Editing Robert Byrd (section)

===George W. Bush era===
Byrd praised the [[John Roberts Supreme Court nomination|nomination of John G. Roberts]] to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court created by the death of Chief Justice [[William Rehnquist]]. Likewise, Byrd was one of four Democrats who supported the [[Samuel Alito Supreme Court nomination|confirmation of Samuel Alito]] to replace retiring Associate Justice [[Sandra Day O'Connor]].<ref>[https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm Roll Call Vote 109th Congress – 2nd Session (on the confirmation of Samuel Alito of New Jersey)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170321194124/https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm |date=March 21, 2017 }}, ''[[United States Senate]]'', January 31, 2006. Retrieved November 26, 2018.</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Kirkpatrick|first1=David D.|title=Alito Sworn In as Justice After Senate Gives Approval|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/01/politics/politicsspecial1/alito-sworn-in-as-justice-after-senate-gives.html|access-date=26 November 2018|work=The New York Times|date=1 February 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181108232102/https://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/01/politics/politicsspecial1/alito-sworn-in-as-justice-after-senate-gives.html|archive-date=November 8, 2018|url-status=live}}</ref>

Like most Democrats, Byrd opposed [[Bush tax cuts|Bush's tax cuts]] and his [[Social Security debate in the United States|proposals to change the Social Security program]].

Byrd opposed the 2002 [[Homeland Security Act]], which created the [[Department of Homeland Security]], stating that the bill ceded too much authority to the [[executive branch]].

On May 2, 2002, Byrd charged the White House with engaging in "sophomoric political antics", citing [[Homeland Security Advisor]] [[Tom Ridge]]'s briefing of senators in another location instead of the Senate on how safe he felt the U.S. was.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.upi.com/Top_News/2002/05/02/Byrd-White-House-pulling-stunts/89501020350467/|title=Byrd: White House pulling stunts|date=May 2, 2002|publisher=UPI|access-date=November 20, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171201042849/https://www.upi.com/Top_News/2002/05/02/Byrd-White-House-pulling-stunts/89501020350467/|archive-date=December 1, 2017|url-status=live}}</ref>

He also led the opposition to Bush's bid to win back the power to negotiate trade deals that Congress cannot amend, but lost overwhelmingly. In the 108th Congress, however, Byrd won his party's top seat on the new Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee.

In July 2004, Byrd released the [[The New York Times Best Seller list|''New York Times'' best-selling book]] ''Losing America: Confronting a Reckless and Arrogant Presidency'', which criticized the Bush presidency and the [[war in Iraq]].

====Iraq War====
[[File:Byrd-Gates.jpg|thumb|Byrd with Secretary of Defense-designate [[Robert Gates]], November 30, 2006]]
[[File:Byrd with petraeus.jpg|thumb|Byrd with Lieutenant General [[David Petraeus]], January 23, 2007]]

Byrd led a filibuster against the [[Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002]] granting [[President of the United States|President]] [[George W. Bush]] broad power to wage a [[preemptive war|"preemptive" war]] against [[Ba'athist Iraq]], but he could not get even a majority of his own party to vote against [[cloture]].<ref>"[http://edition.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/11/iraq.us/index.html Senate approves Iraq war resolution] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151016030131/http://edition.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/11/iraq.us/index.html |date=October 16, 2015 }}" (October 11, 2002). CNN.</ref>

Byrd was one of the Senate's most outspoken critics of the [[2003 invasion of Iraq]].

Byrd anticipated the difficulty of fighting an [[Iraqi insurgency (2003–2011)|insurgency in Iraq]], stating on March 13, 2003,

{{blockquote|If the United States leads the charge to war in the [[Persian Gulf]], we may get lucky and achieve a rapid victory. But then we will face a second war: a war to win the peace in Iraq. This war will last many years and will surely cost hundreds of billions of dollars. In light of this enormous task, it would be a great mistake to expect that this will be a replay of the 1991 war. The stakes are much higher in this conflict.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://byrd.senate.gov/speeches/byrd_speeches_2003march/byrd_speeches_2003march_list/byrd_speeches_2003march_list_2.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050825063856/http://byrd.senate.gov/speeches/byrd_speeches_2003march/byrd_speeches_2003march_list/byrd_speeches_2003march_list_2.html|archive-date=August 25, 2005 |title=Senator Byrd – Senate Speeches |publisher=Byrd.senate.gov |date=March 13, 2003 |access-date=June 28, 2010}}</ref>}}

On March 19, 2003, when Bush ordered the invasion after receiving [[Iraq Resolution|congressional approval]], Byrd said,

{{blockquote|Today I weep for my country. I have watched the events of recent months with a heavy, heavy heart. No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. The image of America has changed. Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned. Instead of reasoning with those with whom we disagree, we demand obedience or threaten recrimination. Instead of isolating Saddam Hussein, we seem to have succeeded in isolating ourselves.<ref>Byrd, Robert (March 23, 2003), [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/mar/23/usa.iraq2 Why I weep for my country] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161201213158/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/mar/23/usa.iraq2 |date=December 1, 2016 }}. ''The Observer''.</ref>}}

