How Long Can a Truce Last in the Senate?

Re “Senate Does the Sidestep,” Commentary, May 25: Ronald A. Cass is way off base in criticizing the “Gang of 14,” as he calls them, for compromising on the “nuclear option” on judicial nominees.

This is the bravest and most constructive thing that has come out of Congress this year, and shows that 14 responsible Republicans and Democrats can find a middle ground to stop the mean-spirited grab for power of the far right.

Has Cass forgotten that Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution gives the Senate the responsibility to advise the president about nominees and the authority to consent to (approve or reject) those nominations? Advice and consent are the key words here. If our arrogant president had done his part and consulted with the people-elected senators in the first place, there would never have been an issue about extremist judicial candidates.

Shirlee Browne

Redondo Beach

*

It is about time that we conservatives quit gnashing our teeth and claim victory on this deal. It will allow 90% of President Bush’s appeals court nominees to receive an up-or-down vote and most likely confirmation. In addition, it has the seven GOP moderates warning the Democrats that anything except extraordinary will be met with the rebirth of the “nuclear option,” which would most likely pass when Democrats eventually break the agreement (as they always do).

What is there not to like? Stop acting like martyrs and realize we have our boot on their throats and they are begging for mercy.

Richard Haskins

Los Angeles

*

Re “Senate Truce Faces Test of Bush’s Next Nominations,” news analysis, May 25: It’s nice that Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and his fellow senators have discovered “the idea that if you constructively engage each other, the political reward is high.” Of course, most of us learned this when we were 5.

Chris Gantner

Redondo Beach

*

Re the Senate filibuster: The clock is still ticking on the “nuclear option,” set to detonate when the next Supreme Court nominee is named. The agreement to preserve the filibuster for one Democrat’s “extraordinary” circumstances will simply be viewed by Republicans as “ordinary” obstructionism, and we will be right back to the same precipice.

This ugly fight has only been given a temporary reprieve.

David Marsh

Los Angeles