Norton Speaks with Bush Official in Call to White House on Threatened Veto (3/20/07)
Norton Speaks with Bush Official in Call to White House on Threatened Veto
March 20, 2007
Washington, DC- Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) this evening issued the following statement concerning the White House's reaction to the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007:
"I was never tempted by the resounding vote for the D.C. House Voting Rights Act of 2007 in two committees to prematurely declare victory. With the statement of the President's advisors recommending that he veto H.R. 1433, the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007, the fight has now begun. Today I called the White House and talked with a high level official to ask for reconsideration of the threatened veto. I appreciate that he heard me out. I especially appreciate that he said that he would take my concerns directly to the President. He also said he would look into how the recommendation, which centered on the constitutionality of the bill, was developed. I emphasized that the President has vetoed just one bill since entering office and questioned why he would take it on himself to prejudge the constitutionality of the bill and be perceived here and around the world as personally denying a basic right to D.C. residents who are fighting on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan and others who are paying federal taxes. I pointed to the division of views on the constitutional issue and the favorable rulings of scholarly conservative opinions such as those from former Court of Appeals Judge Kenneth Starr and former Assistant Attorney General Viet Dinh, strongly suggesting that our bill would be found constitutional. I stressed the necessity to avoid inconsistent actions on signing bills where constitutional issues are raised. The President signed the late term abortion bill in 2003, although the Supreme Court had ruled an almost identical bill unconstitutional in 2000. All three of the recent federal late term abortion cases in three circuits have been declared unconstitutional and two have already been heard by the Supreme Court. The House and Senate, which passed the late term abortion bill, likewise, will be held responsible if they use their own views of the Constitution to deny D.C. residents the vote. The President, the Senate, and the House cannot be held responsible if the courts find our bill to be unconstitutional, but they will personally bear the responsibility if the President's veto threat preempts the democratic process and forecloses judicial determination. I particularly ask my Senate colleagues to move ahead and pass the D.C. House vote bill if it comes to their chamber and to do so using the same independence they showed when the late term abortion bill was passed in the 109th Congress.
"Rep. Tom Davis and I are resolute in continuing to work for passage in the House by the end of this week and are encouraged by the bill's excellent prospects here. We also are grateful to the D.C. voting rights coalition of civil rights groups which continues to press the bill in both houses. This is not the time to give up. It is a time to pick up the gauntlet, pass the bill in the House and Senate and give the President a bill I believe he will then find hard to refuse."