Posted on 10/06/2005 7:12:45 AM PDT by linkinpunk
Gang: 'no alarm bells'
By Jonathan Allen and Alexander Bolton
The Gang of 14’s centrist Democratic and Republican senators met and gave preliminary approval yesterday to Harriet Miers as President Bush’s nominee to replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court.
Emerging from a meeting at the offices of Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said, “This nomination didn’t set off any alarm bells with any of us.”
The significance of this provisional endorsement, though presented in a low-key fashion, could be huge, for it means that unless damning evidence emerges during the Judiciary Committee’s as-yet unscheduled confirmation hearings the nominee is unlikely to be filibustered, and a party-line vote would mean confirmation. A party-line vote is far from assured because conservatives have not welcomed the nomination.
Yesterday’s meeting was the Gang’s first formal opportunity to discuss Miers, and several of the senators said they are still early in the process and under no commitment to vote for the nominee.
“This is the beginning of a lengthy process,” said Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine).
But the Gang’s raison d’être is to prevent both politically motivated filibusters and the “nuclear option,” a rule change to cut off debate. The Gang thus seems to be lining up to force colleagues to accept an up-or-down vote on Miers’s confirmation.
“I think it’s highly unlikely there would be a filibuster,” said Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio). Senators declined to say whether they thought the president’s selection of Miers, who has generated more controversy on the right than the left, was evidence that the center is holding on judicial nominations.
An endorsement from the Gang of 14 would make it easier for Democratic Party leaders to support Miers. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has indicated that he is leaning toward backing Miers.
He appeared alongside Miers at a press conference Monday, declaring himself happy to be with her and lauding her credentials.
“Harriet Miers has served with distinction as a trial lawyer,” Reid said. “That’s what I am; I’m a trial lawyer. So anyone with that background makes me feel good — someone who has been in a courtroom, has tried questions, answered interrogatories, done all those things that lawyers need to do.”
But Reid backed away from his statements Tuesday, perhaps because of strong criticism from some liberals and Democrats about Miers’s sparse public record.
“Let me make clear that I have not endorsed this nomination,” he said.
Senate Assistant Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has also thrown his weight behind Miers.
That has focused most of the attention and suspense on the question of what will be the positions of conservative senators such as Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and John Thune (R-S.D.).
Many conservative activist leaders, such as Gary Bauer, president of American Values, a conservative advocacy organization, are disappointed with Bush’s pick. And conservative activists are contacting conservative senators such as Brownback and urging them to oppose Miers, said a GOP aide to a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
One conservative strategist said that a column by George Will published yesterday could serve as a tool to rally conservative opposition to Miers.
Will wrote: “It is important that Miers not be confirmed unless, in her 61st year, she suddenly and unexpectedly is found to have hitherto undisclosed interests and talents pertinent to the court’s role.”
“Otherwise the sound principle of substantial deference to a president’s choice of judicial nominees will dissolve into a rationalization for senatorial abdication of the duty to hold presidents to some standards of seriousness,” he wrote.
In an interview with ABC News yesterday, Brownback said that if Miers testifies during the Judiciary Committee’s hearings that she views Roe v. Wade settled law he would likely vote against her. Roe is an anathema to conservatives because it provided the legal foundation for a woman’s right to an abortion.
On Monday, Thune issued a press release announcing that he would reserve judgment on Miers’s nomination. Likewise, Coburn and Sessions have not made any commitments to supporting Miers.
It will be difficult for these conservative senators to generate enough opposition to defeat Miers’s nomination, even if they forge alliances with liberal colleagues such as Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) or Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.). The Gang of 14’s support of Miers makes the prospect of defeating Miers even more unlikely.
A Gang of 14 green light for Miers would likely influence more mainstream Republican and Democratic lawmakers.
The Dems on the Gang of 14 have already said she appears to be OK with them. If that holds, there will be no Dem filibuster.
Next point...
Best post of the day.
Bush played poker at Harvard Business College. He has made fools of people time and time again when they misunderestimate him. Besides, using the poker analogy, the Meirs pick was one of his "weak" cards. There's going to be another SCOTUS departure before Bush's term expires, and he'll probably choose Luttig or Brown. Wonder if Ann will screech against those choices.
Most people on the Right deplored those on the Left who have tried to defeat the Presidential nominees to the Court based on philosophical differences with the candidate. We said that the President has the right to nominate anyone he pleases and the Senate should confirm absent some disqualifying history or activity. While I wish that the President had nominated someone known to be an originalist, I think the Republicans should vote to confirm Harriet Miers or be seen as hypocritical.
And if it doesn't, Bush has put up a nominee that is satisfactory to the RINO contingent of the gang of 14. Which means they will be willing to vote for the nuclear option if the Dem contingent bolts. And then we win.
IF IF IF
It's just a matter of the trust factor. So while we wait and see... if she turns out as we're being told it's a huge win and a very very good stroke of politics at it's absolute finest. If it goes south as Souter did... then the wheels will fall of the party in my opinion.
I didn't get that logic either. Of course Dingy Harry said nice things that first day. He had to. Anything else would make him look like a raving, partisan loon. He knows to leave reflexive flaming to others; like Hillary...
Dingy Harry and Chuckles the Clown were in a panic that first day. They were ready to spit venom at one of the better known candidates and they got caught flat-footed. Their nice words were simply meant to buy time. They tell us nothing about Miers' qualifications.
Agreed. So we need to look at history here.
If there is one area where the Bush Admin has excelled, it has been with the appointment of judges. So, given that Miers was part of that process, I doubt that Bush would suddenly lurch off that course - and in an absense of more information, I will give Bush the benefit of the doubt here - unless it becomes clear that there is a big problem with Miers' views or her ethics.
Now, if Bush had asked me to trust him on immigration proposals...
If that's really true... WOW
14 mediocre senators accepting mediocrity! No surprise here!
Conservatives: form circle, bring out guns, start shooting.
ping to article and thread
I can't read these threads anymore; too many people have made up their minds about her without knowing the facts. Since I'm neutral, I'll just have to wait for the hearings.
But it's interesting to watch the left AND the right spin their little tales of woe. LOL
Everybody says Roe is settled law, and Brownback knows it.
He's just announcing he's voting against her.
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.