Republicans No Longer Heart Up & Down Votes

Americablog has a fascinating video of Senate Republicans blocking every single nominee of President Barack Obama. Republicans bitched and moaned about an "up or down vote" when President Bush was in the White House.

Sen. Bill Frist, speaking on bahalf on Bush nominee Priscilla Owen.

Mr. President, I rise today as the leader of the majority party of the Senate. But I do not rise for party. I rise for principle. I rise for the principle that judicial nominees with the support of a majority of senators deserve up-or-down votes on this floor.

Sen. Lamar Alexander warned the (then minority) Democrats not to oppose Bush's judicial nominees.

"I am beginning to think it is a train and that there is not much way to avoid a train wreck. The train wreck I am talking about is a threat by the minority to 'shut the Senate down in every way' if the majority adopts rules that will do what the Senate has done for 200 years, which is to vote up or down the President's appellate judicial nominees."

With Obama in the Oval Office, Alexander now supports denying an up and down vote on Obama's nominee to replace Supreme Court Justice Stevens. It's amazing how an election can change Sen. Alexander's outlook towards nominees.

“Justice Stevens has had a long and impressive career. I hope President Obama will nominate his successor from the middle and not from the fringe. His nominee will be fairly and respectfully considered. The question is not whether the president’s nominee is politically ‘on my side,’ but whether he or she is well-qualified and has a record of being impartial. In truly extraordinary cases, I reserve the prerogative to vote no on confirmation or even to vote to deny an up-or-down vote.”

Sen. John Cornyn, in an op-ed piece for the National Review. The irony of the op-ed reads like an Onion parody.

After all, it is wrong for a partisan minority of senators to treat good people like statistics; wrong to mistreat distinguished jurists with unprecedented filibusters and unconscionable character attacks; wrong to hijack the Constitution and seize control of the judicial-confirmation process from the president and a bipartisan majority of the Senate; wrong to deny up-or-down votes to judicial nominees simply because a partisan minority of senators cannot persuade the bipartisan majority to vote against a nominee; and wrong not to play fair, follow tradition, and allow a vote. Once is bad enough, and four unconstitutional filibusters is four too many.

Yes, it would be wrong for a legislative minority to oppose nominees strictly for partisan purposes. Thank you for pointing that out, Sen. Cornyn.