Byrd also criticized Bush for his speech declaring the "end of major combat operations" in Iraq, which Bush made on the [[USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72)|USS ''Abraham Lincoln'']]. Byrd stated on the Senate floor,

{{blockquote|I do not begrudge his salute to America's warriors aboard the carrier Lincoln, for they have performed bravely and skillfully, as have their countrymen still in Iraq. But I do question the motives of a deskbound president who assumes the garb of a warrior for the purposes of a speech.<ref>Richard W. Stevenson, [https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/07/us/aftereffects-the-president-white-house-clarifies-bush-s-carrier-landing.html AFTEREFFECTS: THE PRESIDENT; White House Clarifies Bush's Carrier Landing] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161128200512/http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/07/us/aftereffects-the-president-white-house-clarifies-bush-s-carrier-landing.html |date=November 28, 2016 }}, ''The New York Times'' (May 7, 2003).</ref>}}

On October 17, 2003, Byrd delivered a speech expressing his concerns about the future of the nation and his unequivocal antipathy to Bush's policies. Referencing the [[Hans Christian Andersen]] children's tale ''[[The Emperor's New Clothes]]'', Byrd said of the president: "the emperor has no clothes". Byrd further lamented the "sheep-like" behavior of the "cowed Members of this Senate" and called on them to oppose the continuation of a "war based on falsehoods".

[[File:GATES APPRO.jpg|thumb|right|350px|Senator Robert C. Byrd (D-[[West Virginia]], far right) shakes hands with Secretary of Defense [[Robert Gates]], while Sens. [[Patrick Leahy]] (D-[[Vermont]], center right) and [[Tom Harkin]] (D-[[Iowa]]) look on. The hearing was held to discuss further funding for the [[War in Iraq]].]]

In April 2004, Byrd mentioned the possibility of the Bush administration violating law by its failure to inform leadership in Congress midway through 2002 about its use of emergency anti-terror dollars to begin preparations for an invasion of Iraq. Byrd stated that he had never been told of a shift in money, a charge reported in the [[Bob Woodward]] book ''[[Plan of Attack]]'', and its validation would mean "the administration failed to abide by the law to consult with and fully inform Congress".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/21/world/the-struggle-for-iraq-byrd-questions-use-of-money-for-iraq.html|title=THE STRUGGLE FOR IRAQ; Byrd Questions Use Of Money for Iraq|date=April 21, 2004|newspaper=The New York Times|access-date=August 10, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180810144320/https://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/21/world/the-struggle-for-iraq-byrd-questions-use-of-money-for-iraq.html|archive-date=August 10, 2018|url-status=live}}</ref>

Byrd accused the [[Presidency of George W. Bush|Bush administration]] of stifling dissent:

{{blockquote|The right to ask questions, debate, and dissent is under attack. The drums of war are beaten ever louder in an attempt to drown out those who speak of our predicament in stark terms. Even in the Senate, our history and tradition of being the world's greatest deliberative body is being snubbed. This huge spending bill—{{Nowrap|$87 billion}}—has been rushed through this chamber in just one month. There were just three open hearings by the Senate Appropriations Committee on {{Nowrap|$87 billion}}—$87 for every minute since [[Jesus|Jesus Christ]] was born—{{Nowrap|$87 billion}} without a single outside witness called to challenge the administration's line.}}

Of the more than 18,000 votes he cast as a senator, Byrd said he was proudest of his vote against the Iraq war resolution.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/12/byrd.access/index.html |title=CNN |date=June 12, 2006 |access-date=June 28, 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100706084002/http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/12/byrd.access/index.html |archive-date=July 6, 2010 |url-status=live }}</ref> Byrd also voted to tie a timetable for troop withdrawal to war funding.

====Gang of 14====
On May 23, 2005, Byrd was one of 14 senators<ref>{{cite news|last1=Rudin|first1=Ken|title=Judging Alito: The Gang of 14 Factor|url=https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5080836|access-date=June 29, 2016|publisher=NPR|date=January 4, 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160816174105/http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5080836|archive-date=August 16, 2016|url-status=live}}</ref> (who became known as the "[[Gang of 14]]") to forge a compromise on the judicial [[filibuster]], thus securing up and down votes for many judicial nominees and ending the threat of the so-called [[Nuclear option (filibuster)|nuclear option]] that would have eliminated the filibuster entirely. Under the agreement, the senators retained the power to filibuster a judicial nominee in only an "extraordinary circumstance". It ensured that the [[appellate court]] nominees ([[Janice Rogers Brown]], [[Priscilla Owen]] and [[William H. Pryor Jr.|William Pryor]]) would receive votes by the full Senate.