MSNBC Hardball - Transcript

MSNBC Hardball - Transcript
03/31/05

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

GREGORY: We're back on HARDBALL tonight live from the White House talking about the tragic case of Terri Schiavo, which is not just a human tragedy, but it has also sparked a debate about politics in this country and where it goes from here, what will really be the result of this debate politically.

Congress, of course, got involved in this case and will that debate continue even beyond Terri Schiavo's death?
To talk about that, two members of Congress who were instrumental in the debate and the ultimate bill to get involved in the Schiavo case. Joining me now, Congressman Robert Wexler, a Democrat of Florida, and Congressman Mark Foley, a Republican of Florida.

Congressman Foley, let me begin with you.

Do you think that Congress' intervention amounted to false hope for the Schindler family and others who wanted to keep Terri Schiavo alive?

REP. MARK FOLEY ®, FLORIDA: Well, it was a difficult call, but the leaders decided to bring us back to Washington to see if we could give this family one last opportunity to present their case.

Clearly, some argue that it was false hope. But we at least allowed the federal court system to review the documentation provided by the state courts and see if there was any glimmer of hope to continue Terri's life. We failed at that. The courts ruled. They did so expeditiously. So, the system did work in the end of the day.

GREGORY: You really believe that it did work? Because that would put you at odds with many other Republicans, who think that, in effect, the judiciary, the federal judiciary, thumbed its nose at the will of Congress.

FOLEY: I respect the judiciary. I think those people who are calling the judges murderers and things have gone to the extreme.

This was a heart-wrenching case. Nobody is satisfied with the outcome. This hurts me and it hurt Robert Wexler. We're talking about a human life, so we should stop playing politics with it and try and get back to the basic business of governance.

While I may not agree with every case the judges rule on, in this particular one, 19 judges ruled, so you can't sit there and assume that there's some technical error made by one person. This was clearly vetted. It was a difficult case. It was contentious, no question. But, at the end of the day, we still have to have finality.

GREGORY: Right.

FOLEY: And the rule of law must have prevail.

GREGORY: Congressman Wexler, why was it a bad idea, in your view, for Congress to get involved in here? What's so wrong with federal review of cases as important as these?

REP. ROBERT WEXLER (D), FLORIDA: This is a tragic case.

And what is to me most tragic is that Congress substituted its judgment for the reasoned judgment of the Florida's courts. Let's be very frank about this. If the Florida courts had ruled in favor of Mrs. Schiavo's parents, the Congress never would have come in and stripped the Florida court of their jurisdiction. The precedent the Congress set was that if a state court system, even if it operates with all the due process required, comes up with a result the Congress doesn't like, it will strip that state of jurisdiction and give it to the federal court.

That violates every American principle of an independent judiciary that we have clung to for over 200 years.

GREGORY: But, Congressman Wexler, this was an extraordinary case. You had a dispute within the family. And there are many conservatives in this country who believe strongly that, in this kind of case, what is wrong with doing everything possible to preserve a life when there is any doubt whatsoever in a case like this?

WEXLER: Well, we should always do everything to preserve life. But there are thousands of people in the same exact position that Terri Schiavo is in today.

And the Florida courts held by a standard of clear and convincing evidence that Terri Schiavo's wishes were that she should not remain in a persistent vegetative state. Congress came in and substituted its judgment. And then, ultimately, the federal courts said, no, Congress, you should have never even engaged in this process in the first place, because what you've done is unconstitutional. This is a very frightening precedent if you take it to further extremes.

GREGORY: Right.

WEXLER: Which is what Tom DeLay suggested today.

GREGORY: Congressman Foley, do you think that you're actually setting the stage here for debate about the judiciary, about the Supreme Court even that will resolve around the culture of life? Social conservatives are mobilized in this country in a way that is profound as a result of this case. The right-to-life debate is energized in a way that it hasn't been in a long time. What is going to happen?

FOLEY: Oh, no question. This is going to energize a lot of factions, if you will, debating the judiciary. But we have debated this before.

When the 11th Circuit came out with the decision on one nation under God in the pledge, that activated Congress. When we've had other debates on these issues, Congress intervenes and steps in. I would suggest to you, this debate is not over. But I would also emphasize that, if Scott Peterson is allowed to have a federal appeal on his death row sentence, then I think Terri Schiavo at least should have been given the opportunity to her family, her parents, those who gave her birth, to at least make certain that a fresh set of eyes reviewed the file.

(CROSSTALK)

GREGORY: But, Congressman Foley, everybody uses the Scott Peterson example. The notion that she did not receive due process is based on what? What error was made in the many years of litigation between these two families?
FOLEY: Well, I guess the bottom line was there was no clear written directive by Terri. It was supposition that the husband said Terri told him this personally. That is now speculative.

(CROSSTALK)

GREGORY: But that is the law of the land, is not, Congressman Wexler?

WEXLER: It is.

GREGORY: I think it is a good point. Anybody in this position, these are difficult discussions. And this is a difficult issue. And there wasn't any written intent. And who knows what she would have thought based on a decision she made in her 20s. But, nevertheless, it is the law of the land.

WEXLER: It is. And the courts in our system are the arbiters of the facts, particularly when there are contested facts. Congress is not set up to do that.

We didn't take any testimony. We did not hear from medical professionals. We didn't hear from the family. We didn't hear from any of the affected parties. But, yet, we issued a judgment and we undermined the judicial system of Florida. It's a very, very dangerous precedent.

(CROSSTALK)

GREGORY: Congressmen, we're going to-we're going to have to leave it there. I'm sorry to interrupt you. We're going to have to leave it there.

I'm going to ask Congressman Wexler and Congressman Mark Foley, both joining us tonight.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7356491/