Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senate Democrats Threaten to Block More Bush Nominees
NY Times ^ | March 26, 2004 | DAVID STOUT

Posted on 03/26/2004 4:39:17 PM PST by neverdem

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"/>

The New York Times


March 26, 2004

Senate Democrats Threaten to Block More Bush Nominees

By DAVID STOUT

WASHINGTON, March 26 — Senate Democrats threatened today to block all of President Bush's judicial nominations unless the White House promised not to name any more judges while Congress was away.

"These actions not only poison the nomination process," the minority leader, Senator Tom Daschle, Democrat of South Dakota, said. "They strike at the principle of checks and balances that is one of pillars of American democracy."

Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called Mr. Bush's use of recess appointments "a finger in the eye of the Constitution."

Five weeks ago, President Bush used a Congressional recess to install William H. Pryor Jr., the Alabama attorney general, in a federal appeals court seat to get around a Democratic filibuster that had blocked his nomination.

Mr. Pryor will be able to serve on the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, based in Atlanta, until the end of the next session of Congress — meaning sometime in the fall of 2005.

The Pryor appointment was the second time this year that Mr. Bush used a president's power to make appointments when Congress is not in session to name judges directly to the bench and thus skirt the Senate confirmation process.

In January, Mr. Bush named Charles W. Pickering Sr., whose nomination had also been blocked by Senate Democrats, to a seat for the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, based in New Orleans. He, too, will have to step down before many months, unless there is a huge shift in the Senate and he is able to win confirmation.

"We will be clear," Senator Daschle said today. "We will continue to cooperate in the confirmation of federal judges, but only if the White House gives the assurance that it will no longer abuse the process and that it will once again respect our Constitution's essential system of checks and balances."

President Bush and his chief spokesman, Scott McClellan, were in the Southwest today and thus not ready to respond immediately to the Democrats' move.

Senator Bill Frist, Republican of Tennessee, the majority leader, called the tactic "posturing" and told reporters no administration would rule out recess appointments.

Senate Democrats have blocked several of Mr. Bush's nominations on grounds that his choices are out of the judicial mainstream and have shown an insensitivity to civil rights. Mr. Bush has said the Democrats are playing politics and in so doing thwarting honest, highly qualified people.


Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | Help | Back to Top


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: daschle; dems; federaljudges; judicialnominees; obstrictionists; senatedemocrats
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last
Check Chucky. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. What's Constitutional about a supermajority filibuster?
1 posted on 03/26/2004 4:39:18 PM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem
I see the usual suspects making their Friday afternoon whine session.
2 posted on 03/26/2004 4:41:38 PM PST by Maigrey (We don't need a thumbsucker in the White House. - azgopgal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Screw 'em. Recess appoint every damn vacancy that there is left. They want to play hardball? Make them sit in DC and confirm judges instead of being out on the campaign trail.
3 posted on 03/26/2004 4:42:21 PM PST by SCHROLL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Duck the Femocrats!
4 posted on 03/26/2004 4:42:44 PM PST by 11th Earl of Mar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Precisely. Eff 'em.
5 posted on 03/26/2004 4:44:35 PM PST by My2Cents ("Well...there you go again.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SCHROLL
At least recess appointments are CONSTITUTIONAL!
6 posted on 03/26/2004 4:45:05 PM PST by My2Cents ("Well...there you go again.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SCHROLL
I too have two words for the 'Rats..."Recess Appointment"
7 posted on 03/26/2004 4:45:22 PM PST by kellynla (U.S.M.C. 1/5 1st Mar Div. Nam 69&70 Semper Fi http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The administration needs to tie together liberal judges appointed by Democrats, with gay marriage and the pledge case.
8 posted on 03/26/2004 4:46:56 PM PST by I still care
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
""These actions not only poison the nomination process," the minority leader, Senator Tom Daschle, Democrat of South Dakota, said. "They strike at the principle of checks and balances that is one of pillars of American democracy."

