WASHINGTON (AP) - Vice President Dick Cheney warned Democrats Friday that he will cast the tie-breaking vote to ban filibusters of President Bush's judicial nominees if the Senate deadlocks on the question.
Republicans are moving the Senate toward a final confrontation with Democrats over judicial nominations. Internal GOP polling shows that most Americans don't support Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist's plan to ban judicial filibusters - a tactic in which opponents can prevent a vote on a nomination with just 41 votes in the 100-member Senate.
"There is no justification for allowing the blocking of nominees who are well qualified and broadly supported," Cheney told the Republican National Lawyers Association. "The tactics of the last few years, I believe, are inexcusable."
"Let me emphasize, the decision about how to proceed will be made by the Republican leadership in the Senate," Cheney said. "But if the Senate majority decides to move forward and if the issue is presented to me in my elected office as president of the Senate and presiding officer, I will support bringing those nominations to the floor for an up or down vote."
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said the White House "has stepped over the line by interfering with the Senate to reduce checks and balances."
"The White House has always wanted to reduce the Senate's power and the fact that Vice President Cheney is encouraging this abuse of power should strengthen the Senate's resolve to resist," Schumer said.
Now that Texas judge Priscilla Owen and California judge Janice Rogers Brown have been approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee, Frist has two nominees to push forward in a battle that conservatives hope their allies will rally around.
"We have now the vehicle. We have two qualified women. They have met every test," said Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas.
An internal Republican poll showed that Frist's plan to ban judicial filibusters might not be as popular as they had hoped.
Frist, strongly backed by conservatives in and out of the Senate, has threatened to employ a parliamentary tactic - requiring only a majority vote - to change Senate practices on judicial filibusters. Republicans hold 55 seats in the 100-member Senate, and Cheney would be available to break a tie if necessary.
Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada commands a solid block of 45 votes against the proposal, and Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island have publicly stated their opposition as well. A few GOP lawmakers are uncommitted, and Reid said this week that if Frist calls a vote, "it's going to be very close."
GOP polling shows 37 percent support for the GOP plan to deny Democrats the ability to filibuster judicial nominees, while 51 percent oppose, officials said Thursday, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Several officials who attended the polling briefing said the survey also contained encouraging news for Republicans. The poll found more than 80 percent of those surveyed believed all judicial nominees deserve a yes-or-no vote.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity, noting the survey data has not been made public.
Republicans say negative polling numbers wouldn't deter them. "Polling on this issue is not going to make a difference. We are going to try to do what's right," Hutchison said.
GOP Conference chairman Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania said he was just as strongly behind the plan to push through Bush's nominees, despite a report that he was urging Republicans to slow down. "As far as the timing, that's up to the majority leader," he said.
Republicans want a resolution before a vacancy occurs on the Supreme Court because they worry that having to get support from 60 senators would affect who Bush picks for that seat. Chief Justice William Rehnquist, 80, is fighting thyroid cancer.
One judicial nominee, Idaho lawyer William Myers, already is waiting for a confirmation vote on the Senate floor. But conservatives would rather see the final showdown come over Brown, Owen or U.S. Appeals Judge William Pryor, who was given a temporary appointment by Bush after he was blocked by Democrats.
Conservatives during the last Congress accused Democrats of acting out of racial, religious and gender prejudice in blocking Brown, Owen and Pryor. Brown is black, and Pryor is a Catholic.
The Family Research Council, a conservative organization, has arranged a rally for this weekend in Tennessee to build support for the GOP plan. It accuses Democrats of waging filibusters based on faith. Frist is scheduled to appear by videotape.
Democrats have condemned those attacks and countered that their opposition is based solely on the conservative views of the nominees.
Republicans defended Owen and Brown, saying they were fine judges and that Democrats broke with Senate tradition by threatening to filibuster their nominations.
It's about time! Now let's move forward with this thing.
