Asymmetrical Information

Interesting discussion; however, what keeps the chair from ruling that further amendments and other stalling are out of order, and having that ruling affirmed by a majority of the Senate in the same manner that Rule 22 had been de facto amended?

Thanx Jane: a super post and a must read for all of us.

No crystal ball, here; but I'm gonna guess that Karl Rove salivates over Schumer's need to run for election in 2004. (He unsat D'Mato, a republican. And, Schumer's history was in the House, where he weilded "dictatorial powers.") Rove's very impressive in Texas, where Bush beats Ann Richards in a slim race. And, he's surrounded by democratic office holders. AND, republican right wing nutters NOT favored by Rove.) Comes the re-election to the governorship and Rove sails home in victory. Attaching republicans to Bush's long coattails. Today, an earthquake in Texas politics has given Texas to the republicans. AND ALLL ARE LOYAL TO BUSH.

Schumer's days are numbered. So is the crazy aunt in the senate's attic (Byrd). History. Or, history about to be made. With 2003 fast approaching at least 3 dems fall off their senate horses. After that, the democrats will be lucky if they have 30 seated members. Sorry-er still if they're like Clinton, a lightening rod for hatred. And, other assorted crap in chairs. Rove, in 2004 hits a nifty-fifty. Sometimes you just need your enemy to sit atop a very high horse.

By the way, what happened in California, where Simon got to take Bush's favored candidate, Riordan, off at the primaries, won't happen again. Karl Rove will see to it that those republicans ALL go back to private lives. No one notices, but that's Rove's strength. You may think Rove has a high profile, but he's really running the president's horse.

Think of Wellington at Waterloo. And, Victor Hugo's words. He said the spot didn't need statuary. But a lottery ticket would do. The "man of calculus" ... Wellington, who plotted every move beforehand, won out on the genius, who operated on the field of battle through his guts. Hugo said the "man of calculus" won. And, the man of genius 'fell.' HISTORY REPEATS! Watch this stuff ahead. You don't even have to be a lawyer to understand how great these victories really are.

I think this looming confrontation shows why it was a mistake for the Democrats to force the issue now, rather than when it was time to confirm a new USSC justice. If they had waited until then to stand firm on the filibuster, the Democrats would have been able to:

1) Point to their relative reasonableness on lower court judges, and say with some justice that they had decided to draw the line at the Supreme Court;

2) If the Republicans then tried the Rule 22 gambit, the Democrats and the usual suspects among their interest groups could have made a big stink about it at a time when news coverage would be far more focused on the goings on than is the case at the moment.

As things stand, the Democrats have given the Republican Senate leadership the benefit of the same type of tactical blunder that Jacques Chirac made when he announced that France would veto *any* resolution permitting the use of force in Iraq--allowing Tony Blair to say "See? They're being unreasonable," and allowing him to suffer far less political cost for ignoring the UNSC from that point on than would have otherwise been the case. If Rule 22 gets blown up in the next few weeks, there is very little the Democrats can do as a minority party about future judicial nominations--including USSC nominations--because the filibuster will be gone as an effective tool, and the job will have been done under relatively little media scrutiny. If Daschle has the brains that God gave a jackrabbit, he's trying right now to figure a way out of this mess, because he has to know he's put his foot in it big time.

That's an interesting point, Scott, although I think that what the Democrats are afraid of is that if they confirm Estrada or Owen now, when it comes time for a Supreme Court appointment, Bush is going to say "so how come they were qualified to sit on this court, but not the Supreme Court?" thus forcing Democrats other than Chuck Schumer, with his liberal NYC constituency, to admit that they're trying to protect Bakke and Roe.

I still think that the only way this gets solved is to make the democrats pay a bigger political price for taking the unreasonable step of fillibustering Miguel Estrada. They are clearly on the wrong side of the facts in this issue and the more people know about it the more upset they are. I think that a left wing solution to this problem is in order because thats what left wing politicians think is the true measure of public opinion. FREE MIGUEL ESTRADA -- political prisoner since 09/05/2001 signs need to start showing up all over the nation. Bumper stickers, fliers, signs hung on a highway overpass... things like that. Put the name into the public consciousness. Have Free Miguel Estrada signs at the liberal demostrations right next to the free mumia signs. Have a website where everyone is uploading the most visible Free Miguel Estrada signs from all over the nation.

Damon, that's a cool idea.

Schumer's up for re-election in 2004. Can Tommy Franks be convinced (by Karl Rove) to run for this seat?

Worried about carpet bagging? How does Hillary complain?

Okay. Texas has Phil Gramm's seat opening up. Franks doesn't even have to move from Texas to run.

AND, YES, I HOPE HE DOES!

Schumer's days are numbered. Hope NY's republican party isn't as dumb as California's. Though Rove has a reputation of destroying republican freaks who try to grab the party's apparatus.

How does Schumer fall? I guess we get to wait and see. Don't we?

Scott asks:
Interesting discussion; however, what keeps the chair from ruling that further amendments and other stalling are out of order, and having that ruling affirmed by a majority of the Senate in the same manner that Rule 22 had been de facto amended?
Nothing, but each time the chair makes a ruling, a vote is required. Each vote takes several minutes, and a determined minority could force enough votes to keep things going forever. In order to prevent this, the leadership must control who gets to speak, denying some Senators the opportunity to even take the floor. But if the rules were changed in that way, the Senate would lose its distinctive character.

Comments are Closed.