Tuesday, April 26, 2005

Hilary Clinton Speaks about the Filibuster & the "Nuclear Option"

The Filibuster is a technique in the U.S. Senate where any Senator can speak at length on an act of the body in order to stall or kill the measure. This is a long standing practice in the Senate. It is this measure that makes the senate the more credible and powerful bodies of Congress. This is where even the voice of the minority can be heard. A very important American value.

This is what Hilary Clinton has to say about Republican efforts, led by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, attempt to eliminate the Filibuster. This attempt has been deemed the "Nuclear Option" because it will cause an explosion of relations between Senate Republicans & Democrats.

"If invoked, the nuclear option would be, in my view, one of the most egregious abuses of power that the Senate has experienced in its history. ...[T]he majority seeks to turn the United States Senate into a rubber stamp for President Bush's extreme judicial nominees and force all Senators to abdicate our constitutional responsibility of advice and consent. As one sworn to uphold the Constitution, that is something that I cannot do and will not do and that is why I will continue to do all I can to fight for our democratic principles. ...President Bush has nominated a few people to serve on our federal courts for life that I and many of my colleagues believe would not abide by the rule of law, which is why some of these nominees were not confirmed. Now, to stack the courts with these nominees and other extreme judges, the majority is attempting to violate long-established and agreed to Senate rules in order to do away with a constitutional check on the power of the President to pick any judicial nominees he pleases. This is wrong and inconsistent with American values. ...I will do all that I can to ensure that this does not happen. "

3 comments:

Anthony Bruno said...

WOW! What a blogsite!
I find it interesting how some folks regurgitate what they "learn"
from the NY Times and the network
news.

Now, to educate readers about what
is written in the CONSTITUTION, not
the misleading Senate "rules".

Wouldn't it be nice if for every
time the word "filibuster" or
" nuclear option" was used, we would also hear what "Article II, Section 2.1" states?

This particular article is what governs the limit of the Senate
power (2/3rd of FULL Senate concurrance, NOT committee approval)

But the media and partisans would
rather mis-inform the public. They
would prefer a Senate "rule" trump the Constitution.

Further, the intent of our Founders when they created the Senate, was to ensure each state would have equal representation, so large states would not dictate to smaller ones. The Founders had little interest in political parties, as evidenced by them
not referenced in the Constitution.

I appreciate your blog allowing me
the opportunity to let readers
understand the Senate's duty.

Thanking you in advance,
Anthony J. Bruno
Cary, NC

Anthony Bruno said...

More..........

Sen. Clinton took the opportunity to share her opinion about what is now described as "the nuclear option". I'm sure the Founders would chuckle at the thought of ensuring 'Article II, Section 2.2' of the Constitution was enforced would be described in such glowing terms.

In her comments she stated, "If invoked, the nuclear option would be, in my view, one of the most egregious abuses of power that the Senate has experienced in its history. ...[T]he majority seeks to turn the United States Senate into a rubber stamp for President
Bush's extreme judicial nominees and force all Senators to abdicate our constitutional responsibility of advice and consent."

Apparently, Sen. Clinton should spend more time studying the Constitution. If she does, it
might prevent her from making
such ignorant statements about
the Senate's duty, as defined
in Article II, Section 2.2.

The Founders viewed the Senate as a SINGLE body, unified to support the Executivewith a two-third's majority, or deny him as this article provides. This prevented the body from being a "rubber stamp" as she fears.

Partisanship often drives our representatives towards political goals, rather than adhering to Constitutional responsibilities. Some will use the Constitution as they see fit, and "interpret" it
to fit into a pre-defined template.

Our votes are the only tools we have to ensure elected officials uphold the oath of office.

Anthony J. Bruno
Cary, NC

Anthony said...

You're welcome Mr. Bruno. Your comments are welcome. I would like to add that my post are original and not taking from sources such as the NY Times or network news. I only wish these media outlets were properly educating the public.

I do not believe that any Congressional Rule of Procedures such as the Filibuster supercede the Constitution. But it is such rules and principles that are the fabric of our system of Checks & Balances. A balance which is essential in order to maintain a prosperous, powerful American democracy.

In addition, for the Senate to maintain its credibility as the upper chamber of Congress, a deliberative body where all states have an equal voice, the Filibuster in its current form must be upheld.