This from the guy who invented and then perfected the poisoning of the process.
9 posted on 03/26/2004 4:49:20 PM PST by Gringo1 (All contents of this post may be contrived,made-up,or just plain not true at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Pity party for the dems!! BOO HOO.......followed by LOLOLOL
10 posted on 03/26/2004 4:51:02 PM PST by OldFriend (Always understand, even if you remain among the few)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Up-Chucky Schumer; the living, breathing, defintion of pond slime; the kind of pond slime even bleach won't kill... The skid mark in humanities shorts...

The unwanted relative who won't leave... The very sight of this man revolts me.


11 posted on 03/26/2004 4:54:22 PM PST by gatorgriz ("The world is full of bastards - the number ever increasing the further one gets from Missoula, MT")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Charles Schumer is a pustule on the buttocks of the goddess of Justice.
12 posted on 03/26/2004 4:59:12 PM PST by Argus (If you favor surrender to terrorism, vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I still care
"The administration needs to tie together liberal judges appointed by Democrats, with gay marriage and the pledge case."

Couldn't say it better myself!

13 posted on 03/26/2004 5:14:39 PM PST by Califelephant (John Kerry has more positions than the Kama Sutra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Maigrey
Aren't they pitiful! I love it! If they keep this up - the President's office will not be the only place where we have a landslide.
14 posted on 03/26/2004 5:18:53 PM PST by CyberAnt (The 2004 Election is for the SOUL of AMERICA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
bush get ready for the next recess and make recess appoints of all those not approved...btw when is the next recess?
15 posted on 03/26/2004 5:22:39 PM PST by metoooo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called Mr. Bush's use of recess appointments "a finger in the eye of the Constitution."

If Dubya really wants to stick it to him, he'll recess appoint either Judge Bork, or Ken Starr during the next recess. I'd pay good money to see that!!!

16 posted on 03/26/2004 5:24:45 PM PST by Bush_Democrat (Now EX-democrat!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The President should immediately give a national speech in which he absolutely calls the Democrats on this threat. The speach should address the fact that recess appointments are specifically provided for in the Constitution, have been made by every modern president, are necessary because of the dim's refusal to provide consent as required by the Constitution, etc. As others have suggested, he could also tie this into judicial activism, the pledge case, the gay marriage issue, etc.

The dim's can either back down (in which case they look like fools), or follow through with their no votes on nominees threat. In the latter case, the Republican's should exercise the "nuclear option."

Frist can simply direct the Clerk of the Senate to schedule nominees before the full Senate for an up or down vote. He can do this on the grounds that, to the extent the Senate rules require a supermajority to pass the nominee to a full vote, they are in violation of the direct and specific constitutional requirement that the Senate provide affirmative advice and consent with respect to the President's judicial nominations.

The dim's could challenge Frist's ruling. But because this would be a challenge to the chair's interpretation of the rules, the issue would be resolved by a simple majority vote--in which the Republicans, if they stick together, could prevail.

Will it happen? I am not holding my breath.
17 posted on 03/26/2004 5:27:02 PM PST by TheConservator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
WELL... W should just appoint judges out the yang everytime the Senate goes out!
18 posted on 03/26/2004 5:31:10 PM PST by sonofatpatcher2 (Love & a .45-- What more could you want, campers? };^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Senate Democrats threatened today to block all of President Bush's judicial nominations unless the White House promised not to name any more judges while Congress was away.

Like they wouldn't block the president's nominations anyway. Riiight.

19 posted on 03/26/2004 5:34:49 PM PST by lonevoice (Some things have to be believed to be seen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheConservator
Bush should say out loud that he won't recess-appoint any judge who has been given an up-or-down vote in the Senate.

But that not allowing a vote will always lead to a recess appointment.

20 posted on 03/26/2004 5:39:18 PM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: lonevoice
That's what the Democrats say. "Mr. Bush, play the game our way or we'll block your nominees. Don't play it our way and we'll still block you nominees."
21 posted on 03/26/2004 6:04:34 PM PST by Hillarys Gate Cult (Proud member of the right wing extremist Neanderthals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Principled
"Bush should say out loud that he won't recess-appoint any judge who has been given an up-or-down vote in the Senate. But that not allowing a vote will always lead to a recess appointment."

