"Judicial nominees and the midterm election: Now what?" CHANGE SENATE RULES, THAT'S WHAT!

[Pryderi]

http://blogs.wvgazette.com/watchdog/2010/11/10/judicial-nominees-and-the-midterm-election-now-what/

Last week’s election saw Republicans retake control of the U.S. House of Representatives, and although they made inroads in the Senate, Republicans fell short of achieving a 51-vote majority. Thanks in part to Joe Manchin’s victory in West Virginia, Democrats still hold 53 seats in the Senate (including two independents who caucus with the Dems).

So what effect will the election have on President Obama’s judicial nominees?

The short answer: Probably not much.

Democrats had already lost their 60-seat super majority that, at least in theory, enabled them to easily overcome any threat of a GOP filibuster. Over the past two years, Republicans have proved very adept at preventing nominees from getting up and down votes, as have Democrats in the past when they were in the minority.

---------------
Any chance of changing the Senate rules to allow presidential nominees to either an up or down vote? How about 53 or 55 votes? How about eliminating secret holds?

[Ozymanithrax]

1. With the new Congress, I believe the Senate rules can be changed...

on a simple majority vote.

Until the New congress, it requires a 2/3rd majority.

I would like to see a change. But it will be an ugly fight, with the so called left wing media ripping Democrats apart.

[Pryderi]

2. What? Why 2/3rds majority?

[Ozymanithrax]

3. Because Senate rules require it.

Only at the beginning of a new congress do they make it easy to change the rules.

[SlimJimmy]

4. Why don't more folks know this? It's not like it's some hidden

rule only known to Senators.

[Ozymanithrax]

5. Because most Americans don't care about Senate Rules...

If it doesn't affect their lives in an obviouis direct way, they don't want to know.

[SlimJimmy]

9. Agreed. The reason I asked is because we recently had the same dicusssion on DU

regarding changing the filibuster rule.

[Pryderi]

7. Well, EXCUUUSSSEEE MEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!

[Ozymanithrax]

11. Ok. You are excused. n/t

[ladjf]

6. If they don't change the rules then the Dems or either dumb, cowardly

and/or are crooks. nt

[LiberalFighter]

8. And they don't consider the consequences if they lose control of the Senate?

If Democrats change the rules to majority then it opens it up if Republicans gain control of the Senate to do anything they want in regards to the rules.

[SlimJimmy]

10. That's correct. Be careful what you ask for.