More Proof That Congressional Democrats Aren’t Interested In Discourse
Sigh...
In their support for the filibuster many Democrats have waxed poetic about the history of lengthy debate in the Senate. Frist's compromise allows for 100 hours of debate. That's a little over four twenty-four hour days. Or two and a half work weeks for the average American worker. All of that devoted to debating the merits of a single judicial candidate.
Why on earth isn't that enough? Can someone please explain to me why these perfectly qualified candidates can't get an up or down vote after 100 hours of debate? Or, lacking that, can Democrats finally admit that their objective in hindering the nomination process isn't out of a concern about discourse in the Senate a desire to derail each and every Republican initiative through obstruction?
WASHINGTON -- The Senate appears headed for a politically explosive confrontation over judicial nominations after a week in which Democrats and Republicans rejected each others' offers to head it off.
The latest overture came Thursday from Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn. He proposed ending the practice of bottling up judicial nominees in committee -- something that Democrats say Republicans did to 69 of President Clinton's nominees. Frist would allow an "exhaustive" 100 hours of debate for each appointee to an appellate court, including the Supreme Court. But Democrats would lose the ability to block Bush's appeals court candidates.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., dismissed the offer as "a big wet kiss to the far right."
In their support for the filibuster many Democrats have waxed poetic about the history of lengthy debate in the Senate. Frist's compromise allows for 100 hours of debate. That's a little over four twenty-four hour days. Or two and a half work weeks for the average American worker. All of that devoted to debating the merits of a single judicial candidate.
Why on earth isn't that enough? Can someone please explain to me why these perfectly qualified candidates can't get an up or down vote after 100 hours of debate? Or, lacking that, can Democrats finally admit that their objective in hindering the nomination process isn't out of a concern about discourse in the Senate a desire to derail each and every Republican initiative through obstruction?
Ziv
Move_Zig
robert108
likwidshoe
ellinas
Hoss
