No filibuster on Sotomayor nomination ... provided Mel Martinez is a man of his word
One curious (and wholly predictable) phenomenon of the Democratic majority in Congress and the White House has been the degree to which Republicans' past statements can be used against them. On topics like the unitary executive and respect for the president, GOP leaders who were all for them from 2001 till 2009 regularly have been revealed as the hypocrites most thinking people knew they were all along now that Barack Obama occupies the Oval Office.
Another such topic that drew a lot of attention from media and the public alike during the Bush crime syndicate's reign of error was judicial appointments. There are innumerable examples of Republican senators chastising the Democrats for allegedly obstructing Bush appointees, but they've made noise recently about reversing themselves on the filibuster option.
Well, folks, never fear. Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) has stated on the record that he will oppose filibusters and insist on an up-or-down vote for judicial nominees. At least that's what he said shortly after taking office in 2005:
As part of my duties as Senator, according to the Constitution, I have the obligation to provide ‘advise [sic] and consent’ on judicial nominees. I am unable to fulfill this duty when qualified judicial nominees are denied the opportunity for an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor.There presently are 59 Democratic senators (pending the seating of Senator-elect Al Franken (D-Minn.) and including newly-Democratic Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania), just one vote shy of the number needed to invoke cloture and force an end to any filibuster. So, presuming all the Democrats stick together (I'm looking at you, Harry Reid), just a single crossover Republican will ensure that no filibuster can hinder the swift confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.
I have not been a part of the partisan struggles of the last 12 years [1993-2005], and I know there is a lot of water under the bridge on both sides regarding judicial nominees. But I think we need to put the partisanship behind us and look at ways to resolve this in a way that doesn’t exacerbate the partisan atmosphere of the Senate even further. We need to do a better job of working together to do the people’s business.
However, as I traveled the highways and byways of Florida, one of the issues I heard about time and time again was that people wanted to see judges confirmed. I promised I would fight for up-or-down votes for all judicial nominees. I am still hopeful that we can come together, but I will vote if necessary to end the unprecedented filibustering of judicial nominees from having their vote on the Senate floor.
It is an integral part of maintaining a high-caliber judiciary that nominees are treated fairly and with respect. If we continue down this path and leave nominees in limbo for years – as has become common practice – we will be unable to recruit high-level attorneys to leave private practice and serve our federal judiciary. These people deserve their vote on the Senate floor.”
Sen. Martinez is not running for reelection next year, so he faces no real risk of political fallout either within the Senate or from his constituents. So, how about it, Senator? If push comes to shove, are you going to keep your word?
(h/t to Eric Jotkoff of the Florida Democratic Party)
Labels: Barack Obama, Eric Jotkoff, filibuster, Mel Martinez, Republicans, Sonia Sotomayor, Supreme Court
posted by Sinfonian at 9:46 AM
