Statement of Senator John Warner

STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN WARNER
on John Bolton
Wednesday, May 25, 2005

Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of John Bolton, the President's nominee for U.S. Representative to the United Nations with the Rank of Ambassador.

How appropriate it is that today of all days, in the United States Senate, this great institution stands in Executive Session, moving forward in the process of considering Presidential nominees. Already today we have confirmed an important judicial nominee to the federal court of appeals. Priscilla Owen was confirmed by the Senate, with my support, by a vote of 56-43. And now we stand poised to confirm the nomination of John Bolton.

You might ask, Mr. President, why is it particularly appropriate for the Senate to be in Executive Session today? Because on this day in 1787 -- 218 years ago -- our Founding Fathers of the United States Constitution first reached a quorum so that the Constitutional Convention to draft our Constitution could proceed. George Washington had been calling for such a convention for years, but it was not until this day, 218 years ago, that the convention finally began.

From May 25, 1787, straight through the summer, 55 individuals gathered in Philadelphia to write our Constitution. It was a very hot summer, and it was a long and arduous debate, many drafts back and forth, but careful consideration was given. Finally, in mid-September it was over. It was a monumental achievement; one that would enable the United States, today, these 200-plus years later, to become the oldest continuously surviving Republic form of government on Earth today.

I mention all of this because one of the key compromises our Founding Fathers made throughout the Constitutional convention was with respect to the advice and consent clause. Our Framers labored extensively over this section of our Constitution, deferring final resolution on this clause for several months. Some of the Framers argued that the President should have total authority to appoint. Others thought that both the House of Representatives and the Senate should be involved in the process. Ultimately, a plan put forth by James Madison won the day - where the President would nominate judges and executive nominees and the Senate would confirm or reject those nominations.

In Federalist Paper 76, dated April 1788, Alexander Hamilton explains in detail exactly why this compromise was so important. Let me read just a portion of what he wrote:

"It has been observed in a former paper, that `the true test of a good
government is its aptitude and tendency to produce a good administration.'
If the justness of this observation be admitted, the mode of appointing the
officers of the United States contained in the foregoing clauses, must,
when examined, be allowed to be entitled to particular commendation.
It is not easy to conceive a plan better calculated than this to promote
a judicious choice of men for filling the offices of the Union"

Today, this great compromise can be found, unmodified, in Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution. This section of the Constitution reads, in part, as follows: the President "shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint . . . public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the
United States . . . ."

Thus, the Constitution provides a role for both the President and the Senate in this process. The President has the responsibility to nominate, and the Senate has the responsibility to render advice and consent on the nomination.

While Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution doesn't explicitly make a distinction between the Senate's role with respect to Executive Branch nominees and Judicial nominees, the tradition of the Senate, in recognition of the Constitution, dictates otherwise.

Traditionally, a President, especially after taking office following an election, is given greater latitude in selecting individuals to serve in the Executive Branch of government. This is in recognition of the fact the Constitution treats Senate confirmed Executive branch nominees far differently than Senate confirmed judges.

In contrast to federal judicial nominees who, once confirmed under the Constitution, serve a lifetime appointment in the third branch of government, independent of the President, Executive branch nominees serve under the President solely at the pleasure of the President. That phrase -- at the pleasure of the President -- is paramount.

This time honored phrase, "At the Pleasure of the President," has been used by Presidents throughout American history to show the American people that the President is the final arbiter of accountability for Executive branch nominees.

And such will be the case with John Bolton. The President, together with his principal Cabinet officers, has put together an extraordinary national security team. John Bolton will be a valuable addition to this team.

The President and his Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, have been clear in their belief that John Bolton has the experience and skills to represent the United States at the United Nations and to carry out the President's priorities to strengthen and reform the U.N. I agree with the confidence they place in this nominee.

John Bolton has had a long and distinguished career in public service and in the private sector. Most recently, he has served for the past four years as the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs. In that capacity, Secretary Bolton worked to build a coalition of over 60 countries to help combat the spread of weapons of mass destruction through the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI). He was a leader in creating the G-8 Global Partnership, which invited other nations to support the Nunn-Lugar nuclear threat reduction concept. As a result, many other nations are now participating with the United States in helping to eliminate and safeguard dangerous weapons and technologies which remain in the countries of the former Soviet Union.

Previously, John Bolton has served as Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs, as an Assistant Attorney General in the Department of Justice, and many years ago he held several senior positions in the Agency for International Development. He has also had a distinguished legal career in the private sector.

It is no secret that Mr. Bolton has at times advocated or represented positions which have sparked controversy. He has done so with a frankness and assertiveness that demonstrate his strongly held beliefs. As the Senate considers this nomination, we should keep in mind the words of Secretary Rice. She stated, and I quote: "The President and I have asked John Bolton to do this work because he knows how to get things done. He is a tough-minded diplomat, he has a strong record of success and he has a proven track record of effective multilteralism." Secretary Rice concluded her remarks by saying, and I quote again: "John, you have my confidence and that of the President."

Given the enormity of problems facing the U.N. today, we have an obligation to send a strong-minded individual to help constructively to solve these problems and to build the confidence of the American people in the U.N.

I share the President's and the Secretary's belief that John Bolton will enthusiastically advance the President's goal of making the United Nations a stronger, more effective international organization.

I urge my colleagues to support this nomination and to send Mr. Bolton to the U.N. to represent our nation and to advance the President's agenda of reform. Such reform is necessary to restore American confidence in the U.N. and to ensure that the U.N. will remain a vital and respected international organization in the years to come.

http://warner.senate.gov/pressoffice/statements/20050525a.htm