__________________
We must be the change we wish to see in the world -- Ghandi
http://www.rightminded.net
RE: Cheney threatens to cast tie-breaking vote to ban fillibusters
Although I am Republican and support them, I also find the Dems tactics pretty crappy as they simply have not advocated any viable alternatives whatsoever. [:@]
__________________
Jesus Christ--The reason for the season!
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a veteran.
If you're certain you know everything, there's little opportunity to learn anything.
RE: Cheney threatens to cast tie-breaking vote to ban fillibusters
The republicans have used the same methods to hold up appointments of other adminstrations. In fact BillFrist has done it.
Quote:
In truth, no one should understand the legitimacy of judicial filibusters better than Bill Frist. On March 9, 2000, Frist participated in a filibuster of Richard Paez, President Clinton's nominee to the Ninth Circuit. When confronted about his vote late last year, Frist claimed he filibustered Paez for "scheduling" purposes. Not true. A press release by former Senator Bob Smith titled "Smith Leads Effort to Block Activist Judicial Nominees" plainly states that the intent of the filibuster was to "block" the Paez nomination.
In fact, Paez was only one of at least six filibusters Republicans attempted during the Clinton years. Senator Orrin Hatch and others argue that these filibusters don't count because they ultimately weren't successful in blocking the nominees.
This could come back to bite them in the future.
Haven't something like 200 judges have been approved and ten have been held up?
__________________
You're only one post away from a federal watch list.
RE: Cheney threatens to cast tie-breaking vote to ban fillibusters
I also found this document:
Mr. President, among the constitutional responsibilities entrusted to the Senate, none is more critical to the well-being of our democracy than providing advice and consent on Presidential nominations. Later on today, we take up that solemn responsibility in connection with two very distinguished judicial nominees, Marsha Berzon and Judge Richard Paez.
Let me commend the majority leader for his commitment to the Senate, and to these nominees, that we would take up these nominees for consideration and ultimately for a vote on confirmation before the 15th of March. We
[Page: S1255] GPO's PDF
would not be here were it not for the fact that he persisted and that he was willing to hold to the commitment he made to us last year.
Both nominees have waited an extraordinarily long time for this consideration. Marsha Berzon, a nominee for the Ninth Circuit, has been kept waiting for a vote more than 2 years. Judge Paez, another Ninth Circuit nominee, has waited for more than 4 years. That is longer than any Federal court nominee in history--a statistic that should shame the Senate.
Judge Paez and Ms. Berzon are both exceptional legal minds and remarkable people. But before I discuss their qualifications, I wish to say something about the context in which these nominations are being considered. Since the 106th Congress convened in January, the President has nominated 79 men and women to fill the vacancies on the Federal bench. Without exception, these nominees have come to us with the highest marks from their peers. Yet of the 79 nominees, only 34--fewer than half--were confirmed last year, and only 4 have been confirmed so far this year.
Looking at those figures, one might assume we have no pressing need for Federal judges. In fact, just the opposite is true. Today, there are 76 vacancies on the Federal bench. Of those 76 vacancies, 29 have been empty so long they are officially classified as ``judicial emergencies.'' The failure to fill these vacancies is straining our Federal court system and delaying justice for people all across this country.
This cannot continue. As Chief Justice Rehnquist warns, ``Judicial vacancies cannot remain at such high levels indefinitely without eroding the quality of justice.''
__________________
You're only one post away from a federal watch list.
RE: Cheney threatens to cast tie-breaking vote to ban fillibusters
True the Republicans did not have to do that to hold up Clintons judges. Forty of them as a matter of fact, they never let them out of committee and on to the floor. I don't think they really want to do this, 2 seats the other way next year and the shoe is on the other foot. Them Senate has confirmed over 200 of King George (the lesser)'s judge nominees, we are talking about 10 or so that the Dems have a problem with. I have heard what some of these "middle of the road" judges have said in their professional career and I would try to block them too.
Cheney threatens to cast tie-breaking vote to ban fillibusters
