writing, even less outspoken GOP senators - including George Voinovich (R-Ohio), Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), and Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) - are hinting that they will support the so-called ??¢â???¬?????nuclear option??¢â???¬ if Democrats refuse to compromise.
3) The nuclear option is a move to end, by a straight majority vote, the practice of filibustering the confirmation of judicial nominations. Republican leaders count only two or three GOP senators who will vote against this option - Sens. Olympia Snowe (Maine) and Lincoln Chafee (R.I.). They are likely to be joined by Sen. John McCain (Ariz.). That would mean 52 senators would go along with the parliamentary maneuver attempting to end filibusters on judges. Only 50 are needed because of Vice President Dick Cheney??¢â???¬â???¢s potential tie-breaking vote.
4) Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has promised to shut down the Senate if the Republicans invoke the nuclear option. But fissures have already appeared in the Senate Democrats??¢â???¬â???¢ unity, perhaps suggesting that they will be unable to do so. Pressure from business interests, who desire action on legislation important to them, will likely overwhelm such Democratic efforts to obstruct all non-defense-related legislation, as Reid had threatened.
5) Democrats lack the votes to prevent the nuclear option. This has prompted moderate Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) to argue for a compromise that could prove very damaging to Democrats. He notes that the judicial filibusters have cost Democrats dearly enough already in Red States. Some Red-State Democrats are uncomfortable continuing and expanding the judicial filibusters. Because the Republicans will evidently soon end the judicial filibuster, Nelson suggests that Democrats should bargain for something in return - namely, an end to the practice of bottling up nominees in committee.
6) Although Republicans never filibustered any of President Bill Clinton??¢â???¬â???¢s nominees, they did bottle some up in committee. Nelson, clearly thinking ahead to the next Democratic president facing a Republican Senate, proposes a rule change that would allow nominees to come to the floor for a vote if the Judiciary Committee does not act on them in a timely fashion. Ironically, Republicans would have loved such a rule in 2001, when Democrats seized control of the Senate in the wake of Sen. Jim Jeffords??¢â???¬â???¢ (I-Vt.) defection from the GOP.
7) Nelson named a handful of Democratic senators - including Ken Salazar (Colo.), Blanche Lincoln (Ark.), and Mark Pryor (Ark.) - who may be amenable to such a compromise. In published reports, these Democrats - along with Tim Johnson (S.D.) and Kent Conrad (N.D.) - have either expressed concern about blocking key non-defense-related legislation, or else stated flatly that they will not participate in filibusters against such legislation, even if asked to do so by Reid.
8) A successful ??¢â???¬?????Nelson option??¢â???¬ would prove extremely humiliating for Reid, more so than a successful nuclear option. Reid??¢â???¬â???¢s threats to shut down the Senate have painted him into a corner, especially after Democrats??¢â???¬â???¢ aggressive use of this issue in order to raise money for themselves and supportive 527 organizations. If Reid fails for any reason other than the Republicans??¢â???¬â???¢ numerical superiority - that is, if Democrats work to undermine the obstruction of nominees - it will anger the Democratic base and turn them against Reid.
9) If five Democrats can be found to support such a deal as Nelson proposes, Republicans could find the 60 votes necessary for a clean change of Senate rules to end judicial filibusters. Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.), the Rules Committee chairman, has expressed interest in this option, which would eliminate the rancor over the so-called ??¢â???¬?????nuclear option??¢â???¬ but with the same results. Several Republicans who currently feel uneasy about that heavier-handed technique would probably go along with such a bipartisan compromise.
10) If no compromise can be reached, Republicans will invoke the nuclear option. Nelson is the only Democrat who might possibly join this effort, but Bush will not press him to break party discipline if his help is unnecessary.
11) Conservatives insist that the solution to judicial filibusters must come soon - in May at the latest, but perhaps sooner. Otherwise, the problem of filibusters will still linger until the next vacancy appears on the Supreme Court. This could taint Bush??¢â???¬â???¢s next Supreme Court nominee and further politicize the court, just as the Bush v. Gore decision tainted the first term of Bush??¢â???¬â???¢s presidency.
Maryland Senate:
Since our last report, Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D) has opted out of the race to succeed retiring Sen. Paul Sarbanes (D), but Rep. Ben Cardin (D) is now almost certain to run. Still eyeing the race is Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D). Former Rep. Kweisi Mfume has already announced. On the GOP side, there is some optimism that Lt. Gov. Michael Steele (R) will run for Sarbanes??¢â???¬â???¢ seat. Although a Republican victory may be unlikely in liberal Maryland, it is not impossible. At the very least, a Steele run would tie up considerable Democratic resources. If Steele demurs, the race will be decided in the Democratic primary.
Rhode Island Senate:
Cranston Mayor Stephen Laffey (R) will make up his mind this spring as to whether he will mount a primary challenge to Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R). The possibility of such a primary challenge increases dramatically with the revelation that Chafee raised only $139,000 in the first quarter of this year - an embarassment for a sitting senator. Chafee??¢â???¬â???¢s survival is now very doubtful.
1) Although he has not committed to running against Chafee, Laffey is vigorously resisting pressure from national Republican leaders to stay out of the race.
2) The mere threat of a primary challenge still works to the benefit of the GOP leadership because it keeps the notoriously liberal Chafee in line for a few months.
3) Laffey believes not only that he will stomp Chafee in a GOP primary, but also that he stands a better chance than the incumbent of keeping the Senate seat in GOP hands. Only about 10 percent of Rhode Island voters are registered Republicans, although there are a very large number of independent voters in the state who can choose to vote in either party??¢â???¬â???¢s primary. Left-leaning Independents will have greater incentive to vote in the Democratic primary, in which a progressive political outsider, Secretary of State Matt Brown (D), will face the establishment candidate, former Atty. Gen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D).
