Posted on 05/09/2003 8:20:00 AM PDT by Remedy
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist on Friday proposed changes in Senate rules that would make it easier for the majority to overcome the filibuster tactics minority Democrats have used to block confirmation of several of President Bush's conservative judicial nominees.
"The need to reform is obvious and it is now urgent," Frist, R-Tenn., said in a speech on the Senate floor.
President Bush, in a Rose Garden appearance at the White House, called for quicker action on his nominees.
Bush told a gathering of supportive senators, administration figures and legal community representatives that eight of the 18 men and women he has nominated for federal appeals court judgeships have waited over a year for a Senate floor vote.
"More appeals court nominees have had to wait for over a year in my presidency than in the last 50 years combined," the president said. "This is not just business as usual. This is an abdication of constitutional responsibility and it is hurting our country."
Bush said he has put forward "an historically diverse group whose character and credentials are impeccable. The Senate has a constitutional responsibility to hold an up or down vote."
"While senators stall and hold onto old grudges, American justice is suffering. Dockets are overcrowded and judges are overworked and citizens are waiting to long to hear their cases," he said.
Frist proposed a process in which it would take gradually fewer votes to overcome filibusters preventing final votes on judicial confirmations.
Democrats were skeptical of the Frist plan. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," said Democratic leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota. He said the Senate has confirmed 124 judicial nominees since Bush took office and "I don't see much broken."
It now takes 60 votes to end a filibuster. Republicans have failed in six attempts over the past few months to end a filibuster over the nomination of Michael Estrada to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Republicans have also unsuccessfully tried twice to end a filibuster over the nomination of Priscilla Owen to a federal appellate court judgeship.
Under the Frist plan, it would take 60 votes to stop a filibuster on the first try, 57 on the second, 54 on the third and 51 on the fourth. The entire process would take about 13 days, he said.
He said his proposal was modeled after a broader plan, made by Democratic Sens. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Tom Harkin of Iowa in 1995.
"Clearly we have entered upon a new era damaging to the Senate as an institution," he said of the recent use of the filibuster to stop the president's judicial nominations. "A disciplined minority can cast an ever-lengthening shadow over the confirmation process."
But the Repubs getting rid of filibusters on these nominations is a chance for the Dems to cry foul when the time comes and Roe vs Wade is overturned.
The democrats are completely willing to make up the rules on the fly, if others (who knows, who cares, why bother, eat, drink,be merry- for tommorrow we die MODERATES) are willing to let them.
I prefer the Talent plan, however:
That is the way the liberals want the entire country at the federal level to operate.
But OPRAH is on….
A Republic, If You Can Keep It At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 18, 1787, a Mrs. Powel anxiously awaited the results, and as Benjamin Franklin emerged from the long task now finished, asked him directly: "Well Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" "A republic if you can keep it" responded Franklin.
If that were true, the Estrada and Owen nominations would still be in committee.
Leahy did the same when he denied Shedd a vote: overrode by majority vote a rule of the Committee- also breaking his word to Thurmond at the same time.
LOL, I guess Holy Joe and Harkin have changed their views. Hypocrites! Maybe Holy Joe should be asked some tough questions on the campaign trail.
On another note, none of this really bothers me because I am confident that the RATS are digging their own graves. They are so negative and divisive, while at the same time Bush (and by extention the GOP) are the epitome of sunny optimism. I have discussions with liberals everyday and they are disheartened. They know that to win they must root for bad things to happen. And they know this is obvious to political independents. They also know they have no bench, and therefore no future. They live in fear of a Hillary run.
The criticism of Bush's aircraft carrier speech and the obstruction of judges will signal thier death knell. RIP RATS!!!!! LOL!!!!!
Maybe Holy Joe should be asked some tough questions on the campaign trail.
Jews for Morality has reams of tough questions.
They also know they have no bench, and therefore no future. They live in fear of a Hillary run.
