June 19, 2009 5:02 PM
- Text
A Primer On Filibusters
(CBS)
By Steve Chaggaris of the CBS News Political Unit
As the escalating Senate fight over the filibustering of a handful of President Bush's judicial nominees threatens to come to a head this week, some are wondering what all the fuss is about.
Basically the issue is this: Senate Democrats feel ten of the president's nominees for federal judgeships harbor "extremist" views, and they've used the filibuster to block floor votes on those nominees. What invoking the filibuster effectively does is raise the bar for confirming a nominee from 51 votes to 60 votes. That leaves Senate Republicans, who have a 55-45 majority, five votes short of passing a filibustered nominee.
While the filibuster has never been used in this way for lower court nominees (it was used once to block a nominee for Supreme Court Chief Justice in 1968), Democrats defend themselves by saying that this is one of the "checks and balances" spelled out in the Constitution.
Republicans charge the Democrats' actions are unprecedented and are not protected by the Constitution. Because of that, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., is contemplating drastic action to force "up-or-down votes" on these nominees.
The "Nuclear Option"
"It is only fair that the Senate promptly consider judicial nominees on the floor, discuss and debate their qualifications, and then vote to confirm or not to confirm them," President Bush said in a statement Monday.
In order to force votes on the floor, Frist has threatened to use the so-called "nuclear option," which would change Senate rules to eliminate filibusters on judicial nominees. The nuclear option would not affect any other types of filibusters.
For Frist to get his way he would need at least 50 votes to force a rule change; Vice President Cheney could break a 50-50 tie in favor of the Republicans.
It's unclear whether Frist has the votes to do this, but it is clear that several Republicans either oppose the nuclear option or are on the fence. That's created a situation where both sides have increased the rhetoric in order to sway the undecided senators and public opinion.
As the escalating Senate fight over the filibustering of a handful of President Bush's judicial nominees threatens to come to a head this week, some are wondering what all the fuss is about.
Basically the issue is this: Senate Democrats feel ten of the president's nominees for federal judgeships harbor "extremist" views, and they've used the filibuster to block floor votes on those nominees. What invoking the filibuster effectively does is raise the bar for confirming a nominee from 51 votes to 60 votes. That leaves Senate Republicans, who have a 55-45 majority, five votes short of passing a filibustered nominee.
While the filibuster has never been used in this way for lower court nominees (it was used once to block a nominee for Supreme Court Chief Justice in 1968), Democrats defend themselves by saying that this is one of the "checks and balances" spelled out in the Constitution.
Republicans charge the Democrats' actions are unprecedented and are not protected by the Constitution. Because of that, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., is contemplating drastic action to force "up-or-down votes" on these nominees.
The "Nuclear Option"
"It is only fair that the Senate promptly consider judicial nominees on the floor, discuss and debate their qualifications, and then vote to confirm or not to confirm them," President Bush said in a statement Monday.
In order to force votes on the floor, Frist has threatened to use the so-called "nuclear option," which would change Senate rules to eliminate filibusters on judicial nominees. The nuclear option would not affect any other types of filibusters.
For Frist to get his way he would need at least 50 votes to force a rule change; Vice President Cheney could break a 50-50 tie in favor of the Republicans.
It's unclear whether Frist has the votes to do this, but it is clear that several Republicans either oppose the nuclear option or are on the fence. That's created a situation where both sides have increased the rhetoric in order to sway the undecided senators and public opinion.
- 1
- 2
- Next Page »
Popular Now in Politics
- Archbishop Dolan urges Obama to back down on birth control
- After Tues. sweep, Santorum seeks to gain speed
- STOCK Act passes in House
- Fallon vs. Obama in fitness challenge
- Santorum sweeps Missouri, Minnesota, Colorado
- Congressional approval hits another all-time low
- Former Giffords aide to run for her House seat
- Romney says his conservatism will shine
- Dems fight back in contraceptive battle
- Contraception issue heats up as Santorum gains
- What Does 'GOP' Stand For?
- No more Mr. Nice Guy for Santorum
- Obama leads Romney in Virginia poll
- Santorum: I'm the consistent social conservative
- Report: Chicago cardinal joins contraceptives fight
- Is Rick Santorum conservatives' last, best hope?
- White House under pressure over contraception
Latest CBS News Headlines
on Facebook
on CBS News
- Correction: Farmers-Immigration-Georgia story
- How chips, PCs, services companies are faring
- How consumer-electronics makers are faring
- A look at cable, satellite TV earnings reports
on Facebook
- Adele sings a cappella for Anderson Cooper
- Tenn. father charged with murdering couple who"unfriended" daughter on Facebook
- Josh Powell had "incestuous" images on his home computer, authorities say
on CBS News






