On Fri, 01 May 2009 15:41:41 -0500, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

wrote:
Much of the media was all aflutter (or maybe a-twitter...) over Specter
switching parties, but he votes nay on Obama's budget, and then, he's the
possible/probable go-to guy for a yea vote on getting an iffy nominee of Obama's
for SCOTUS out of committee - by current rules, at least one R must vote yes to
get a nom out of the committee.

That's not technically true. One member of the minority must
vote yes to end the debate before a nomination can be listed for
Committee consideration during an Executive Business Meeting.
Once the nomination is listed for consideration a simple majority
vote determines whether the nomination is ordered reported to the
full Senate.

Specter certainly knew that and I'm pretty sure
Souter would have, too. I've heard, um, "speculation" (again, DC style) that
most middle-of-road types of both parties intend that any potential noms need to
be, well, middle-of-the-road types - they better be somewhere between Souter and
Roberts, and another Sandra Day O'Connor-type would be OK, but some half-assed
Ruth Ginsburg-wannabe (I'm not sure even an actual RBG clone would fly) would
not.

The Republicans wouldn't dare hold up a Supreme Court nominee in
committee by refusing to allow the Judiciary Committee to hold a
vote.

Oops, nope - there's no "refusing" to allow the committee to vote. As I
shorthanded it, but you expounded upon, they simply can vote to continue the
debate - they would not be voting to "refuse" to do anything, except, if one
wants to phrase it as such, "refusing to vote yes to end the debate." IAC, they
wouldn't be voting to refuse to allow the committee to vote and if a
questionable nominee is presented, there should be plenty of debate (and given
the Dems past history with such, they'd be hard-pressed to claim otherwise). And
the Rs have no real incentive to allow a nominee too far to the left out of
committee - there's little chance to get hurt by it.

That's a non-starter, more deancounter wishful thinking, and
I'm sure the thought never crossed Souter's mind.

Um, well, you were sure Phil Graham is a US Senator, too...

But, having said that, I sure do wish they'd try. Talk about a PR
nightmare for the GOP in the mid-terms.

Actually, it could be worse for the Dems - well, certain Dems, anyway.

HTH,
R