AmeriPAC - American Political Action Committee
A brief look at the history of Hillary Clinton will confirm what columnist Camille Paglia said in a recent article in Women’s Quarterly: "That woman should not be anywhere near our government . . . That woman is an authoritarian who should be kept out of government. She’s a tyrant who thinks she knows what’s best for the people. She’s Orwellian in her attitude toward the rest of humanity." One should not, and need not, judge her by her husband’s actions— she is a corrupt radical in her own right.
feminizeed wimp limp wrist kissy kissy Republicans
will attempt to stand tall and proud against the Marxist Takeover. NEXT WEEK.Let's Rock & Roll!
So, why are the DemocRATs pursuing such scorched-earth tactics? Is it because they realize they are doomed to suffer defeat in the end, and their only victories can be short-term ones?
The DemocRATs have gone beyond those limits, thus provoking a further serious limitation on the filibuster power. Because of the Fortas precedent, the DemocRATs could probably have gotten away with filibustering Supreme Court appointments.
United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary Statement of The Honorable John Cornyn United States Senator, Texas,May 6, 2003
To justify the current filibusters, some have cited the example of Abe Fortas. President Lyndon Johnson nominated Fortas to be Chief Justice in 1968. But what is critical to understand about the Fortas episode is that majority rule was not under attack in that case. Dogged by allegations of ethical improprieties and bipartisan opposition, Fortas was unable to obtain the votes of 51 Senators to prematurely end debate. That was a serious problem for Fortas - because, if there were not even 51 Senators to close debate, it was far from clear that there would be a simple majority of Senators present and voting to vote to confirm. Rather than allow further debate, Johnson withdrew the nomination altogether just three days later.
It's also worth noting that, back in 1968, future Carter and Clinton White House Counsel Lloyd Cutler, along with numerous other leading members of the bar and the legal academy, signed a letter urging all Senators that "nothing would more poorly serve our constitutional system than for the nominations to have earned the approval of the Senate majority, but to be thwarted because the majority is denied a chance to vote." Without objection, that letter will be entered into the record.
But of course, as I mentioned, Fortas wasn't able to get the support of even 51 votes to close debate, and Johnson withdrew the nomination as a result, so the Cutler letter was moot.
The Fortas episode is thus a far cry from the present situation. And the Cutler letter, condemning filibusters of judicial nominations when used to deny the majority its right to consent, most certainly would apply today. After extensive debate, Miguel Estrada, Priscilla Owen, and countless others enjoy enthusiastic, bipartisan majority support, yet they face an uncertain future of indefinite debate.
Judicial Nominations, Filibusters, The Constitution:....MR. STEVEN CALABRESI " Now for the first time in 214 years of American history an angry minority of Senators is seeking to extend the tradition of filibustering from legislation to judicial nominees who enjoy the support of a majority of the Senate. This unprecedented extension of the filibuster to judicial nominees threatens to raise the vote required for senatorial confirmation of judges from 51 to 60 votes. This is a direct violation of the Advice and Consent Clause, which clearly contemplates only a majority vote to confirm a judge. Raising the vote required to confirm a judge will weaken the power of the President in this area in direct violation of the Constitution while augmenting the power of a minority of the Senate. Giving a minority of Senators a veto over judicial nominees will also threaten the independence of the federal judiciary in direct violation of the separation of powers. So, why are the DemocRATs pursuing such scorched-earth tactics? Is it because they realize they are doomed to suffer defeat in the end, and their only victories can be short-term ones?
They have everything to gain and nothing to lose from a populace that is ignorant, apathetic and fed a 24/7 stream of propaganda from the mass media, or from their own constituency - some of the most evil people to ever walk the earth. They have nothing to fear from a slim majority of 'moderate' Senate Republicans, or from BUSH, whose #1 priority has been dealing with foreign enemies, before dealing with the domestic enemies in the Senate President Calls for Judicial Reform.
Why The Democrats Are The Way They Are -- Phyllis Schlafly Nov. ... EMILY's List, which contributes only to Democratic pro-abortion feminist candidates, put $20 million into political campaigns in 2000 and another $20 million into campaigns this year. That's twice as much as the second largest political action committee. Such a vast amount of money explains why Democratic Senators don't dare to confirm a judge who is pro-life.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.