Myths, Facts and Quotes: Judicial Nominations and Democrat hypocrisy

Myth #1: Senate Republicans are attempting to abolish all filibusters.
Fact: Republicans are seeking to reestablish the Senate's traditional role in the judicial nomination process, not eliminate all filibusters. (an initiative some Democrats have supported in the past.)

Myth #2: Filibusters of judicial nominations are part of Senate tradition.
Fact: Having to overcome a filibuster (obtaining 60 votes) on judicial nominations is unprecedented and has never been the confirmation test for a nominee. (In the past, even Democrats have called for up or down votes.)

Quotes from some of the most hypocritical of the Democratic leadership:
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) "I would object and fight against any filibuster on a judge, whether it is somebody I opposed or supported; that I felt the Senate should do its duty." (Sen. Patrick Leahy, Congressional Record, 6/18/98, p. S6521)

In 1998, Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) said: "We owe it to Americans across the country to give these nominees a vote. If our Republican colleagues don't like them, vote against them. But give them a vote." (Sen. Edward Kennedy, Congressional Record, 2/3/98, p. S295)

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) said government does not fulfill its "constitutional mandate" when judicial nominees do not receive a vote. "The basic issue of holding up judgeships is the issue before us, not the qualifications of judges, which we can always debate. The problem is it takes so long for us to debate those qualifications. It is an example of government not fulfilling its constitutional mandate because the President nominates, and we are charged with voting on the nominees." (Sen. Charles Schumer, Congressional Record, 3/7/00, p. S1211)

In 1995, the only Senators on record supporting the end of the filibuster were all Democrats, nine of whom are still serving in the Senate. (Bingaman, Boxer, Feingold, Harkin, Kennedy, Kerry, Lautenberg, Lieberman, And Sarbanes)