The 7 "Compromising" Dems and the Abortion Issue

[welshTerrier2]

The agreement entered into by 7 Democrats states that they will only support a filibuster in "extraordinary" circumstances ... it is widely accepted that this entire debate was not really just about the 7 prospective judges currently before the Senate but rather a focus on likely near-term vacancies on the Supreme Court ...

and, of course, one of the "hot" issues on the Supreme Court is the national debate on the abortion issue (i won't entertain the various "framing" jargons at this time) ...

so, if the Supreme Court is to consider the possible overturning of Roe v. Wade, and if Democrats, especially the 7 "compromising" Democrats agreed not to filibuster judicial nominees except in "extraordinary" circumstances, it seemed worthwhile to try to assess just what these 7 Democrats might consider "extraordinary" ... I, for one, would consider any judge who has clearly opposed Roe v. Wade as "extraordinary" given the current delicate balance on the Court ... a right-wing extremist judge would likely tip the balance on the abortion issue ...

so, using Project Vote Smart (http://www.vote-smart.org/), i researched NARAL's position on the 7 Democrats ... here, is a recap of their "ratings" ... for the purpose of simplicity, i used my assessment of the numeric scores that were provided over several years ...

NARAL's Rating of the 7 "Compromising" Democrats:

Byrd - erratic
Inouye - excellent
Landrieu - erratic
Lieberman - excellent
Nelson - poor
Pryor - poor
Salazar - N/A

What's at issue here is where the Democratic Party stands on the issue of choice ... what's not clear with the "centrist" wing of the Party involved in yesterday's "compromise" is exactly what has, and has not been, "compromised" ...

Chairman Dean has made several statements over the last few months about the need to "reframe" the issue of choice ... some have questioned whether this means the Party is abandoning its absolute position supporting a woman's right to choose ... i think it would be extremely important for Dr. Dean, and all leading Democrats, to clearly and unequivocably restate their commitment to a woman's right to choose in light of recent events ...

[uppityperson]

1. I had the Supreme Court "oh shit" moment yesterday

I was listening to NPR talk about Mr.bush getting his chance to swing the Supreme Court in this next yr and realized why the dems were even talking compromise about the filibuster right now. Save the crisis for the Supreme Court. Yes, too many conservative judges have been placed so far. Yes I am appalled at appointing more. Having been a vehement NARAL/ right to chose supporterfor yrs, I agree that they needed to compromise now and save it for the bigger battle coming up (Supreme Court). Be patient, the fireworks will still happen.

Thanks for this list, it is interesting. 2 Excellent, 2 Poor, 2 Erratic, 1 unkown.

20 years ago the dems and repubs were much closer in what they were focusing on. Part of the problem I see for the Dems is that it is encompassing so many people with so many different viewpoints that it is impossible to get 1 single position on anything (it seems like the main thing right now is ABB). It will be interesting to see how we continue to pull together to fight those who believe everyone should think, believe, act as they tell them to.

[woodleydem]

2. This compromise was a good deal for Democrats because it reserves the

right to filibuster a Supreme Court nominee. Yes, letting the three nut jobs on the circuit and appellate courts sucks, but the real battle is the Supreme Court. Rehnquist is the one most likely to step down due to his health, and considering that he is one of the conservatives on the court, it's doubtful that Bush will be able to swing the court unless someone else in addition to Rehnquist leaves during Bush's term. Nevertheless, when Bush inevitably nominates an extreme radical for the Supreme Court, many liberals around here will be thanking the centrists Senators for saving the option to filibuster.

[Eliot Spitzer 2006]

3. You are so right

and I can't wait to see how the Supremes will rule on the abortion case they accepted yesterday.