Do Senate Dems Have the Votes to Go Nuclear?

WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 16: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) (C), speaks to the media while flanked by U.S. Sen. Tom Udall (D-CO) (L) and U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), after attending the weekly Senate Democratic policy luncheon at the U.S. Capitol July 16, 2013 in Washington, DC. Democrats gathered a the luncheon to discuss their agenda.
National Journal
Elahe Izad and Michael Catalini
See more stories about...
Elahe Izad Michael Catalini
Nov. 11, 2013, 4:15 p.m.

One group fa­vor­ing abor­tion rights labeled the nuc­le­ar op­tion a “dan­ger­ous power grab.” Five oth­ers said in a state­ment that they would “op­pose any ef­fort to take away the right of any Sen­at­or to fili­buster now or in the fu­ture.”

That was in 2005. Now, with Demo­crats run­ning the Sen­ate, those groups have largely si­lenced their cri­ti­cism of the “nuc­le­ar” op­tion, which would change Sen­ate rules and make it harder to fili­buster nom­in­a­tions.

But they still fear the nuc­le­ar op­tion — and that may have hindered Demo­crats’ abil­ity to carry it out.

While Demo­crat­ic sen­at­ors are again rais­ing the specter of a rule change, it is no longer clear that they have the 51 votes they’ll need to ex­ecute such a plan, ac­cord­ing to a Demo­crat­ic lead­er­ship aide. Sen­at­ors point to con­cerns raised by abor­tion-rights groups that worry a Re­pub­lic­an Sen­ate could one day clear an­ti­abor­tion judges on a simple ma­jor­ity vote, the aide said.

In­deed, while these groups are keep­ing a lower pro­file this time around be­cause Demo­crats are in charge, the wor­ries that fueled their full-court press against the Re­pub­lic­an ma­jor­ity in 2005 re­main.

“Our con­cerns would be that should the power struc­ture flip in the fore­see­able fu­ture, that con­ser­vat­ives would use wo­men’s re­pro­duct­ive is­sues as a ham­mer and a wedge,” said Anna Scholl, ex­ec­ut­ive dir­ect­or of Pro­gress VA. “That’s a very ser­i­ous con­cern.”

The cur­rent ef­fort in the Sen­ate is led by stal­wart re­formers like Sens. Jeff Merkley of Ore­gon and Tom Ud­all of New Mex­ico, but Ma­jor­ity Lead­er Harry Re­id and As­sist­ant Ma­jor­ity Lead­er Dick Durbin have kept a lower pro­file.

Durbin’s stock line about the nuc­le­ar op­tion is that there will be a “tip­ping point,” but he has yet to spe­cify when that would be. Re­id, nev­er shy when it comes to jab­bing Re­pub­lic­ans, has cri­ti­cized them for block­ing nom­in­a­tions but stopped short of say­ing he’s made up his mind to go nuc­le­ar.

Back in 2005, a num­ber of groups were vo­cal in ad­voc­at­ing against a rules change. Planned Par­ent­hood’s Ac­tion Net­work said at the time that it gen­er­ated al­most 115,000 calls, let­ters, and pe­ti­tion sig­na­tures against the nuc­le­ar op­tion. Civil-rights or­gan­iz­a­tions, such as the Lead­er­ship Con­fer­ence on Civil Rights, had like­wise cri­ti­cized Re­pub­lic­ans for pur­su­ing the meas­ure.

But Nan Aron, pres­id­ent of the Al­li­ance for Justice, ar­gues that this fight is dif­fer­ent than in 2005.

“We’re op­er­at­ing in a whole dif­fer­ent world now. The fili­buster was used only a hand­ful of times by Demo­crats to re­gister op­pos­i­tion to ju­di­cial nom­in­ees on mer­it. Now, ju­di­cial nom­in­ees are be­ing fili­bustered for an en­tirely dif­fer­ent reas­on, and that is solely for the pur­pose of ob­struc­tion, re­gard­less of who the nom­in­ee is,” Aron said. “This shouldn’t be ne­ces­sary at all — to call for rules re­form — but if Re­pub­lic­ans are go­ing to block votes on ju­di­cial nom­in­ees … to ob­struct, then the Demo­crats have no choice but to call for Sen­ate floor re­forms.”

