Ezliving_Jim

Deal Preserves Constitutional Superduper Majority
by Scott Ott

(2005-05-24) -- A bipartisan group of 14 moderate Senators last night struck a deal to preserve the Constitutional requirement of a 'superduper majority' for confirmation of judicial appointees by ensuring that any future nominee must meet the approval of 87 percent of the Senate.

As part of the deal, three of President Bush's nominees will receive prompt votes on confirmation and two others will be "cast into the yawning mouth of an active volcano."

"We're delighted to return to the intent of the framers of the Constitution," said Sen. John McCain, M-AZ, who led the compromise coalition. "The purpose of the Senate is to ensure the right of the minority to prevent any decision. This deal eliminates the unfair advantage of so-called 'majority rule'."

Seven Republicans and seven Democrats bucked their party leadership to forge the compromise, which Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-TN, called "disappointing" and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, called "a significant victory for our country."

"Of course, I'm as outraged as Sen. Frist that these mavericks have gone behind our backs and cut a deal," said Sen. Reid. "I'm only consoled by the knowledge that we've protected the Constitutional requirement for a superduper majority. Let no one think that I approve of what these renegades have done to undermine my leadership."

Mr. Reid called it a 'lucky coincidence' that the compromise still allows Democrats to filibuster judicial nominees in 'extraordinary' circumstances.

Asked to give an example of such a circumstance, Mr. Reid said, "If President Bush violates the spirit of bipartisanship by nominating a conservative to the bench, that would be deal buster leading to a filibuster."

mr belvedere

Children, children. They complain when they get their way, and they complain when they don't. This debate/argument in the senate has zero to do with selecting wise, fair, and qualified judges. It has everything to do with good versus evil. Both sides think they're the good ones, but in reality, they're both evil. They continue to squabble over a principle rather than work together toward judicial appointments that would best dispatch justice. Et tu, Brute? Good luck.