WASHINGTON — The Senate was unable to break the election-year blockade of judicial nominees Monday as Republicans filibustered one of President Obama’s popular picks for appellate court in Oklahoma. That all but ensures no further such confirmations will be made by this Congress, including a vote on William J. Kayatta Jr., a Maine attorney, who has served as a special master appointed by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Kayatta, of Cape Elizabeth, was nominated in January by Obama to replace Kermit Lipez, the only judge from Maine on the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals based in Boston. For months, Maine Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins have been pressing GOP leadership for a floor vote on his nomination, but now that appears unlikely.
The filibuster showed that neither bipartisan support for nominees nor the shortage of judges in the nation’s legal system would prevent the partisan fighting that is defining the countdown to the November election. The conservative Heritage Foundation warned senators Monday’s vote would be counted on its scorecard of lawmakers’ performances.
Oklahoma Judge Robert E. Bacharach was a largely noncontroversial figure, backed the state’s two Republican senators. The Senate voted 56-34, failing to reach the 60-votes needed to overcome a filibuster.
The GOP blockade was not without discomfort. Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.) said the situation was awkward because Bacharach was so well received.
“I cannot vote against this guy,” Inhofe said. In an unusual move, Inhofe simply voted present, as did fellow Oklahoma Republican Sen. Tom Coburn and Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah). Three other Republicans voted to confirm the judge: Snowe, Collins, and Scott Brown of Massachusetts, who is in a tough reelection battle.
Republicans defended their decision to employ the so-called Thurmond rule — named after the late Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.), who in early 1980 refused President Carter’s judicial nominees — as a necessary “time out.” The intent was to allow the incoming president to make appointments for such lifetime judicial posts.
But the GOP is also still smarting from Obama’s recess appointments this year of nonjudicial nominees Republicans opposed. Coburn called the rule “stupid.”
Democrats decried the blockade as an unnecessary expression of partisanship in an election year. But under the George W. Bush administration, Democrats also made some use of the rule, which Republicans prefer to call the Leahy-Thurmond rule after the Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.).
“If ever there was an example of crocodile tears, this is it,” said Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa).
Leahy, though, said Monday’s action was the first time a judicial nominee with bipartisan support from the committee had been blocked. “What they are doing now is a first,” he said.
(c)2012 the Los Angeles Times
Distributed by MCT Information Services
It’s high time that ALL Senator’s and Congressmen went and told all the special interest group’s that hold these so-called ‘report card’s’ to go take a long leap over the Grand Canyon. These ‘report card’s’ are nothing more than an extortion tool that they use to try and embarass the specific Member if they don’t vote ‘the right way’. Get these extortionist’s, of both sides, out of the way and maybe both House’s will finally get back to doing what they were elected to do. Until then, well, we have November coming and the press exposing just what, and who, these Member’s are working for. And the more that this type of Saturday morning cartoon nonsense goes on, and these Member’s are specifically tied to it thru their so-called Voting Record, the easier it’s going to be to see just who’s serving the pblic and who’s serving their campaign contributor’s. And despite what many may say, money in any form leaves a very visible trail back to it’s donor.
Such ‘report cards’ and ‘pledges’ have the significance a member chooses to give them.
They should try behaving like adults. Tell ‘Mom’, ‘ your ‘spouse’, or whoever “Yeah’ and then go do what you want. We all learn to – eventually.
If they are known by their constiutuencies as being effective representatives, it won’t make a big difference come re-election time.
Well said Sir, well said !
If Senators Snowe and Collins want to make a statement, this is the time. If they stand up and speak for confirming this nomination it would be a positive step. They need to show leadership if we are ever going to get beyond this partisan gridlock on nominations. It keeps getting worse and worse.
They only have today to do it as they are going on vacation again. Nothing gets done for another month.
It’s all part of the reactionaries’ pattern: first, declare modern government of any use in solving problems to be unworkable, too intrusive and the enemy of all that is good and true (“government is the problem” quoth the Gipper); second, to prove the point, harp on that theme for decades while using every possible political maneuver to keep legitimate government agencies from working as intended. What other reason can there be for the backlog of unresolved judiciary and executive department appointments and for depriving those departments the personnel and resources necessary to meet even their minimum responsibilities? Claiming the individuals are not sufficiently qualified is too lame a complaint, thus their resort to simple obstruction, and, given sufficient votes (think the 60 vote closure rule in the Senate) that’s the route they take.
