- The Washington Times - Thursday, March 30, 2017

Senator Claire McCaskill, Missouri Democrat, isn’t disclosing how she plans to vote for Judge Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation, but an audio recording that’s surfaced from a fundraising event suggests she isn’t fond of the idea to filibuster the judge.

Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, has encouraged his colleagues to filibuster President Trump’s nominee. But not all Democrats have been quick to agree with the leader’s strategy.

“The Gorsuch situation is really hard. There are going to be people in this room that are going to say, ’No, no, no. You cannot vote for Gorsuch,’ ” McCaskill said in the recording published by The Kansas City Star. “Let’s assume for the purposes of this discussion that we turn down Gorsuch, that there are not eight Democrats that vote to confirm him and therefore there’s not enough to put him on the Supreme Court. What then?”

Ms. McCaskill goes on to say that Judge Gorsuch was “one of the better ones” on Mr. Trump’s short list for Supreme Court nominees.

The Star obtained the recording from a person connected to the Missouri Republican Party. It’s reportedly from a fundraising event in Springfield, Missouri.

“So they pick another one off the list and then they bring it over to the Senate and we say no, no, no, this one’s worse. And there’s not enough votes to confirm him. They’re not going to let us do that too long before they move it to 51 votes,” Ms. McCaskill said, referencing the potential of Republicans going “nuclear” and changing the senate rules to avoid a filibuster.

To overcome a filibuster, Judge Gorsuch needs 60 votes. But there are only 52 Republicans in the majority, so eight senators from the Democratic Caucus would need to back his confirmation. If eight senators don’t join Republicans in voting for him, Republicans will have to go “nuclear” and change the vote to a simple majority in order to get him confirmed.

Ms. McCaskill suggested the filibuster would be better if used on the next nominee, who could be replacing a liberal justice instead of using it on a conservative justice replacing another conservative, the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

“So they move it to 51 votes and they confirm either Gorsuch or they confirm the one after Gorsuch,” said Ms. McCaskill. “They go on the Supreme Court and then, God forbid, Ruth Bader Ginsburg dies, or (Anthony) Kennedy retires or (Stephen) Breyer has a stroke or is no longer able to serve. Then we’re not talking about Scalia for Scalia, which is what Gorsuch is, we’re talking about Scalia for somebody on the court who shares our values. And then all of a sudden the things I fought for with scars on my back to show for it in this state are in jeopardy.”

John LaBombard, Ms. McCaskill’s spokesman, said she gave “an honest answer to a question.”

“She was asked about the lay of the land with the Gorsuch nomination and gave her thoughts. She didn’t say how she is going to vote on the nomination because she hasn’t decided yet,” Mr. LaBombard told The Star.

• Alex Swoyer can be reached at aswoyer@washingtontimes.com.

Copyright © 2024 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide