I've read all kinds of opinion all over the internet on the Senate compromise. Some of the posts at Brothers Judd have led me to realize that Bush (whose performance is, in my eyes, hovering a hair below 100%) : The President and his advisers are free to read the relevant Federalist paper FOR HIMSELF and come up with a different interpretation of what "Advise" means in "Advise and Consent" that is free from the Senate's desire to magnify their power over that of the Presidency. The Presidency is free to try to magnify its power over that of the Senate. The ORIGINAL design of our Consitution is fiendishly ingenious in that it exploits the natural human lust for power in the system of checks and balances between the branches of Government. This wrangling and maneuvering is not bad or evil: It's a FEATURE, not a bug.
To me, it's quite simple: When the Senate consents, it's when they vote in favor of the nominee. When they Advise, it's when they vote AGAINST the nominee and send them back with their SPECIFIC objections.
In short, a "I still have questions" or "I'm not comfortable with the nominee" IS NOT ADVISING. The President is not obligated, by the Constitution, to interact with a SUBSET of Senators. He is intitled to look past a domineering or subverted Senate "leadership", bypass them, and submit the nominee directly to the ENTIRE Senate. He is not required, by the Constitution, to grovel before the desires of a MINORITY in the Senate, much less 14 of them.
Here's hoping the President plays HIS Constitutional role and fights for HIS Office's power.
Posted by ptah at May 26, 2005 07:01 AM