None of it points to a popularly elected government that is up to the task of actually governing.
Welcome to the way things have always been done. There has been an ebb and flow to the cooperation one party has given to the other throughout our history. There is nothing new here except the Democrats want to push their agenda and the Republicans resist. After the Republicans take over in November the shoe will be on the other foot.
Will you complain as bitterly about the system then?
If you do then I might suggest you are favoring a more authoritarian form of government and not Democracy at all.
Didn’t they say they say that this is the first time a person with bipartisan support has been refused? If he is liked by both parties then they are simply not doing there job.
I am a firm believer in the idea that there is a first time for everything, but in this case I don’t buy it. If you can’t muster enough votes then it obviously isn’t enough “bi-partisan” support. Defeated by their own words.
The article says that he had bipartisan support of the committee. Then the vote of the full Senate was 56 to 34 after a few Republicans voted for confirmation. There may be a valid reason for the filibuster, but it’s being abused by the minority in the Senate whichever party that is at the time.
So we have always had this rate of filibustering? How the hell did we ever get any Judges past the Senate in the past??? Does this mean that the only time a judge can be appointed is when there is at least 61 Dems or Reps?
This is not the way “things have always been done.” This spring, the White House released statistics showing that only 70% of President Obama’s nominees had been confirmed, versus 85% for President Bill Clinton and President George W. Bush at similar points in their first terms. Additionally, President Obama’s nominees have had to wait far longer for confirmation votes.
A more authoritarian form of government… where do you get this bs?
One Party rule, the avowed agenda of the gop (remember that “permanent majority” thing…) served the communists well…
As I said above, this ideological purity thing is getting pretty old.
After the Republicans take over in November the shoe will be on the other foot? Feel free to hold your breath waiting for that to happen. Come November a bunch of those turdblossoms will be packing to go back home for good.
Ha LOL in you dreams.
I hope you are not counting your chickens before they hatch or did I miss something that stated the R’s are taking over. I really would be careful about what you post as you could be eating some humble pie. With what the R’s are doing and they have lost two or three from the party today as they are getting sick of their own party and believe me I know of two, plus myself that left the R’s.
‘cloture’ meaning closed for debate and put to a vote instantly
The Thurmond rule? So they’re going to pretend they haven’t been blocking non-controversial nominees this entire time? They’re going to pretend like they’re automatically going to start letting votes happen when Obama gets re-elected?
Complete and obvious dishonesty. They certainly earn their low approval rating.
The Republicans voted against this guy even though they like him.
Hardly a surprise since they are the same tractors who shipped missiles to Iran and are trying to destroy the US government.
More stupid partisanship by the gop… Disgusting, ignorant, senseless, anti-democratic… This ideological purity thing is getting pretty old…
One Party rule was for the communists. Funny how tightly the gop is embracing the concept now…
Bet you didn’t call the dems commies when they
did the very same thing to Bush appointments?
Bet you didn’t call the dems commies when they DID
have ONE party complete rule and didn’t allow the other
party ANY say. And the funny thing is,
they are the closest to wanting a communist ideology
than anyone. How soon we forget those Pelosi words….
WE WON! WE will write the bill!
Holding up highly competent nominations is just ONE symptom of the larger rot that has infected the republican party these days. Sure the dems held up ideologues, and maybe even a few competent nominees, but to hold up a record number of highly skilled, highly respected, NON-PARTISAN nominees is just more obstructionism from the party that has publicly avowed THAT to be its whole point and focus…
One Party rule is the rallying cry that has infected the gop. No compromise. Ideological purity.
Strictly speaking the gop doesn’t want a communist ideology, nor do the dems… party leadership at the helm of industry, ownership and control of the means of production doesn’t appeal to either corporatist party… but the allure of neo-liberalism and One Party rule to assure government is completely captured by elite corporatists and takes a hands off approach letting the predators and cronies reap the profits and socialize the risks… that’s what the gop is all about these days. All under some Randian fantasy that the individual is sacro-sanct, selfishness and narcissism is the right of the influential individual. By extension the concept that unfettered markets are sacro-sanct and unassailable is the gop’s mantra when any honest person knows markets are seldom free from manipulation, cartels, near monopolies, and some goods and services are not suited to be provided in competitive (whether rigged or not) markets.
