Frist Is Moving
Sen. Frist issued a statement from his office this morning regarding the president’s judicial nominees. (Hat-Tip: Hugh Hewitt)
http://hughhewitt.com/
STATEMENT FROM THE OFFICE OF THE
SENATE MAJORITY LEADER
Upon completion of action on the pending highway bill, the Senate will begin debate on fair up or down votes on judicial nominations. As is the regular order, the Leader will move to act on judge nominations sent to the full Senate by the Judiciary Committee in the past several weeks. Priscilla Owen, to serve as a judge for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, and Janice Rogers Brown, to serve as a judge for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, will be the nominees of focus.
The Majority Leader will continue to discuss an appropriate resolution of the need for fair up or down votes with the Minority Leader. If they can not find a way for the Senate to decide on fair up or down votes on judicial nominations, the Majority Leader will seek a ruling from the Presiding Officer regarding the appropriate length of time for debate on such nominees. After the ruling, he will ensure that every Senator has the opportunity to decide whether to restore the 214-year practice of fair up or down votes on judicial nominees; or, to enshrine a new veto by filibuster that both denies all Senators the opportunity to advise and consent and fundamentally disturbs the separation of powers between the branches.
There will be a full and vigorous Senate floor debate that is too important for parliamentary tactics to speed it up or slow it down until all members who wish have had their say. All members are encouraged to ensure that rhetoric in this debate follows the rules, and best traditions, of the Senate.
It is time for 100 Senators to decide the issue of fair up or down votes for judicial nominees after over two years of unprecedented obstructionism. The Minority has made public threats that much of the Senate's work will be shut down. Such threats are unfortunate.
The Majority Leader has proposed his Fairness Rule: up to 100 hours of debate, and then an up or down vote on circuit and Supreme Court nominations. Further, the Fairness Rule would eliminate the opportunity for blockade of such nominees at the Judiciary Committee. And finally, it will make no changes to the legislative filibuster.
If Senators believe a nominee is qualified, they should have the opportunity to vote for her. If they believe she is unqualified, they should have the opportunity to vote against her.
Members must decide if their legacy to the Senate is to eliminate the filibuster's barrier to the Constitutional responsibility of all Senators to advise and consent with fair, up or down votes.
Marcie and I have ardently defended the right of the president to nominate qualified people to federal positions whether it is a judicial nominee, an ambassador, or various Cabinet secretary position. This is an enumerated right under the Constitution. And until these judicial nominees surfaced in the president’s first term, the Senate abided by it’s role in that process. However, the Democrats aren’t playing fair, and that is why the Constitutional Option has been such a hot topic on our site, and numerous other sites that we have linked to other the past few weeks.
This is an important issue, and it’s not going to simply go away. Frist and the rest of the GOP leadership in the Senate know that they must push this forward, and he is moving on it; the above statement shows that he is serious. I dislike the idea of negotiating with the Democrats. Indeed, as we both pointed out yesterday, the Democrats can’t be trusted to keep their word. Reid has said he won’t filibuster a Supreme Court nominee, but what if that nominee is Priscilla Owens, William Pryor, or Janice Rogers Brown. These three are the most hotly contested nominees by the Democrats, and there is no good reason whatsoever for the vitriol, the spite, and the blatant character assassination that they have perpetuated against them.
This is a quote from John Kyl on Hugh Hewitt’s show yesterday. (Hat-Tip: RadioBlogger for the entire transcript of the interview. We have the votes.)
http://www.radioblogger.com/
"Central to the Democrats' offers, every one of them, every single one of them, is that of the ten judges that have been filibustered, six of them have to be thrown overboard. And by that I mean not even have a vote and defeat it. They have to be withdrawn at Republicans' insistence. And it's not just that six of the ten have to be withdrawn, but three out of four specifically named judges. Three out of these four. You pick the three that you want to throw overboard. Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen, Myers and Pryor. Bill Pryor, that just came out today. Bill Myers and Bill Pryor. Now you decide which one of those you're going to take, and then the other three have to be thrown over. That's the Democrats' principled argument. We're filibustering these judges because they're no good. And yet they say spin the bottle, pick one of the four, you can have him, you can't have the others. That is unprincipled. It's wrong, and it's not going to be part of any offer that I certainly have anything to do with accepting. And I just don't think our side will accept it."
