Thursday, April 28, 2005

The Frist "Compromise"?

I was always taught that in a compromise neither side is happy, or gets what it fully wants, but that both sides get something that they are seeking. By that definition, Bill Frist's latest proposals cannot really be called a compromise.

Here is Frist's proposed "compromise" on Judges:

a) Guaranteed up-or-down votes on nominations for Circuit Courts of Appeals and Supreme Court nominees.

b) Guaranteed debate time of up to 100 hours for those nominees.

c) Guaranteed reporting of nominees from the Senate Judiciary Committee to the Senate floor.

d) Guaranteed protection of the legislative filibuster.

I can only assume that Harry Reid has already said no, since there are no benefit to the Democrats under this "compromise". As a matter of fact, as far as I can tell, the Democrats gain nothing other than a specified, and limited, amount of debate time, which under the current rules are unlimited, until 60 Senators agree to close debate.

If Frist has the 50 votes, he should use them. If he doesn't then he will continue to talk about using the nuclear option, but not actually use it. Right now I believe that the latter is the more accurate description.
<