I’ve studied enough microeconomics to know some of the undoubted benefits of capitalism. I’m old enough to have seen enough abuse to know where the flaws are.
One Party rule in order to optimize profit-taking and capital flows at the expense of society is bad public policy. To operate its politics in service to this idea the gop has shown itself to be the party of the 1%, furthering the largest UPWARD redistribution of income and wealth in the history of this country. One Party rule and a collectivist bent to accumulate wealth and power, pretty dangerous stuff.
Then in that case, since you are a guru in microeconomics, it is
only the gop who caters to the 1% as you call them? I guess you
didn’t look closely at the dems who cater to that same 1%. Your
progressive dem party is just as deeply involved in corporate
cronyism, which in turn hurts the free capitalistic market. When
you have politicians and an administration favoring those who
gain by those favors, you have the real thieves sitting in political
positions. The gop is not the ONE party who is doing this. I suppose
it isn’t your 1% who are attending 35K fundraisers for Obama? Open
your eyes and see that it isn’t JUST the gop who is doing wrong. The
socialist party which has become the dem party wants you to think
that you can’t exist without them wiping you. This 1% garbage is just
that…garbage. Business is there to make money…a profit…not to be
nice to you. I wouldn’t invest a dime in a company unless I believed they
would make me a profit and not just give it away to people who do nothing
and pay nothing. When a govt is run by ONE party as we have just witnessed
we get to pass a bill and THEN read it to find out what is in it. When something
is wrong or will hurt this country…I don’t want compromise. I want EITHER
party to say why it is wrong and stop any bill from being passed that is no good.
When one party, as we have just witnessed, will not even incorporate the other
party’s ideas and says WE WON, WE WILL WRITE THE BILL, don’t try to tell
me the gop is the culprit. As for the so-called 1%…you should be thankful that
they PAY what they are paying because without them, the 49% who pay NOTHING
would really be in trouble eh?
You apparently haven’t been reading my posts closely enough. One, I’m not a democrat. I’m un-enrolled. And, yes, the dems have their 1%-ers supporting them, but even there you have missed my point… It isn’t the fact that one is a 1%-er that is the problem, it is the hubris and greed with some 1%-ers that have and are rigging the system to their favor. THAT is my complaint. And there are plenty of 1%-ers that flip their support between parties depending on what policy they think is going to profit them the most
When wealthy people openly acknowledge that govt is for serving the interests of all people, and the public good, I applaud them. When they use their wealth, as many do, to promote these progressive values – and by progressive values I mean those values that make our society better for more people, progressing our society toward more fairness and equality in opportunity – I applaud them.
The publicly avowed agenda of the gop to prevent this president from succeeding and talks about establishing a “permanent majority,” and finances law suits that result in the travesty of ruling like Citizens United in service to establishing a permanent majority in fact… THAT is advocating for ideological purity and One Party rule… argue all you like around the fringes with your tit-for-tat partisan views…
“Business is there to make money…a profit…not to be
nice to you. I wouldn’t invest a dime in a company unless I believed they
would make me a profit and not just give it away to people who do nothing
and pay nothing.”
If your pro-business, pro-profit views leads you to overturn laws and rules that have protected the public good that ALL Americans should expect to enjoy… you don’t support policies that are good for the country, and your “no compromise” stance is worthy of being shut down in the harshest way for the uncompromising harm that potentially follows. Repealing Glass Steagall (by Clinton) was a enormous mistake, the revolving door between industry and govt is a huge mistake when it comes to health and safety, or environmental regulations, privatization of certain govt services is a huge mistake for services or markets that DO NOT respond to market forces in ways that serve the consumer: health care, for one.
The ACA… get over it… my god, people have been trying to pass health care reform, BOTH REPUBs and DEMS, for DECADES… With republican ideas forming the basis for Obamacare, coming from the Heritage Foundation, from Romneycare… Sure the devil is in the details, but pass legislation to fix the identifiable problems…
THAT is the normal process of compromise the ideologically pure gop caucus has abandoned….
One Party rule won’t work, Homer…