If this is truly the logic of the Democrats, and right now it seems to be, it’s faulty. If these nominees are truly as bad as the Democrats portray, and they’re not, then none of them can be considered acceptable. We don’t put lousy judges on the bench (though I’m still wondering how Ginsburg got on the high court) and if that is what the Democrats are saying, it’s purely hypocritcal. Further, it kills their argument that these people are "too extreme" for the federal bench.
Kyl also stated that yes, the GOP has the votes to set things right. They have the votes to return the Senate back to the way they used to deal with nominees, i.e., no filibusters. This announcement, each time it has been made for the past week, is like a stake in the heart of a vampire. The Democrats will surely ramp up the rhetoric this weekend as the vote is going to go down next week. Frist and the other senators in favor of breaking the unconstitutional filibusters aren’t going to back down. Frist knows all too well that the GOP is now in a veritable catch-22. They can’t back out, because the base will savage them. They have to move forward, and risk the possibility of the RINOs departing them.
But Frist also knows that he has an ace in the base of the party. Those that vote against this measure, such as McCain, such as Chaffee, and now, apparently, Snowe, will be facing the voters, and their prospects don’t look too good. Rhode Island isn’t happy with Chaffee as it is, and his voting record reflects their disdain of him. Voters in Maine aren’t happy with Snowe, either. Both are coming up for reelection in 2006, and the base is already actively moving against them. There’s nothing that can truly be done to McCain, unless he decides to run for president. If he opts out of that move, we here in Arizona will be hard pressed to unseat him 2010. (Not to generalize, but the people in this state are as politically-affluent and knowledgeable as a chimpanzee. At least the chimp has the brain cells.)
But this issue is, at last, coming to a head. These nominees will get their votes, or Reid will be the ultimate moron, and shut down the Senate; not the smartest thing to do heading into an election cycle. The last thing you do is give your enemy the firepower he can use to kill you. And if Reid does decide to shut the Senate down, it will be the epitaph on his political tombstone. He will end up "Daschling" himself right out of the Senate.
Publius II
Sen. Frist issued a statement from his office this morning regarding the president’s judicial nominees. (Hat-Tip: Hugh Hewitt)
http://hughhewitt.com/
STATEMENT FROM THE OFFICE OF THE
SENATE MAJORITY LEADER
Upon completion of action on the pending highway bill, the Senate will begin debate on fair up or down votes on judicial nominations. As is the regular order, the Leader will move to act on judge nominations sent to the full Senate by the Judiciary Committee in the past several weeks. Priscilla Owen, to serve as a judge for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, and Janice Rogers Brown, to serve as a judge for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, will be the nominees of focus.
The Majority Leader will continue to discuss an appropriate resolution of the need for fair up or down votes with the Minority Leader. If they can not find a way for the Senate to decide on fair up or down votes on judicial nominations, the Majority Leader will seek a ruling from the Presiding Officer regarding the appropriate length of time for debate on such nominees. After the ruling, he will ensure that every Senator has the opportunity to decide whether to restore the 214-year practice of fair up or down votes on judicial nominees; or, to enshrine a new veto by filibuster that both denies all Senators the opportunity to advise and consent and fundamentally disturbs the separation of powers between the branches.
There will be a full and vigorous Senate floor debate that is too important for parliamentary tactics to speed it up or slow it down until all members who wish have had their say. All members are encouraged to ensure that rhetoric in this debate follows the rules, and best traditions, of the Senate.
It is time for 100 Senators to decide the issue of fair up or down votes for judicial nominees after over two years of unprecedented obstructionism. The Minority has made public threats that much of the Senate's work will be shut down. Such threats are unfortunate.
The Majority Leader has proposed his Fairness Rule: up to 100 hours of debate, and then an up or down vote on circuit and Supreme Court nominations. Further, the Fairness Rule would eliminate the opportunity for blockade of such nominees at the Judiciary Committee. And finally, it will make no changes to the legislative filibuster.
If Senators believe a nominee is qualified, they should have the opportunity to vote for her. If they believe she is unqualified, they should have the opportunity to vote against her.
