Posted on 11/17/2004 6:06:32 PM PST by yonif
WASHINGTON (AP) — After two days of appealing to fellow GOP senators, embattled Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania said he would make a public statement to assure Republicans at large he would not block anti-abortion judicial nominees from President Bush.
"I'm working on it," Specter said of the statement after receiving more Senate support despite calls from anti-abortion conservatives that he be skipped over as the next chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
Specter, a moderate on abortion rights, has been trying to repair the damage caused by his postelection comment that Democrats would probably block judicial nominees who would try to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court case legalizing abortion.
"And I would expect the president to be mindful of the considerations which I am mentioning," he said after the Nov. 2 election.
Since then, he has sought to reassure Republicans that he would not stand in the way of Bush's nominees if he took over the Judiciary Committee next year. The current chairman, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, is stepping down because of term limits.
Even as he campaigned to save his chairmanship, Specter lost his spot as one of the senators who must sign the compromise $388 billion spending bill being worked on by congressional negotiators. Specter, a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, which wrote the spending measure, now will have less leverage in reaching a final deal.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said the move "has nothing to do with the chairmanship."
Specter has gone on radio and television. He has told senators, individually and in groups, that he does not have a litmus test on abortion for judges. In addition, he has stressed that Democrats plan to filibuster against conservative judges regardless of what he does.
"People are looking to him to provide some assurance, so he'll make a statement," said Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., who is in line, in terms of seniority, to become the committee's chairman if Specter is passed over.
Senators have said that there would have to be some kind of public reckoning for Specter to smooth over relations with abortion opponents, and to give them some political cover from the e-mails, faxes and phone calls they have been receiving.
But nothing Specter says will satisfy some conservatives, who say he has a track record of opposing their issues.
"When Jon Kyl, Jeff Sessions or John Cornyn would make a great chairman, why in the world would Republicans take the great risk of trusting Specter?" said Jan LaRue, lawyer for the conservative Concerned Women for America.
Nevertheless, the Senate's No. 3 Republican, anti-abortion advocate and fellow Pennsylvanian Rick Santorum, offered Specter support.
"I expect him to keep his commitments, to move judges out of committee, and to be an advocate of the president in getting those judges passed," Santorum said.
Committee Republicans will take an official vote on his chairmanship in January. The vote can be appealed to the full GOP caucus, which heard from Specter on Wednesday.
No one would say what Specter told senators, and that includes Specter. Frist said Specter's comments "were received well."
Even before the meeting, Specter was getting public statements of support from colleagues such as Hatch, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, R-Va., and Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine.
"He was just restating the facts about potential challenges with a Supreme Court nominee before the United States Senate," Snowe said.
His subsequent statements since Election Day, said Warner, have been "clear as a bell — no ifs, ands or buts. I think he's made clear the circumstances under which he made that statement, and he should be given the opportunity to serve."
•__
On the Net:
Senate Judiciary Committee: http://judiciary.senate.gov
Sen. Arlen Specter: http://specter.senate.gov
Anti-Specter group: http://www.notspecter.com
Why in the world should we trust this guy? No way in Hell, I say.
Say they give him the gavel and he keeps his promise (unlikely as that may seem) not to block on abortion issues. Is anyone dumb enough to think he and his liberal sneak friends are not going to find some other reason to stop a nomination they don't like?
They are experts at this. It won't be about abortion, oh no! Heaven forbid! It will be that the nominee's experience is not suitable, or that he has some other controversial opinion, or whatever.
Or he will just refuse to schedule a hearing on that nominee.
Arlen wants it too bad. That makes me suspicious in itself.
He already disclosed his true intentions. Bork 'im!
In addition to his pro-choice position, he is also:
1) a copyright nazi
2) an opponent of tort reform
3) anti-gun
This guy should NOT be the chairman.
If the committee votes for him, WE MUST FIGHT ALL OVER AGAIN, AS IT CAN BE APPEALED TO THE WHOLE GOP CAUCUS.
and we are to believe specter .... why??? because hatch likes him???
I personally don't care if the judges are pro or anti abortion as long as they are PRO CONSTITUTION ( ain't nothing in the document about murder that was all state law etc etc )
Roe V Wade was an abomination as far as the Constitution is concerned
No way Lying Rino, you have broke the trust. Time to shuck the excess baggage!
Glad you brought those other points up-it's not just the abortion issue that Specter is on the wrong side, but many others plus he simply is the wrong man for the wrong position at the wrong time.
btt
paltz sez: that's not the issue really. If Ginsburg were to step down, say. Will he block a conservative nominee to take her place?..or will he be too chicken and only replace conservative justices w/ conservative justices?
OO sez: You hit the nail on the head.
Watch carefully what Specter says in his statement, my guess is there will be some out for him. I expect a Clintonesque, word-parsing, lawyer special.
My fear is, if he gets in, he will support a conservative to replace Rehnquist and everyone will breathe a sigh of relief, thinking the GOP has Arlen by the shorthairs.
They won't realize that his treachery will not come until he has to replace a Stevens or a Ginsberg. Then, it will be Robert Bork II, cementing Arlen's pro-abortion legacy by assuring another 20 million dead babies in America over the next generation.
Arlen doesn't mind supporting a pro-lifer, unless the pro-lifer will tip the balance of power on the SC (like Bork would have). When that has the potnetial of happening, then the long knives come out (PBA pun intended)
At that point, all the members of the "Bush/Rove/Santorum know what they are doing" crowd will quietly disappear into the background. "What could we have done?" - they will plead, forgetting their stance at this historic moment.
This doesn't even touch the damage Arlen would do on a plethera of other issues (RKBA, tort reform, etc.).
Specter must be stopped - now.
Guess he'll have to block them on their 2nd amendment stance then.
Sometimes the glass is half full.
He may not block them, but he will do all he can to smear and malign them to the point where the candidate has no chance.
"Wonder what you'd have to do to qualify as a liberal on this subject?"
Gut a baby with your bare hands.
Well the GOP is screwing us. Specter being backed, DeLay getting a pass; labeling of foreign grown fruits being disassembled... and more to come. If SPECTER screws us ONCE, it is FU GOP in 2006; as you see, I am keeping score!
Sometimes the glass is half full."
... neutered?... the glass is half full? Of what? ... or should I sat whose? Ours!Democrats have the audacity to call people who support killing babeies but who oppose killing guilty murderers "mainstream" when what they should really be called is "insane."
Spector will just find another reason to block Bush's nominatons. It won't be said it was because they are anti-abortion, but it will have the same effect. This guy cannot be trusted.
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.