Some ad­voc­ates be­lieve that Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans will likely pur­sue rules changes them­selves if they take the ma­jor­ity in the Sen­ate. In­deed, Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans say they would make such changes if Demo­crats change the rules now. Sen. James Risch, R-Idaho, says his mes­sage to Demo­crats is, “Do it” — in ef­fect dar­ing them to make the rules change.

The is­sue last came to a head in Ju­ly, when 98 sen­at­ors met in the Old Sen­ate Cham­ber late in­to the night. The deal that emerged soon after that meet­ing cleared the way for a hand­ful of Pres­id­ent Obama’s nom­in­ees.

But that agree­ment pre­served Demo­crats’ abil­ity to raise the is­sue again, which is pre­cisely what’s hap­pen­ing in the Sen­ate. Re­pub­lic­ans blocked Demo­crat­ic Rep. Mel Watt of North Car­o­lina to head the Fed­er­al Hous­ing Fin­ance Agency and Pa­tri­cia Mil­lett to sit on the D.C. Cir­cuit Court of Ap­peals.

The Sen­ate re­turns after the Vet­er­ans Day hol­i­day on Tues­day. Already Re­pub­lic­an sen­at­ors are prom­ising to block Cor­ne­lia Pil­lard, who’s also been ap­poin­ted to serve on the D.C. Cir­cuit Court.

“The Sen­ate rules aren’t work­ing,” Scholl said. “In­stead of be­ing used to pro­tect the rights of the minor­ity, [they’re] be­ing used for petty polit­ic­al games. [But] there are cer­tainly risks in­her­ent in mov­ing for­ward with the nuc­le­ar op­tion.”

What We're Following See More »
FOLLOWED CLOSED DOOR MEETING
Peña Nieto, Trump Trade Subtle Jabs in Statements
3 hours ago
THE DETAILS

Following their meeting, President Enrique Peña Nieto of Mexico and Republican nominee for president, Donald Trump, briefly addressed the media, with Peña Nieto subtly rebuking Trump's rhetoric. While he spoke respectfully about Trump, Peña Nieto did not back down, saying that free trade has proved effective and that illegal immigration into America from the south has decreased over the last ten years while the flow of people and drugs into Mexico has increased. Additionally, he stressed that Mexicans in America are "honest" and "deserve respect." Trump responded, calling some Mexicans "tremendous people" while saying others are "beyond reproach." Trump laid out five important issues, including the end of illegal immigration and the ability for either country to build a wall or border. However, Trump said he did not discuss who would pay for the wall.

LOWER COURT RULING STANDS
SCOTUS Won’t Restore NC Voter ID Law
4 hours ago
THE LATEST

A divided Supreme Court "refused Wednesday to reinstate North Carolina’s voter identification requirement and keep just 10 days of early in-person voting. The court rejected a request by Gov. Pat McCrory and other state officials to delay a lower court ruling that found the state law was tainted by racial discrimination."

Source:
SMOKIN’ AND SHOOTIN’
Court: 2nd Amendment Doesn’t Protect Pot Users’ Gun Rights
4 hours ago
THE DETAILS
CHICAGO DISTRICT
Woman Self-Immolates in Congressman’s Office
6 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"Police say a woman walked into U.S. Rep. Danny Davis' office on Chicago's West Side, drank out of a bottle of hand sanitizer, poured the sanitizer over herself and set herself on fire with a lighter." The Democrat wasn't in the office at the time.

Source:
ASKS CONGRESS FOR $1.1 BILLION MORE
White House Grants $53 Million for Opioids
8 hours ago
THE LATEST

"The Department of Health and Human Services on Wednesday awarded 44 states, four tribes and the District of Columbia a combined $53 million in grants to expand access to treatment for opioid use disorders and ultimately aimed at reducing the number of opioid-related deaths." But HHS Secretary Sylvia Burwell and drug czar Michael Botticelli both called on Congress to approve the $1.1 billion Obama has requested to fight the opioid crisis.

Source:
×