The non-partisan Congressional Research Service came out with a report Thursday, May 2nd titled "President Obama’s First-Term U.S. Circuit and District Court Nominations: An Analysis and Comparison with Presidents Since Reagan."
In it, a comprehensive comparative analysis is conducted of judicial nominations under the past five presidents. The findings were mixed, but a general trend of unusually high obstruction was present among most of the datapoints.
A list of key facts from the report:
During the first terms of the five most recent Presidents (Reagan to Obama), the
30 confirmed Obama circuit court nominees were tied with 30 Clinton nominees
as the fewest number of circuit nominees confirmed. The percentage of circuit
nominees confirmed during President Obama’s first term, 71.4%, was the
second-lowest, while the percentage confirmed during G.W. Bush’s first term,
67.3%, was the lowest.
President Obama’s first term, compared with the first terms of Presidents Reagan
to G.W. Bush, had the second-fewest number of district court nominees
confirmed (143 compared with 130 for President Reagan) and the second-lowest
percentage of district court nominees confirmed (82.7% compared with 76.9%
for President G.H.W. Bush).
The average number of days elapsed from nomination to confirmation for circuit
court nominees confirmed during a President’s first term ranged from 45.5 days Nomination and Confirmation of U.S. Circuit and District Court Judges during President Reagan’s first term to 277 days during President G.W. Bush’s. For district court nominees, the average time between nomination to confirmation ranged from 34.7 days (Reagan) to 221.8 days (Obama).
The median number of days from nomination to confirmation for circuit court
nominees confirmed during a President’s first term ranged from 28 days
(Reagan) to 225.5 days (Obama). For district court nominees, the median time
elapsed ranged from a low, again, of 28 days (Reagan) to 215 days (Obama).
In these stats, the obstruction faced by President Obama in the area of judicial nominations is at least as bad as President George W. Bush, and in many metrics, worse than Bush.
The most telling part of the report to me was this:
President Obama is the only one of the five most recent Presidents for whom, during his first term, both the average and median waiting time from nomination to confirmation for circuit and district court nominees was greater than half a calendar year (i.e., more than 182 days).
And here is the talking point that needs to be pressed against the Republicans to force their hand and dislodge this stonewalling of Obama's nominees. In recent history, this is an unprecedented degree of obstruction causing more than half-a-year waiting time for judicial nominees.
Jonathan Berstein at the Washington Post delves deeper into describing the comparisons made in the CRS release:
But Obama, like Ronald Reagan, had a same-party Senate majority during his first term. He should have had among the best results over any recent president, all things being equal.
What changed when Obama took office, however, was the extension of the filibuster to cover every single nominee. Republicans didn’t always vote against cloture (or even demand cloture votes), but they did demand 60 votes for every nominee. That’s brand new. It’s true that Democrats filibustered selected judicial nominations during the George W. Bush presidency, but only at the circuit court level, and not every single one.
That meant that despite solid Democratic majorities and solid support from those Democrats, Obama’s judicial approval statistics are basically the worse of any of the recent presidents.
So while it was bad for Bush when he was facing Democratic Senate majorities -- the situation with Obama is different, as his party has a strong majority in the Senate, yet his statistics on nominees being obstructed are as bad or worse than Bush's.
This is yet more conclusive, non-partisan, objective data to support the argument of GOP obstruction (in this case, in the area of blocking judicial nominations).
As Wonkblog has reported, there have been more general filibusters (not just of judicial nominees) by the current Republican minority against the Democrats than ever before in the history of the Senate:
Let's just hope, when/if the tables are turned, that the Democrats don't forget the precedents being set by this disgraceful opposition Republican party.