A voice of reason from Montgomery, AL
Nov. 17th, 2004 07:56 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ambitious_wenchFrom: http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/NEWSV5/storyV5edsen1116web.htm
Via: http://www.civilrights.org
Comments: The South is not all people of low intellect. Witness this well written Editorial opinion from the Montgomery Adviser.
EDITORIAL
Senators owe duty to Constitution
A great deal of attention has been given to remarks by Sen. Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who, if seniority is respected, will become the next chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Too little attention has been given to far more troubling remarks by the Senate majority leader, Sen. Bill Frist of Tennessee.
Specter sparked protests from some conservative corners when he said that judicial nominees with strong anti-abortion stands would have a hard time winning confirmation. There have been calls for denying Specter the chairmanship.
But Frist's words have much greater implications. He said in essence last week that it is the job of the Judiciary Committee chairman to get the president's nominees confirmed. He pulled back from that a bit this week, saying instead that the chairman should "have a strong predisposition" toward supporting the president's nominees in the committee hearings and in the vote on the Senate floor.
Frist is wrong on both counts. The chairman, as should every other senator, should consider each nominee on his or her merits. The Constitution assigns to the Senate a crucial "advise and consent" role in judicial nominations. It should never be abandoned for partisan reasons.
The president's nominees deserve a fair hearing before the Judiciary Committee and a confirmation vote before the full Senate. They do not deserve, nor has the president any right to expect, automatic acceptance by the chairman or by any other senator.
What Frist should want, what President Bush should want, what the nominees should want, indeed what every American should want, is a Judiciary chairman who holds prompt, fair hearings and a Senate in which the members vote on the merits of the men and women proposed for the bench.
Via: http://www.civilrights.org
Comments: The South is not all people of low intellect. Witness this well written Editorial opinion from the Montgomery Adviser.
EDITORIAL
Senators owe duty to Constitution
A great deal of attention has been given to remarks by Sen. Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who, if seniority is respected, will become the next chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Too little attention has been given to far more troubling remarks by the Senate majority leader, Sen. Bill Frist of Tennessee.
Specter sparked protests from some conservative corners when he said that judicial nominees with strong anti-abortion stands would have a hard time winning confirmation. There have been calls for denying Specter the chairmanship.
But Frist's words have much greater implications. He said in essence last week that it is the job of the Judiciary Committee chairman to get the president's nominees confirmed. He pulled back from that a bit this week, saying instead that the chairman should "have a strong predisposition" toward supporting the president's nominees in the committee hearings and in the vote on the Senate floor.
Frist is wrong on both counts. The chairman, as should every other senator, should consider each nominee on his or her merits. The Constitution assigns to the Senate a crucial "advise and consent" role in judicial nominations. It should never be abandoned for partisan reasons.
The president's nominees deserve a fair hearing before the Judiciary Committee and a confirmation vote before the full Senate. They do not deserve, nor has the president any right to expect, automatic acceptance by the chairman or by any other senator.
What Frist should want, what President Bush should want, what the nominees should want, indeed what every American should want, is a Judiciary chairman who holds prompt, fair hearings and a Senate in which the members vote on the merits of the men and women proposed for the bench.