Bill Frist's Only Choice
Yesterday I expressed pessimism that the "compromise" in the Senate between seven agents of Minority Leader Harry Reid and seven traitors to Majority Leader Bill Frist would be only a short-term truce, but that it is already becoming the firmly established status quo ante.
However, if that status quo is to have any chance of being reversed, the reversal will have to come very, very soon, before it can become "set in cement." And a post over at Blogs for Bush got me thinking about the means Fristy could utilize to turn things around.
Actually, no, they will not have.
The "agreement" doesn't specify what "extraordinary circumstances" mean, which means they can mean whatever Harry Reid wants them to mean. The only concessions the Dems explicitly made were to allow up-or-down votes on Priscilla Owen, Janet Rogers Brown, and William Pryor. If they filibuster either or both of the latter two, then you'd have an unambiguous breach. That's why Frist said that Saad and Myers are in "limbo."
The explicit concession the McCain Seven made (to which the other 48 Republicans did not consent) was to eschew the Byrd Option for the remainder of this Congress. Frist, of course, isn't constrained from invoking it, but he's also deterred from doing so because, by design, he won't have the votes to sustain it.
Of the seven, I think five are actively committed to this "deal" (for their own respective, nominally overlapping reasons): McCain, Warner, Chafee, Snowe, and Collins. That leaves DeWine, who appears to have simply wanted to make a name for himself, and Graham, who fancies himself as McCain's towel boy.
I would wager that the last thing the latter two want to see is Frist calling their bluff on invoking the Byrd Option. As long as that doesn't happen, they can continue to bask in the short-term adulation of the opposition elites and defer confronting the longer-term consequences in the hopes that "the folks back home" will forget their treachery. But if Frist chooses not to be deterred and, in effect, calls them out, that confrontation will not only be vastly hastened, but will be maximally public in the same timeframe as their defection.
These men made an unprincipled choice to duck having to make a principled one. Poetic justice demands that they not be allowed to escape the latter; yet the gamble for Frist is that calling the "Seven Dwarves'" bluff will finish DeWine's and Graham's drift in their perfidious direction.
However, I don't think Frist has much of a choice. One B4B commenter suggests that
But the reality is that this is pretty much already the case. In fact, it's worse because McCain has, at this juncture, already prevented the breaking of the filibuster without Frist even making the attempt.
This is precisely why Frist must do so. If he tries and fails, the onus will be on McCain's treachery at least as much as Frist's dithering that contributed to it; if Frist doesn't try at all, the onus will be on him, and McCain will largely escape lasting blame for the debacle altogether.
If I were Majority Leader, I would move Saad and Myers ahead of Brown and Pryor on the calendar. Don't let the Democrats build a false PR momentum of confirming three Bush judges in a row. Force them to either yield on those two to keep DeWine and Graham from looking even more foolish, or filibuster them and run the risk of the "deal" collapsing under its own lopsidedness.
This might have been part of Frist's thinking in putting the Bolton floor debate right after now-Judge Owens' confirmation. If he applies that strategy in an actually relevant fashion, it just might work.
But whether or not it succeeds, it's the right thing to do.
However, if that status quo is to have any chance of being reversed, the reversal will have to come very, very soon, before it can become "set in cement." And a post over at Blogs for Bush got me thinking about the means Fristy could utilize to turn things around.
Sounds to me like the Democrats plan to violate the judicial filibuster compromise:
"Aides to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid told FOX News that Democrats will filibuster the nomination of Saad and William Myers to the 9th Circuit Court. Democrats say both nominees are exempt from the "[extraordinary] circumstances" clause in the bipartisan agreement...."
How is Saad an "extraordinary circumstance"? The article tells us Saad "has been endorsed by the United Auto Workers and, in the past, by the AFL-CIO. He's been lauded with praise by some high profile Democrats, and was given the American Bar Association's highest rating of "well qualified."
If the Democrats filbuster Saad and Myers they will have violated the agreement.
Actually, no, they will not have.
The "agreement" doesn't specify what "extraordinary circumstances" mean, which means they can mean whatever Harry Reid wants them to mean. The only concessions the Dems explicitly made were to allow up-or-down votes on Priscilla Owen, Janet Rogers Brown, and William Pryor. If they filibuster either or both of the latter two, then you'd have an unambiguous breach. That's why Frist said that Saad and Myers are in "limbo."
The explicit concession the McCain Seven made (to which the other 48 Republicans did not consent) was to eschew the Byrd Option for the remainder of this Congress. Frist, of course, isn't constrained from invoking it, but he's also deterred from doing so because, by design, he won't have the votes to sustain it.
Of the seven, I think five are actively committed to this "deal" (for their own respective, nominally overlapping reasons): McCain, Warner, Chafee, Snowe, and Collins. That leaves DeWine, who appears to have simply wanted to make a name for himself, and Graham, who fancies himself as McCain's towel boy.
I would wager that the last thing the latter two want to see is Frist calling their bluff on invoking the Byrd Option. As long as that doesn't happen, they can continue to bask in the short-term adulation of the opposition elites and defer confronting the longer-term consequences in the hopes that "the folks back home" will forget their treachery. But if Frist chooses not to be deterred and, in effect, calls them out, that confrontation will not only be vastly hastened, but will be maximally public in the same timeframe as their defection.
These men made an unprincipled choice to duck having to make a principled one. Poetic justice demands that they not be allowed to escape the latter; yet the gamble for Frist is that calling the "Seven Dwarves'" bluff will finish DeWine's and Graham's drift in their perfidious direction.
However, I don't think Frist has much of a choice. One B4B commenter suggests that
If Frist pursues the nuke option now and McCain somehow prevents it from being successful, Frist is gone, the party will be shattered, and standing on top of the rubble will be McCain, his rabble, and the smirking donks.
But the reality is that this is pretty much already the case. In fact, it's worse because McCain has, at this juncture, already prevented the breaking of the filibuster without Frist even making the attempt.
This is precisely why Frist must do so. If he tries and fails, the onus will be on McCain's treachery at least as much as Frist's dithering that contributed to it; if Frist doesn't try at all, the onus will be on him, and McCain will largely escape lasting blame for the debacle altogether.
If I were Majority Leader, I would move Saad and Myers ahead of Brown and Pryor on the calendar. Don't let the Democrats build a false PR momentum of confirming three Bush judges in a row. Force them to either yield on those two to keep DeWine and Graham from looking even more foolish, or filibuster them and run the risk of the "deal" collapsing under its own lopsidedness.
This might have been part of Frist's thinking in putting the Bolton floor debate right after now-Judge Owens' confirmation. If he applies that strategy in an actually relevant fashion, it just might work.
But whether or not it succeeds, it's the right thing to do.
posted by JASmius at 11:59 PM
<<< Home