You have stated the perfect solution. He should go on television and announce this policy. And then follow through.

22 posted on 03/26/2004 6:10:42 PM PST by Montfort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TheConservator
Or Bush culd pledge to not use his constitutionally mandated power if the Dems pledge not to use a filibuster to block his nominations.
23 posted on 03/26/2004 6:13:16 PM PST by Bogey78O (I voted for this tagline... before I voted against it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Refresh my memory, didn't the hero of the rat party Clinton use recess of congress to install judges?

Obviously it is legal, obviously a promise means nothing to a rat, so go well you know what yourself Tommy.
24 posted on 03/26/2004 6:15:51 PM PST by ladyinred (Weakness Invites War. Peace through Strength (Margaret Thatcher))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hillarys Gate Cult
That's what the Democrats say. "Mr. Bush, play the game our way or we'll block your nominees. Don't play it our way and we'll still block you nominees."

No kidding. Democrats threatening increased obstruction is like Palestinians threatening increased terrorism. The threat only works if you assume that they are holding back as it is. I don't.

25 posted on 03/26/2004 6:17:56 PM PST by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Montfort
Well, you know they lurk... we'll see!
26 posted on 03/26/2004 6:19:49 PM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Translation: They know they're in trouble, and this is the best they can come up with.
27 posted on 03/26/2004 6:25:50 PM PST by Imal (Capitalism appeals to optimists, Communism appeals to pessimists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
"We will be clear," Senator Daschle said today. "We will continue to cooperate in the confirmation of federal judges, but only if the White House gives the assurance that it will no longer abuse the process and that it will once again respect our Constitution's essential system of checks and balances."

Uh, excuse me, but how have the Demwits cooperated up to this point in the confirmation of Bush nominees?

28 posted on 03/26/2004 6:30:48 PM PST by TC Rider (The United States Constitution 1791. All Rights Reserved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Do the Dems say either you agree to our blackmail or we will engage in a complete strike of your nominees!

Seems treason to me.
29 posted on 03/26/2004 6:31:24 PM PST by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Frist should have fought this to the bitter end the first time they tried it. Now he pays the price.

Make them filibuster 24-7.
30 posted on 03/26/2004 6:40:32 PM PST by Carry_Okie (Environmental deregulation is critical national defense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
You would never know without a scorecard, that the majority are Republicans. Sometimes I think Bush may be too nice a fellow to be president. He and most fellow Dems simply don't respond in kind, and it doesn't look like high moral ground, it looks like weakness. Filibusters, supermajorities, Memogate getting turned around on us, inquisitional commissions---the Dems are fighting dirtier than ever before, and mostly getting away with it.
31 posted on 03/26/2004 6:42:20 PM PST by Graymatter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graymatter
D'oh! Make that he and fellow Reps. Too much Nyquil again.
:(

32 posted on 03/26/2004 6:44:11 PM PST by Graymatter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
"We will continue to cooperate in the confirmation of federal judges,"

BWAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAH!!!!!

Qwinn
33 posted on 03/26/2004 6:47:18 PM PST by Qwinn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
It's so touching when the Dims express their fervent regard for constitutional processes. Feh.
34 posted on 03/26/2004 6:56:56 PM PST by Mad_Tom_Rackham (Any day you wake up is a good day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
When President Clinton made recess appointments, the Democrats backed them. Their demand is election year politics - and if they allowed an up or down vote on the judges before the Senate, it goes without saying it wouldn't be necessary for the President to resort to recess appointments in the first place. For folks concerned about upholding the Constitution, they're a veritable bunch of hypocrites.
35 posted on 03/26/2004 6:58:12 PM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam
Democrats threatening increased obstruction is like Palestinians threatening increased terrorism

That's exactly right... I was thinking along those same lines. It seems that Hamas is now really really going to murder some Israelis (as if they weren't already going to do exactly that). And now the Demos are threatening to really really obstruct the President's judicial nominations (as if they weren't already going to do exactly that).

Is the comparison between a murderous bunch of thugs and a group of law-hating Communist thugs too strong? I don't think so...

