Posted on 10/03/2001 1:12:32 PM PDT by anniegetyourgun
WASHINGTON- Eugene Scalia, President Bush's nominee as the Labor Department's top lawyer, defended his opposition to workplace safety regulations at a Senate confirmation hearing Tuesday.
"For a lawyer to shade or slant his legal advice to advance a private agenda is among the gravest betrayals of his solemn duty as an attorney," said Scalia, a Washington labor lawyer and son of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
Democrats on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee appeared to be solidly against Scalia, who has criticized ergonomics and Clinton-era regulations as "quackery" and "junk science."
The vote that probably will determine if Democrats can block Scalia's nomination from the Senate floor is that of Sen. Jim Jeffords, I-Vt., who was not at the hearing. His spokesman, Erik Smulson, said Jeffords "has indicated to me he will support the nomination." A committee vote is expected Oct. 10.
"Many of us have serious concerns about Mr. Scalia's nomination to this important position based on our review of his record and his writings - which clearly suggest that his views are outside the mainstream on many issues of vital importance to the nation's workers and their families," said Chairman Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass.
As labor solicitor, Scalia would be charged with enforcing nearly 200 labor laws. He would provide legal advice and guidance on virtually every initiative of the department in areas such as safety and health, minimum wage and pension security. He would be regarded as a top lieutenant to Secretary Elaine Chao.
The labor laws "are to be taken seriously, and if confirmed I pledge to enforce them vigorously," Scalia said.
Scalia was pressed by Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., to admit he has represented just two workers in his 10-year labor law career, which has focused mostly on corporate clients.
Edwards said he questioned whether Scalia has the "necessary empathy for workers in order to adequately and properly represent them."
Scalia said he thinks ergonomics-related injuries do exist. He said his criticism was aimed at the specific regulation issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which he thought went too far, and said scientific evidence supporting it did not satisfy a legal "junk science" test established by the Supreme Court.
Clinton-era ergonomics regulations were repealed by Congress in March after a legislative battle that pitted business groups against labor unions. Chao plans to announce this month if the Labor Department will pursue another regulation or a voluntary approach.
Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, the ranking Republican, defended Scalia, saying it made no sense to disqualify him based on his opposition to a regulation killed by bipartisan majorities in the House and Senate.
"His views do not differ greatly and are certainly not out of the mainstream of the United States Congress," Gregg said.
I would imagine the son will be an even greater turncoat.
Translation: he's doesn't agree with the Democrats often enough.
These seems to be the new "buzz-phrase" for the Democrats. Anyone who opposes them is "outside the mainstream"... I guess it all depends on who's defining what the "mainstream" is, doesn't it?
According to Sen. Kennedy (Drunk Skirt Chaser, Mass.) you are in the mainstream if you think the Feds need to regulate the location light switches in the workplace, so as to prevent ergonomic injury.
Scalia was pressed by Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., to admit he has represented just two workers in his 10-year labor law career, which has focused mostly on corporate clients.
And just how many employers did Sen. Edwards (Plaintiff Lawyer, N.C.) represent in his career?
It's all about feelings, not competence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.