Majority Leader Frist Remarks To Family Research Council

Republican National Committee ^ | April 25, 2005

[RWR8189]

Remarks by Majority Leader Bill Frist, M.D. Family Research Council Telecast April 24, 2005

Tony, thank you. And good evening to all of you. The judicial nominations debate has created quite a bit of controversy. Emotions are running high on both sides, and it reveals once again, our country's desperate need for more civility in political life. All of us who are active in politics -- whether Republican or Democrat -- need to remember the lesson of Ronald Reagan -- that we can disagree without being disagreeable. Now let me tell you about a disagreement that is going on in our nation's capital. Never in 214 years, never in the history of the United States Senate had a judicial nominee with majority support been denied an up-or-down vote...until two years ago. In the last Congress, however, a minority of senators denied ten of the president's judicial nominees an up-or-down vote. They wouldn't allow a vote, because they knew the nominations would be approved. Now we are in a new Congress, and these same senators again threaten to obstruct the vote on judges. And, even worse, if they don't get their way, they threaten to shut down the Senate - and obstruct government itself.

Americans elect their senators to vote on the people's business. That is a senator's job -- to vote. If these senators are not prepared to fulfill their constitutional responsibilities, then why are they here in the first place? Right now, there are 46 vacancies on the federal bench. Four of the appeals court vacancies are in the region that serves my home state of Tennessee. Those four nominees have been waiting a combined thirteen years for a vote on the Senate floor. Thirteen years! Either confirm the nominees or reject them . . . but don't leave them hanging. Don't leave our courts hanging. Don't leave our country hanging.If the nominees are rejected . . . fine . . . that's fair. At least, rejection is a vote. Give those nominees the courtesy and the respect of a vote. Let me tell you about Priscilla Owen. A Texas Supreme Court justice for the last ten years -- she has received praise from both parties. Former Justice Raul Gonzalez, a Democrat, said: "I found her to be apolitical, extremely bright, diligent in her work, and of the highest integrity. I recommend her for confirmation without reservation."Justice Owen has also been a leader for providing free legal services to the poor. And she has worked to soften the impact of legal proceedings on children of divorcing parents. On May 9, 2001, President Bush nominated Justice Owen to the fifth circuit court of appeals. To this day, even though a majority of Senators support her, she has been denied an up-or-down vote on the floor of the Senate.Ladies and gentlemen, Justice Owen deserves better. She deserves a vote.

To ensure Justice Owen and other judicial nominees get a vote, I've been trying to work out a compromise that would do just that. It's not easy. My Democratic counterpart, Senator Reid, calls me a radical Republican. I don't think it's radical to ask senators to vote. I don't think it's radical to expect senators to fulfill their constitutional responsibilities. I don't think it's radical to restore precedents that worked so well for 214 years.Now if Senator Reid continues to obstruct the process, we will consider what opponents call the "nuclear option." Only in the United States Senate could it be considered a devastating option to allow a vote. Most places call that democracy. But let me make one important point - this option only addresses the delay of judicial nominees. In no way will it curb delays on legislation, which is a time-honored senatorial practice. "Mr. Smith" will still be able to go to Washington and take a stand on the Senate floor.

Now some Republicans - even some conservatives - don't think we should press the issue on requiring votes on judicial nominees. They're concerned that in the future Republicans won't be able to use this same device to obstruct Democratic nominees. Well ... that may be true. But if what Democrats are doing is wrong today, it won't be right for Republicans to do the same thing tomorrow.

Ladies and gentlemen, our judiciary must be independent, impartial and fair. When we think judicial decisions are outside mainstream American values, we will say so. But we must also be clear that the balance of power among all three branches requires respect - not retaliation. I won't go along with that.

Allow me to close with how you can help. I hope you'll call your senators and remind them -- whether they're Republican or Democrat -- that they work for you. Tell them to do what's right. Tell them to do what's fair. Tell them to do their job - give judicial nominees the up-or-down votes they deserve. Thank you for coming together to study this issue...and thank you for inviting me to be a part of this evening's discussion.

[Pylot]

I am sending Frist a note to do his job.

To seek compromise is to seek a point at which both parties have decided to stop thinking.

Nonsense.

Frist needs to go to the doctor and get a testosterone shot. He is not presidential material and will never be as long as he behaves this way.

[FreeReign]

I am sending Frist a note to do his job. To seek compromise is to seek a point at which both parties have decided to stop thinking. Nonsense. Frist needs to go to the doctor and get a testosterone shot. He is not presidential material and will never be as long as he behaves this way.

The problem is not Frist. All 8 Democrats plus Chaffee, Voinovitch and Hagel on the committee prevented the nomination from moving out of committee.

So here goes Frist not backing down, not giving up and out campaigning for Bolton for the next session.

And who do you criticize? The 8 Democrats? -- no. The three turncoat R Senators? -- no. You bad mouth Frist.

That's just great. Real Freeping cutting edge you are!

[Pylot]

I have sent Voinovitch and Hagel a note too.

Tell me what Freeper cutting edge is.