Members must decide if their legacy to the Senate is to eliminate the filibuster's barrier to the Constitutional responsibility of all Senators to advise and consent with fair, up or down votes.
Marcie and I have ardently defended the right of the president to nominate qualified people to federal positions whether it is a judicial nominee, an ambassador, or various Cabinet secretary position. This is an enumerated right under the Constitution. And until these judicial nominees surfaced in the president’s first term, the Senate abided by it’s role in that process. However, the Democrats aren’t playing fair, and that is why the Constitutional Option has been such a hot topic on our site, and numerous other sites that we have linked to other the past few weeks.
This is an important issue, and it’s not going to simply go away. Frist and the rest of the GOP leadership in the Senate know that they must push this forward, and he is moving on it; the above statement shows that he is serious. I dislike the idea of negotiating with the Democrats. Indeed, as we both pointed out yesterday, the Democrats can’t be trusted to keep their word. Reid has said he won’t filibuster a Supreme Court nominee, but what if that nominee is Priscilla Owens, William Pryor, or Janice Rogers Brown. These three are the most hotly contested nominees by the Democrats, and there is no good reason whatsoever for the vitriol, the spite, and the blatant character assassination that they have perpetuated against them.
This is a quote from John Kyl on Hugh Hewitt’s show yesterday. (Hat-Tip: RadioBlogger for the entire transcript of the interview. We have the votes.)
http://www.radioblogger.com/
"Central to the Democrats' offers, every one of them, every single one of them, is that of the ten judges that have been filibustered, six of them have to be thrown overboard. And by that I mean not even have a vote and defeat it. They have to be withdrawn at Republicans' insistence. And it's not just that six of the ten have to be withdrawn, but three out of four specifically named judges. Three out of these four. You pick the three that you want to throw overboard. Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen, Myers and Pryor. Bill Pryor, that just came out today. Bill Myers and Bill Pryor. Now you decide which one of those you're going to take, and then the other three have to be thrown over. That's the Democrats' principled argument. We're filibustering these judges because they're no good. And yet they say spin the bottle, pick one of the four, you can have him, you can't have the others. That is unprincipled. It's wrong, and it's not going to be part of any offer that I certainly have anything to do with accepting. And I just don't think our side will accept it."
If this is truly the logic of the Democrats, and right now it seems to be, it’s faulty. If these nominees are truly as bad as the Democrats portray, and they’re not, then none of them can be considered acceptable. We don’t put lousy judges on the bench (though I’m still wondering how Ginsburg got on the high court) and if that is what the Democrats are saying, it’s purely hypocritcal. Further, it kills their argument that these people are "too extreme" for the federal bench.
Kyl also stated that yes, the GOP has the votes to set things right. They have the votes to return the Senate back to the way they used to deal with nominees, i.e., no filibusters. This announcement, each time it has been made for the past week, is like a stake in the heart of a vampire. The Democrats will surely ramp up the rhetoric this weekend as the vote is going to go down next week. Frist and the other senators in favor of breaking the unconstitutional filibusters aren’t going to back down. Frist knows all too well that the GOP is now in a veritable catch-22. They can’t back out, because the base will savage them. They have to move forward, and risk the possibility of the RINOs departing them.
But Frist also knows that he has an ace in the base of the party. Those that vote against this measure, such as McCain, such as Chaffee, and now, apparently, Snowe, will be facing the voters, and their prospects don’t look too good. Rhode Island isn’t happy with Chaffee as it is, and his voting record reflects their disdain of him. Voters in Maine aren’t happy with Snowe, either. Both are coming up for reelection in 2006, and the base is already actively moving against them. There’s nothing that can truly be done to McCain, unless he decides to run for president. If he opts out of that move, we here in Arizona will be hard pressed to unseat him 2010. (Not to generalize, but the people in this state are as politically-affluent and knowledgeable as a chimpanzee. At least the chimp has the brain cells.)
But this issue is, at last, coming to a head. These nominees will get their votes, or Reid will be the ultimate moron, and shut down the Senate; not the smartest thing to do heading into an election cycle. The last thing you do is give your enemy the firepower he can use to kill you. And if Reid does decide to shut the Senate down, it will be the epitaph on his political tombstone. He will end up "Daschling" himself right out of the Senate.
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 11:43 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home