Thank you for writing concerning judicial nominations and the role of the United States Senate in this process. As you know, the Constitution dictates that the President shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint judges of the Federal Court.
Yes, thank you for writing. It makes me feel important when my minions write me letters quaintly telling me and my party to stop trying to take over the world. Now here's a gross oversimplification of the Federal dictates on judicial appointments.
Concerns relating to the pace of the confirmation process, procedural changes, judicial ideology and filibusters have played an important role in the Senate's ongoing battle to fulfill this duty.
Oh, so now it's a battle to do your job. Maybe if you weren't trying to appoint corporate lackeys and ideologues, it would be a little easier.
In light of recent terrorist attacks, it is readily apparent that we face a new age of global unrest, a world in which terror has replaced formal declarations of war as the major threat against freedom and democracy.
Attacks. Plural. Huh.
You see, the filibuster leaves us vulnerable to (get this) the TERRORISTS!! These guys would evoke 9/11 to get the afternoon off. "I need uh, two hours today of personal time. To uh . . . personally fight terrorism."
A necessary component of providing justice to those who would do harm to
our nation is to maintain an efficient court system - a court equipped with the personnel and resources that enable it to fulfill its role as a pillar of our constitutional system of governance.
. . . meaning that they will conveniently ignore the Constitution when it doesn't play well with our ideas. PATRIOT Act, anyone?
The current filibusters of President Bush's Circuit Court nominees clearly demonstrates an active effort by a minority of Senators to block the confirmation of well-qualified judicial nominees. I firmly believe that these tactics have damaged the judicial nomination process to an unacceptable degree, and now it must be corrected. It is shameful that the action of a handful of Senators has created a vacancy crisis that threatens the service of the very justice upon which our great nation depends.
So shameful, in fact, that Mr. Allard can't bring himself to mention that the GOP used precisely the same tactics to block the confirmation of ONE THIRD of Clinton's judicial nominations.
The Senate must move to end this stalemate, and act quickly to restore faith in the Constitutional process. I continue to urge my colleagues in the Senate to act diligently and to fill the vacancies that plague our courts. Some have suggested that diligent action requires a change in Senate Rule 22, a measure introduced by Majority Leader Bill Frist. I am actively engaged in this procedural debate and, should this matter proceed to the Senate floor, will act in a manner that is faithful to my constituents and respectful of the Constitution.
Yes, in order to "restore faith" in the Constitutional process, we must bypass it completely. And honestly, looking at the nominees so far, a vacancy isn't so much a plague on the courts right now as it is a blessing.
Aside from the effects of the slow confirmation pace of the 108th Congress, the filibuster of President Bush's nominees threatens the integrity of the Constitution, imposing a super-majority requirement where a simple majority was envisioned by the founders. I will continue to support responsible measures and procedures aimed at ending this obstructionist tactic.
Hey Wayne. Yeah, you, the guy with a face like a spiral-cut ham. You know what would really threaten the integrity of the Consitution? Destruction of separation of powers. Elimination of checks and balances. Smart Republicans like McCain understand this. You, on the other hand . . . well, let's just say that you are like that little dog that trips along behind big dog Frist, constantly asking what the two of you are going to do next.
When the nomination finally comes before the Senate, I will support the confirmation of those individuals who will uphold the Constitution, abide by the text of the law, and who will resist temptations to legislate from the bench. In Federalist Number 78, Alexander Hamilton wrote that Judges are the guardians of the constitution, "The courts must declare the sense of the law; and if they should be disposed to exercise will instead of judgment, the consequence would equally be the substitution of their pleasure to that of the legislative body."
Read that part carefully. "Resist temptations to legislate from the bench." If others had resisted that temptation, blacks and whites would still be drinking from separate water fountains. Women would not be allowed to vote. I suppose that wouldn't be a problem for Wayne, but it is a problem for a lot of other people. And don't you take Alexander Hamilton's words out of context to support your twisted little plan, Wayne. If you read the rest of the Federalist papers (which I strongly doubt you have) you'd find that Madison in fact states:
No political truth is certainly of greater intrinsic value, or is stamped with the authority of more enlightened patrons of liberty, than that on which the objection is founded. The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.
One Party rule ain't good, Wayne. Isn't it your president who's always yammering on about the elimination of tyranny?
You can be assured that I will continue to urge my colleagues in the Senate to move expeditiously toward the confirmation of well-qualified judicial nominees. It is time to show the American people that the Senate is indeed interested in the service of justice.
Well, Wayne, once you put some of those "well qualified" nominees up for appointment, let us know.
United States Senator