Senate on the brink of a filibuster fight

WASHINGTON – Top Senate leaders declared an unsuccessful end Monday to their compromise talks over President Bush’s stalled judicial nominees, despite fresh talk of a deal to clear five appeals court appointees while scuttling three others.

“I’ve tried to compromise and they want all or nothing, and I can’t do that,” Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada told reporters after a private meeting with Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.

“We both agreed that after several months of discussions, we have been unable to come to a negotiated position where the president’s nominees get an up-or-down vote,” Frist said.

By their comments, the two party leaders pushed the Senate closer to a historic confrontation that could decide the fate of the appeals court candidates, Supreme Court nominees during Bush’s term and the Senate’s venerable filibuster rules as well.

Democrats prevented final votes on 10 of Bush’s first-term appeals court nominees and have threatened to do the same this year to seven whom the president renominated. Frist has threatened to change Senate procedures to strip them of their ability to do so. At issue is the filibuster, a parliamentary device that can be overcome only by a majority of 60 votes or more.

Frist and Reid reached their self-declared dead end at the same time a small group of Democrats, who have been meeting with Republicans also eager to avoid a showdown, floated a proposal to clear the way for confirmation of some of Bush’s blocked appointees.

Under the proposal, circulated in writing, Republicans would have to pledge no change through 2006 in the Senate’s rules that allow filibusters against judicial nominees. For their part, Democrats would commit not to block votes on Bush’s Supreme Court or appeals court nominees during the same period, except in extreme circumstances.

Officials who spoke on condition of anonymity said Democrats involved in the compromise would vote to end any filibuster blocking a final vote on Richard Griffin, David McKeague and Susan Neilson, all named to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Democrats would also clear the way for final votes on William H. Pryor Jr. for the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals and Janice Rogers Brown for the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Both are among the nominees most strongly opposed by organized labor as well as civil rights and abortion rights groups and others that provide political support for the Democratic Party.

Three other nominations would continue to be blocked under the offer: those of Henry Saad to the 6th Circuit Court, Priscilla Owen to the 5th Circuit and William G. Myers III to the 9th Circuit.

Individual Democrats would be free to decide for themselves what constitutes an extreme case for future nominees, according to officials familiar with the proposal. At the same time, Republicans would be bound to leave filibuster practices in effect.

Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson, a Democrat seeking re-election in a Republican state, outlined the suggested compromise for Frist on Sunday night at a dinner at the Tennessee Republican’s home. Nelson also has spoken with Reid.

Frist has said all along he will not accept any plan unless it gives each of Bush’s nominees a yes or no vote.

For his part, Reid has not endorsed Nelson’s proposal, which would clear the way for confirmation of one more judge than the party leader has publicly signaled he would accept.

At the same time, he met with leaders of outside groups during the day, and a representative of one organization who attended said he did not reject the terms, either. This individual spoke on condition of anonymity.

Nelson’s spokesman, David DiMartino, declined to confirm the details of the compromise offer. He declined to say which other Democrats were willing to pledge to support the proposal, but a spokesman for Sen. Mark Pryor, Rodell Mollineaux, said the Arkansas lawmaker was “the No. 2 Democrat on this” effort at compromise.

Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz. and Trent Lott, R-Miss., have both been vocal advocates of compromise.

Republicans hold 55 seats in the Senate, meaning they can afford five defections and still triumph. Already, though, McCain and Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island have said they will break ranks. Vote counters on both sides have sad they expect Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine to do likewise.

Several other Republicans are publicly uncommitted, and neither side appears certain it has enough votes to prevail if the issue is put to a vote. At the same time, if six Republicans and six Democrats agree to a compromise of their own, they could impose it on the leadership if necessary, averting a showdown.

Even Republicans who strongly opposed the Democrats’ repeated use of filibusters argue that banning such moves would amount to a sweeping change in the way the Senate conducts business. The chamber’s uniqueness, they say, stems in part from the rights it preserves for the minority.

As a result, many have expressed hope that a confrontation could be avoided.

“I believe that we are skating over very thin ice here with regard to the continuity of life in the Senate as we’ve known it,” Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., said over the weekend on CNN. “I’m opposed to trying to eliminate filibusters simply because I think they protect minority rights, whether they’re Republicans, Democrats or other people.”