The Senate used to have a rule that it required a
supermajority of 60 votes (out of 100 Senators) to end a filibuster and bring
nomination to a vote, and 67 votes to make a change in the Senate rules. The
principle behind this is that nominations, and Senate rules, are so important
that they ought to require concurrence from most Senators.
The so-called “nuclear option” was proposed back in 2005,
when the Republicans had a majority in the Senate. It involved changing the Senate
rules so a simple majority could pass a nomination and change Senate rules.
John McCain saw that this was a dangerous route, because while it would help
the Republicans at that moment, it would set a precedent that could be used
against them in the future. He organized a bipartisan “gang of 14” that killed
this idea.
Fast forward to 2013 and Democratic Senate leader Harry Reid,
faced with filibusters of judicial nominations from the Republicans , actually
went ahead and exercised the “nuclear option” against the advice of many of his
colleagues. It let the Democrats get a few nominations through over Republican
objections. And just before election night, Democratic Vice-Presidential
candidate Tim Kaine was boasting that when Hillary won they could use it again
to get her Supreme Court nominations through.
Guess what? Hillary didn’t win, and now the Democrats are
about to reap the whirlwind which they unwisely sowed, because they have set
the precedent. As it stands now it does still take 60 votes to approve a
Supreme Court nomination, but the Republicans can, if they wish, reduce it to a
simple majority. The Democrats will of course
“be outraged” and make all sorts of hypocritical statements about such a move –
but in fact they were the ones who did it first, set the precedent, and made it
possible. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb!
Posts
