Will GOP Restore Constitutional Order to Judicial Confirmation Process?
by Chad Groening and Jody Brown
April 14, 2005
(AgapePress) - A conservative activist says there could be a backlash at the ballot box if Senate Republicans fail to follow through on their promise to change the rules in order to overcome the Democratic filibuster of President Bush's judicial appointments. That activist is not alone in his assessment of the critical nature of that decision by the GOP.Hearings on presidential judicial nominees are to begin today (Thursday) before the Senate Judiciary Committee. But over the past few years, confirmation of several of Bush's high-profile nominees has been stymied by Democrats in the Senate who have staged delaying tactics that, according to rules established by a previous session of Congress, cannot be stopped without at least 60 members of the body voting to do so. A nominee, once passed to the Senate from the Judiciary Committee, only needs a simply majority -- 51 votes -- for confirmation. The Democratic-led filibuster has prevented a straightforward up-or-down vote on many conservative, pro-life nominees put forward by the president.
Bill Greene is president of RightMarch.com, a conservative political action committee whose goal is to counter what it calls "the well-financed antics of radical left-wing groups" and to give individuals sympathetic to its cause a strong collective voice in the political process. Greene is encouraging concerned citizens to e-mail their U.S. senators, urging them to move forward with plans to change the rules of the Senate to permit a simple majority to end a filibuster.
According to news reports, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has discussed exercising the constitutional right of Congress to change Senate rules governing the continuance of filibustering tactics. But Greene says senators appear to be waffling in the face of incessant attacks from the media and Democrats.
"We see it over and over, in case after case," the long-time conservative activist observes. "This issue of judicial nominations is just the latest example where you've got people across the nation ... telling their elected senators, 'Look, you've got to put a stop to this.'"
Greene says failing to act could result in voter backlash. "If Frist and the Republican senators don't step up to the plate and do what they said they would do and put an end to these unconstitutional filibusters of the judicial nominees, then the voters are going to remember that," he predicts. "And I think when election time comes around, there's going to be a real price to pay."
The RightMarch.com founder says he is convinced that grassroots America elected a Republican majority to the U.S. Senate to advance President Bush's conservative agenda -- not to pander to the media and the Democratic Party. He says that is why Americans are frustrated that GOP members in the Senate are hesitant to exercise the so-called "nuclear option."
"This is what the grassroots [movement] across America [is] getting the most frustrated about," he explains. "We've let our voices be heard loud and clear.
"We re-elected these guys to come back to Washington, DC, and to implement conservative principles. The values voters are the ones that put these people in office, and they put them there for a specific reason -- to do their job. What we're having happen now is people apparently are not exhibiting a backbone."
According to Greene, changing the rules is the constitutional option -- and he says it needs to be carried out by the Republican leadership.
Greene Not Alone
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council in Washington, DC, believes Senator Frist must change the rules to restore "constitutional order" to the Senate. He contends that Democrats in the Senate are trying to change the rules for confirmation of judges because their political party has now lost control of the White House and both houses of Congress.
| | 
Tony Perkins |
"The Democratic Party argues that President Bush is arrogantly grabbing for 'absolute power,'" Perkins states in a recent Washington Update. "[And] Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and Senator Robert Byrd [both Democrats] tell everyone that will listen that only they know how to interpret the U.S. Constitution."Perkins suggests that both Reid and Byrd pay heed to the writings of Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers, which state: "It will be the office of the President to nominate, and, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint. There will, of course, be no exertion of choice on the part of the Senate. They may defeat one choice of the Executive, and oblige him to make another; but they cannot themselves choose, they can only ratify or reject the choice of the President."
The FRC spokesman maintains that Senate Democrats are employing a tool intended for legislative matters -- filibustering -- against the president's constitutionally granted power to nominate individuals to the federal bench.
"The extreme to which the minority has gone to in essence rewrite the Constitution demonstrates only too well that what they cannot accomplish at the voting polls is being done for them by activists judges," Perkins concludes. "Their greatest fear is losing this misplace judicial control."
Conservative icon Gary Bauer of the Campaign for Working Families expects Frist will move for a rules change before the end of April. "The vote will be close, but I think we can win it," he says. "The margin could literally be one vote."
Meanwhile, Bauer says the scuttlebutt on Capitol Hill is that some unidentified "moderate Democrats," perhaps a bit uneasy with the hard-line stand being exhibited by their party's leadership, are negotiating behind the scenes so that the president's judicial nominees could be voted on after a set time of debate.
"In either case," Bauer says, "we appear to be headed toward a showdown on the issue that could very well determine whether President Bush has a chance to restore balance to our courts."
