CNN Lou Dobbs Tonight - Transcript

CNN Lou Dobbs Tonight - Transcript
Wednesday, May 18, 2005

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

DOBBS: Thank you very much, Kitty Pilgrim.

A showdown in a Senate tonight over the president's judicial nominees and the future of the filibuster. Senator Barbara Boxer is fighting to save the filibuster. She says the White House and some Senate Republicans aren't happy with the results of the debate so they want to change the rules. Senator Barbara Boxer of California joins us tonight from Capitol Hill. Senator, good to have you with us.

SEN. BARBARA BOXER, (D) CALIFORNIA: Thank you, Lou.

DOBBS: Senator, negotiations have been going on. We're being told in rather stark terms that this is critically important to the Republican Party and leadership and majority. We're being told by the Democrats it's a constitutional crisis.

In point of fact, this is a confrontation that would be unnecessary if the Democrats would back off of the judicial nominations as the venue for the filibuster, wouldn't it?

BOXER: Well, Lou, you are talking the Republican line here which is your prerogative to do. We have confirmed 208 of President Bush's nominees for the court. We have stopped ten. Now that number is actually a little lower, but we'll stick with the ten. That's 95 percent.

And I would say to you, Lou, just in your life if CNN gave you 95 percent of what you wanted and your family did, and the same for me, I'd have a smile on my face. But if you really wanted everything, if you had that arrogance that you wanted 100 percent, you wouldn't be happy. And what we're fighting here is an arrogance of power that isn't good for the country, because these judges that we have stopped are way out of the mainstream.

DOBBS: Well, now, senator, you and I are having a face off. And I'm going to force that, taking the Republican line on some of this. But let me quote something you said eight years ago.

BOXER: Sure.

DOBBS: According to the-if we could put that up it would be great-"according to the U.S. constitution, the president nominates and the Senate will provide advice and consent. It is not the role of the Senate to obstruct the process and prevent numbers of highly qualified nominees from even being given the opportunity for a vote on the Senate floor." One Senator, Barbara Boxer on May 14, 1997.

BOXER: I stand by that. You have to understand that 61 of president Clinton nominees never got out of committee. They were pocket filibustered. These nominees have all had votes. Priscilla Owens has had four votes on the Senate floor. She just didn't make the 60 vote cut.

Janice Rogers Brown, someone who I know pretty well in terms-I don't know her personally, but I know her record, way out of the mainstream from California, had a vote. Didn't make the cut of 60.

So what I was talking about is the fact that the Judiciary Committee wasn't even allowing us to have this vote to see if we could get to 60 with some of the nominees.

DOBBS: Well, in 1995 you joined with Senator Lieberman and others, other Democrats, trying to end all filibusters just two years before that, Senator.

BOXER: Well, here's what happened then. That was Tom Harkin. And he was trying to change the rules. And I was wrong. And as soon as this happened, I admitted it. I have big statement. As a matter of fact, I gave a big speech to the National Newspaper Editors that I had come over from the House just a couple of years before. And I kind of wanted to make the Senate like the House. I thought it took too long to get things done. I thought that, you know, my party had all the answers. I was absolutely wrong. And I have made my mea culpa on that one.

There's another point, Lou, you need to understand. It's really key. When Tom Harkin made the motion to do away with filibusters, we got something like 19 votes, OK. So, it wasn't very popular. But we did it in the context of a rules change, which would have taken 67 votes. We didn't try to go around the back door and say, well, we can't get 67 votes so we'll have the vice president sit in the chair and then we'll have this ruling and all of that.

What they are doing is an end run around the Senate rules and around the constitution. And it will have terrible ramifications.

DOBBS: Senator, forgive me, I can understand how you might feel that way. But in point of fact it's changing the rules which have been done twice over the course of the past hundred years. But the second part, it's a constitutional issue, how so?

BOXER: Well, the fact is the Senate sets its rules. That's what the constitution says. So, therefore, when the Senate wants to change the rules, they should have to go by the rulebook.

What kind of lesson is this to our children? We have a set of rules, it takes 67 votes to change it. And they figured out a way to go around the back door with 51 votes. If this is so great an idea, they should have to get 67 votes to change the rules.

Let me tell you, this whole thing is so bad, Lou, I don't know, you don't have enough time to go through it all. But let me just say we stopped ten judges out of 218. The ones we stopped deserve to be stopped, because they will hurt the people of America. That's the truth. DOBBS: How is it the ABA gave both Justice Owens and Justice Brown qualified and well qualified ratings?

BOXER: Well, it has nothing to do with the fact that they have stood alone in many of their decisions. Do you know, that Janice Rogers Brown is in a court, the California Supreme Court, with six Republicans and one Democrat. 31 times she stood alone. And she stood on the side of rapists. She stood on the side of big business against consumers. Her record is horrendous for the people.

DOBBS: Why don't you have confidence senator, if that is the case.

BOXER: Yes.

DOBBS: That your colleagues, your peers in the Senate, a majority could form to vote her up or down.

BOXER: Yes. Well, we have had a vote. We already had a vote, Lou. And she didn't make the 60 vote cut. We are going to have another one way or another.

DOBBS: This would not be unprecedented that you would vote over and over on an issue.

BOXER: We voted four times on Priscilla Owen. The question is, shouldn't we have this advice of consent situation with judges where they do have to meet, because their lifetime appointees at very high salaries here. They may be around for 30 years. No other check and balance but this moment. Why wouldn't you want to have that kind of nominee have to meet a higher bar? It happens very rarely. I think it's a good system. I hope you change your mind.

DOBBS: We're out of time. I just wonder, would your view change if the Democrats were in the majority?

BOXER: The truth is, I should not change my view at all. That would be hypocritical. I would keep my view...

DOBBS: It might just be flexibility and growth. One never knows. I wouldn't want to characterize it.

BOXER: That's what politicians are known to say. The fact is, I've grown up in this job, the founders knew what they were doing when they said the Senate sets the rules. We said it takes 67 votes to change it. And they are backdooring it. And it's all about politics. It's all about Doctor Frist's ambition. It's wrong for the country, Lou.

DOBBS: Senator Boxer, we thank you for being here.

BOXER: Thanks for having me.

DOBBS: Thank you very much.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0505/18/ldt.01.html