And McConnell takes the deal
Who got the better deal on judges?
Here is the story for your analysis:
The reports we have seen in several conservative journals are all positive about what Republican Majority Leader (emphasis on Majority) Mitch McConnell achieved in his bargaining with Charles “Chucky” Schumer, Senate Minority Leader, emphasis on Minority . They seem to range in our interpretation from complimentary for crafty deal making to having Schumer over a barrel, to how Chucky out-smarted himself to Mitch McConnell put a gun to Schumer and said “judgeships or else”.
Or else what?
Perhaps there are some Senate intricacies we are not aware of but based on what is reported about the ” bargaining chips” it seems that McConnell had them all before and after November no matter the election results at least until January 2019. And Schumer was betting (now) that the Democrats best chance to win the Senate required that they be released to campaign (although they were their based on Schumer-forced scheduling of more debate). So McConnell accommodated him?!
As a result Republicans get 15 judgeship in return for letting Democrats (and the few Republicans in any sort of a race) go campaign. But isn’t that number and more available to McConnell by sticking it out and sticking it to Democrats for their threat, making them live up to the rules they wanted implimented (ala Alinsky)?
Hell McConnell should call for the 30 hours of debate Schumer thought he was being so forceful in using to delay confirmations . . . and keep the Democrats in Washington, to their detriment by Schumer’s bet. If The Hill’s analysis is right Chucky had to make the hard decision to let the judgeships go through so his boys and girls could go campaign and win, that was his bet.
But what Schumer really gave was what was McConnell’s for the taking and perhaps could have been expanded on even in a lame-duck session even if Democrats won in November or increased after a win come January with an expanded Republican Senate. The thing is McConnell could see Schumer’s hold cards and Schumer’s “tell” that he had to get his people out to campaign. Why not deny him that opportunity and Schumer/Democrats would have no one to blame but themselves?
Sure, if my presumption is correct, McConnell can add to the judgeships in the lame-duck term as well, but will he? And the question still arises why give Schumer anything he wants after what he and the rest of the Democrats have done to the process, and by Schumer’s estimation increase the Democrats’ chance of a takeover?
R Mall