36 posted on 03/26/2004 7:28:31 PM PST by Zeppo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Enough with the racism!

These Dems crack me up. Really. They must all leave the building and go to a room where they laugh like hell out of reach of the microphones.

37 posted on 03/26/2004 7:29:49 PM PST by Glenn (The two keys to character: 1) Learn how to keep a secret. 2) ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
Seems treason to me.

I'd say it was just hardball. I don't think it's too smart though, not when the pubbies have national security as an issue again for the foreseeable future.

The next rat president, God forbid, will need 60 rats in the Senate to get their nominees confirmed. That's assuming all the pubbies have real spines and memories.

38 posted on 03/26/2004 7:33:08 PM PST by neverdem (Xin loi min oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
What a coincidence! Al Qaeda threatened today to attack the United States unless the White House promised to stop doing things that made them angry and frustrated.
39 posted on 03/26/2004 7:47:43 PM PST by spycatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SCHROLL
Screw 'em. Recess appoint every damn vacancy that there is left. They want to play hardball? Make them sit in DC and confirm judges instead of being out on the campaign trail.

I'm with you! Are these characters really Americans or imposters? i.e. "Face Off"

40 posted on 03/26/2004 7:54:29 PM PST by AnimalLover
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Graymatter
You would never know without a scorecard, that the majority are Republicans.

A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Sadly, included in the Republican Senate majority of 51 are some pretty weak lnks: Chaffee, Snowe, Collins, Specter, McCain...

41 posted on 03/26/2004 8:16:58 PM PST by possible
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Principled
Very good idea. You should send it to President Bush and his advisors.
42 posted on 03/26/2004 8:21:53 PM PST by SendShaqtoIraq
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
"finger in the eye of the Constitution"; a foot needs to be planted up the asses of Shumer, Dashle and the other obstructionist Democrats in the Senate. Effem!
43 posted on 03/26/2004 8:25:22 PM PST by Atchafalaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheConservator
The dim's could challenge Frist's ruling. But because this would be a challenge to the chair's interpretation of the rules, the issue would be resolved by a simple majority vote--in which the Republicans, if they stick together, could prevail.

Yes, but there could come a time in a Democrat administration when a Republican supermajority is the only gate left on the highway to hell.

44 posted on 03/26/2004 8:25:30 PM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Bush_Democrat
OOOOHHHH, me too; there ain't enough cows, goats and sheep to make the cheese necessary to handle the whine that would create. Where do I pay up?
45 posted on 03/26/2004 8:32:24 PM PST by Atchafalaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: TheConservator
if they stick together There's the rub. None of the Northeastern Republicans will stick with the party.
46 posted on 03/26/2004 9:37:49 PM PST by RobbyS (Latin nothing of atonment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Principled; neverdem; Coop
Here is the REST of the story:
Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) is threatening to stall President Bush’s judicial nominees if the president does not take action soon to appoint more than a dozen Democrats to government boards and commissions.

Daschle: Move Dem nominees (to stall Bush’s judicial picks unless 12 RATs are appointed)

47 posted on 03/26/2004 9:51:30 PM PST by hobson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Senate Democrats threatened today to block all of President Bush's judicial nominations unless the White House promised not to name any more judges while Congress was away.

Hey, let's go for this deal. We can trust them. /sarcasm

"These actions not only poison the nomination process," the minority leader, Senator Tom Daschle, Democrat of South Dakota, said. "They strike at the principle of checks and balances that is one of pillars of American democracy."

Man, this is rich. How do Democrats face their families, their colleagues, and themselves in the mirror everyday? So, denying an up or down vote, and fillibustering judicial nominees is a checks and balances pillar?

48 posted on 03/26/2004 11:59:21 PM PST by lowbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Imal
Translation: They know they're in trouble, and this is the best they can come up with.

Explain this to the "Bush bashers", in detail, that have no political patience. Paawlease??

49 posted on 03/27/2004 12:30:22 AM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
If they do this then its more likely we could get 51 R's to take the nuclear option and eliminate the filibuster.
50 posted on 03/27/2004 4:01:36 AM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson