Cornyn decries Democrat tactics

By BRENDA ALLUMSnews1@kilgorenewsherald.com

Cornyn

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Texas Representative John Cornyn thinks the current filibustering in the U.S. Senate is in flagrant opposition to the Senate’s long tradition.

The Senate has been “debating” President George Bush’s nomination of Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen to the New Orleans-based 5th Court of Circuit Appeals.

During the last Congressional session, Owen’s appointment was blocked by a filibuster — and history may be repeating itself. A number of debates and negotiations have been ongoing this week on Capitol Hill in an effort to find a compromise on the Owen confirmation.

At the heart of the issue is whether Democrats have the right to use a filibuster to prevent the appointment and other Bush nominees.

“The bottom line is there has never been in the history of the Senate a filibuster of a nominee who enjoyed majority vote,” said John Drogin, press secretary for Cornyn. “It’s a matter of procedure ... 60 votes are needed for cloture (a vote to end debates or filibusters) and the Democrats are not going to get past cloture.”

Cornyn said the issue of filibusters is “about the rules of the Senate and the power of the Senate to determine for itself the rules by which we govern.”

The U.S. Senator believes it’s time to “tone down our rhetoric and try to address squarely this issue.”

Cornyn said all the Republicans are asking for in this debate is a “simple up-or-down vote for this President’s nominee.”

Owen has been waiting four years for the simple vote from the Senate.

“Though a bipartisan majority stands ready to confirm her nomination, a partisan minority obstructs the process and refuses to allow a vote,” Cornyn said. “This partisan minority insists for the first time in history that she (Owen) must be supported by a supermajority of 60 senators, rather than the constitutional standard and Senate tradition of a majority vote.”

Cornyn said he remains optimistic that “this violation of many years of Senate tradition, the imposition of a new supermajority requirement of 60 votes, will be laid aside in the interest of proceeding with the people’s business, a job my colleagues and I were elected to faithfully execute.”

He noted that for more than 200 years, voting on Presidential nominees was “faithfully executed” by the Senate.

“Senators from both sides of the aisle exercised mutual restraint and did not abuse the privilege of debate out of respect for two coequal branches of government – the executive, that has a constitutional right to choose his or her nominees, and an independent judiciary,” Cornyn said.

He pointed out that until four years ago “both Republican and Democratic Senators consistently opposed the use of the filibuster to prevent judicial nominees from receiving an up-or-down vote.”

Cornyn terms the current actions as a “disservice” to the nominees.

“The new requirement the partisan minority is now imposing -- that nominees will not be confirmed without the support of 60 Senators -- is unprecedented in Senate history,” Cornyn said. “The reason is simple ... The case for opposing this fine nominee (Owen) is so weak that using a double standard and changing the rules is the only way they can hope to defeat her nomination.”

Despite the fact the Owen seems to be at the eye of this storm, the gridlock is not really about her.

“Just a few weeks ago the Democratic leader announced that Senate Democrats would give Justice Owen an up-or-down vote, albeit only if other nominees were defeated or withdrawn,” Cornyn said. “Obviously, with these kind of offers being made based on cutting deals and pure politics, this debate is not about principle. It is all about politics. It is shameful.”

Cornyn said rules should “apply across the board exactly the same to all nominees, regardless of who wins and who loses form a political consideration.”

The newest senator from Texas believes if the U.S. Senate would simply follow the more than 200 years of consistent Senate and constitutional tradition, there would be no questions about the confirmation of Owen or the process.

Both Cornyn and Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson are reported to be leading the charge against the Democratic tactic and want an end to filibustering on judicial appointments, but not legislative issues.

Spokesmen for both Texas senators said the two would rather have a simple majority vote.

“But Sen. Hutchinson is willing to use it (the nuclear option) if needed,” said. Don Stewart, Hutchinson’ communications director. “The Democrats are not using the filibuster in an attempt for more time to study the nominees, but to block a vote.”

Cornyn said political scholars have long realized that changing the rules of confirmation “as the partisan minority has done badly, politicizes the judiciary and hands over control of the judiciary to special interest groups.”

Stewart and Drogin believe the issue of cloture will be on the Senate floor Monday or Tuesday.

Sixty votes are needed to end the debate.

“We expect the Democrats to vote against this,” Drogin said. “If that happens then we will ask for a ruling from the president of the Senate, which will probably be Vice President Cheney.”

Drogin said if the Senate president rules the Democrats “out of order,” the Democrats will more than likely protest.

“Then the Senate will vote on supporting the president of the Senate’s decision.” Drogin said. “It takes 51 votes to uphold the ruling. If that happens then we can vote on the nominees.”

Drogin said this action will set the precedent for the coming legislative session, unless the filibuster threat looms again when considering judicial appointments.

“It’s really in the Democrats’ interest to stop the filibuster,” Stewart said. “They can always hold the filibuster in reserve for a time when they really need it. But if the chair rules them out of order and the Senate upholds the chair’s ruling, then precedent is set.”