What should the Democrats do if Repubs follow thru on the "nuclear option"

[kentuck]

...on the appointment of federal judges? Are they simply threatening in an attempt to get some of the weaker Democrats to fold on the right-wing judges or are they serious? This is a very serious threat. If they plan on using their "nuclear" option, what should the Democrats do?

Should they walk out of the Senate? Should they refuse to vote at all and let the Republicans vote on their own? How long should they stay away from the Senate? Will they be accused of shutting down the US Senate? Can the Republicans not vote on anything they want if the Democrats are not there?

any suggestions??

[Zuni]

1. Raise hell

They should walk out of the Senate in protest, and then get on the media and really sling some dirt

[LondonAmerican]

3. Leaving the Senate is a very bad idea

that's what the socialists did early in Mussolini's rule -- it was callled the Aventine secession -- and all it did was give him complete control of parliament.

[Tamyrlin79]

5. Well, then leave one to deny them unanimous consent to anything.

Then send the other 40-odd democrats across the country decrying what the Republicans are doing and have done. Once the NukeOp is effectively accomplished, taking the issue to the people and getting public support for any Democratic standoff that throws a wrench into the business of the Senate is really the only option left open.

[Skidmore]

7. We don't have a parliamentary system though.

[Zuni]

8. But once they push the nuclear option

we will lose much of our voice anyway. And I am not saying that we should stay out permanently, but we need to draw attention to the thuggish tactics being used to steamroll extremist legislation through

[Emit]

15. End unanimous consent...

End unanimous consent...


Pepperbelly discussed it here, and the article on this thread explains a lot:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1713585&mesg_id=1713952&page=


" Under the Senate's rules ... there are many things that they ...


are required to do ... read the Bills aloud when they come to the floor each time. Read the amendments into the record. Adding items to the record. To grease the wheels of the Senate, the tradition has been that all concerned give unanimous consent that this reading or that vote or whatever be waived. If no one objects (which they never do) then business proceeds. However, if Reid made sure that EVERY single thing was done EXACTLY as required by Senate Rules, the whole damned thing would lock up and nothing would go anywhere. "

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Article:

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20050408.html

Friday, Apr. 08, 2005


Why the Filibuster Is So Important, and What Its Effect Has Been


...

The result has been either the nomination of moderates or, at least, of judges and justices palatable to the minority party. Given that the judges and justices have life tenure, for the minority party to have this kind of input seems not only reasonable, but necessary. But now the Republicans want the Democrats, currently the minority, to have no input at all.


That is particularly unfortunate given that Senate Democrats represent the majority of Americans - as Washington Post columnist E. J. Dionne Jr. has pointed out. Dionne found, based on July 2004 Census Bureau figures, that the 44 Democratic Senators represent 148,026,027 people, while the 55 Republican Senators represent 144,765,157. (Independent Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords, who votes with the Democrats on such issues, represents 310,697, making the gap even greater.)


The filibuster could hardly be more important than it is at this particular point in history. Congressional Republicans have become a rubber stamp for anything the Bush White House wants. House Democrats have been effectively neutered by the rules of that body, where the majority controls. As a result, Senate Democrats, with their filibuster, are the only check on Bush's bid to impose hard right wing philosophy on the federal judiciary. And Bush is hell-bent on pushing his nominees through: He has resubmitted twenty judicial nominees turned down by the Congress earlier.

...

"Forgetting" the Fortas Filibuster: Gray's False Claim


The April 4, 2005 media briefing by the conservative coalition campaigning to kill the filibuster - mentioned above -- was broadcast by C-Span. There, former White House counsel Borden Gray, who is chairman of the Committee for Justice (an organization working to turn the federal judiciary to the hard right), spoke. However, he spoke falsely.


Gray claimed that the action by the Democrats in filibustering judicial nominees is unprecedented. Senator Frist had earlier called the action by the Democrats radical.


The reality is that there is plenty of filibuster precedent - and indeed, Frist himself participated in a Democratic nominee's filibuster.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. Go to some of the saner Republicans

and remind them that if we still have a democracy, sometime the GOP will be in the minority again. Do they want to kill the filibuster with that in mind?

In fact, I've heard some GOP Senators make this very comment.

[kentuck]

4. Should they be working with some of the saner Repubs behind the scenes?

Right now? Will they be able to accomplish that? Should they make it public that they are working with some Repubs to save the Senate? Would this plant seeds of doubt in the minds of the present Repub leadership, Frist, et al?

[Zuni]

10. I think the GOP would be stupid to go nuclear over a few judges

None of these judges are worth it if they have to deal with same handicap when Dems have the majority

[MostlyLurks]

13. Could the Pubs "unnuke" filibusters later?

Everybody uses the argument that the Dems will come back into power eventually and then the lack of filibusters would come back to bite them in the ass.

But what's to the Pubs from re-instituting the filibuster on the last day of a Republican controlled Senate? Is it something they could never bring back once they got rid of it? I don't understand why the "nuke option" is a point of no return. What Senatorial rule would prevent them from recreating the filibuster rule at the 11th hour as they were about to lose Senatorial control? Just curious.

Mostly

[kentuck]

14. You know how they operate..

:)

[kentuck]

6. Now it is being reported that McCain has come out against...

the nuclear option. If they can find 5 or 6 more moderate Repubs, the strategy will not work. That may be why it has not been done already? Frist knows he doesn't have the votes .... but has been doing some serious arm-twisting?

[Zuni]

9. McCain, Snowe, Voinovich, Specter and Chafee may help us

I think we could perhaps persuade them to vote against the nuclear option.

[BrainRants]

11. Begin laying the seeds to paint Republicans as obstructionist now...

They have been told that if they pull the NukeOp that Dems will shut down the senate.

If they still pull the NukeOp KNOWING the senate will be shutdown then they are knowingly obstructing the senate from doing the business of the people. (Well, really the business of special interests, but that's another thread)

OTOH, the special interests will be pissed that their agenda's aren't being rubber stamped, so they could exert additional pressure from the pig trough side of the spectrum.

[iconoclastNYC]

12. Every (D) senator should picket the steps of the capital

and protest the hijacking of our democracy.

[DearAbby]

16. They should walk out of the Senate in protest...

In effect of closing down the government, we as American Democrats should follow their lead by closing down what we can...in effect a STRIKE...SOLIDARITY

[eriffle]

17. it wouldn't close down the senate

The Senate only needs 51 people to have a quorum, without a fillibuster the only thing we can do is do away with unanimous consent which would require the reading of multi-1000 page bills out loud and was mentioned earlier in this thread. However, what would stop the GOP from changing this rule? Anyway, the only way to win this is to make sure the American public knows that the GOP wants to squash all dissent of all types, and I don't think that most americans want that to happen.

[kentuck]

18. I still think their best option may be to get moderate Repubs....

to join them. McCain has already publically declared. If we could get about a half-dozen more Repubs (are there that many left?) to join the Democrats, then all they can do is bide their time until they have the votes. They are patient - most of the time. But Frist would never bring it up unless he knew he had the votes ahead of time. They may have to do some vote-swapping and dog trading to get it done, such as, we will promise not to run an opponent against you if you stand with us this time?

[Lone_Wolf]

19. I have two ideas for our very own "Nuclear Option"...

1. A general strike until the Repukes relent...

2. All of us pulling our money out of our bank accounts until the Repukes relent...