Senator Jack Reed explains Democrats' opposition to Ashcroft nomination

Chat Moderator: Realistically, do democrats really believe they can block confirmation for either Ashcroft or Norton?

Senator Jack Reed: The issue before every individual senator is how he or she will vote. It's particularly critical, because this is a crucial position in the U.S. government, the position of attorney general. So it's not ultimately about blocking a nominee, but expressing the Constitutional consent that is necessary to confirm a Cabinet member.

Question from the chat room: Is it the responsibility of the Judiciary Committee to vet a candidate or to ask questions? Is there a difference, Senator?

Senator Jack Reed: The Constitution of the United States specifically obligates senators to give their "advice and consent" with respect to nominations by the president for executive positions. This is a clear Constitutional mandate, so these proceedings are different from a hearing on a piece of legislation, or a general hearing on an oversight matter of the Senate. It's a Constitutional obligation and requires not just questioning, but approving or disapproving a nominee by the president.

Question from the chat room: I am a little puzzled at the continued opposition to Ashcroft's nomination after the hearings last week. Is there something Ashcroft has said or done to make democrats distrust his word that he will uphold all laws?

Senator Jack Reed: Senator Ashcroft very passionately and sincerely has spent his public life advocating -- sometimes single-handedly -- against laws that he now says he will enforce. I believe he would enforce the letter of the law, but I'm troubled he might not enforce the spirit of the law. In terms of enforcing laws, there's a wide range of options: how many resources you use to enforce laws, how many deputy attorneys general you put on certain areas. All these could result in a situation where he claims he is enforcing the letter of the law, but the law itself is not being enforced across the country.

Chat Moderator: Are democrats being fair to Ashcroft?

Senator Jack Reed: We are being fair -- we're trying to be fair. I can only speak for myself. I deliberately waited until I had an opportunity to look at his record as a senator, governor, and state attorney general, to listen and review his testimony and then to think long and hard about whether I felt he could be the lawyer, not just for the president, but all people of this country. My conclusion is that I don't think he could. It's not a reflection on his character and integrity, but a reflection on his passionate commitment to an agenda, which is much different than that shared by many Americans, regardless of party affiliation.

Chat Moderator: Do you anticipate litigation over lack of enforcement of environmental laws if Norton is interior secretary?

Senator Jack Reed: My concern is that she would not vigorously enforce environmental laws, not dedicate resources to that enforcement. But I haven't reached a conclusion. I want to review her public records and reach a conclusion based on all her activities and all of her statement.

Question from chat room: Why is there so much controversy on Ashcroft and Norton?

Senator Jack Reed: The controversy began with President Bush's nominations. So many of us would very much have preferred to see individuals who were less partisan, less pronounced in their views with respect to, in Ms. Norton's case, environmental protection, and in Senator Ashcroft's case, individual rights. The choice of these individuals generated the controversy. We have no right to tell the president whom he can nominate. We have the obligation, however, to vote for or against the nominees. So the controversy was shaped by the presidential nominations.

Question from chat room: What effect do you think Ashcroft's tenure as attorney general would have on immigrants?

Senator Jack Reed: My fear is that Senator Ashcroft will not be supportive of immigration in general, and will not be responsive to the needs of a good many immigrants here in the U.S., who've established themselves and wish to become permanent residents and citizens. That's one concern I have and one reason I'm unwilling to support his nomination.

Question from chat room: You mention Senator Ashcroft's views on individual rights. What is it exactly that is wrong with having greater individual rights?

Senator Jack Reed: There's nothing wrong with having greater individual rights, but Senator Ashcroft as attorney general of Missouri spent a great deal of time trying to frustrate a voluntary desegregation plan, which would have given minority students the rights to go to more decent schools.

It's not just rights, but making sure each person's rights are protected. There's a concern that his perception of individual rights applies selectively -- the right to bear arms, but not to all students to go to good schools regardless of race. So, it's a question of whether he'll support the rights of all Americans. That's a reason I've been persuaded to oppose his nomination.

Question from chat room: Are the democrats just targeting one of the nominees just to cause a ruckus? Tommy Thompson is strongly against abortion too--how come he isn't getting attacked like Ashcroft?

Senator Jack Reed: One reason is the fact that Senator Ashcroft is nominated to the attorney general position, a critical juncture between executive and judiciary. He'll be charged with protecting rights of all Americans. His record suggests he wouldn't be as vigorous in protecting the rights of all Americans.

Chat Moderator: Thank you for joining us today, Senator Reed.

Senator Jack Reed: Thank you very much.

Check out the CNN Chat calendar
Post your opinion on our message boards

Democrats force delay on committee vote on Ashcroft

Note: Pages will open in a new browser window

External sites are not endorsed by CNN Interactive.