Posted on 11/05/2004 6:28:01 AM PST by Always Right
Specter Retreats: Specter denied yesterday that he threatened Bush on judge nominees. Don’t buy it. Specter knows that he got too arrogant and stepped into a hornets nest. Specter’s statement that, “I have never and would never apply any litmus test on the abortion issue,” just is not true. Specter has made it clear that he considers Roe v. Wade as Constitutional as the First Amendment. When the rubber hits the road, this is a litmus test for Specter. A few token votes to save his behind doesn’t change that a bit. Never forget what he did to Bork. In words and actions, Sen. Specter is no different than President NON-elect Kerry.
The BUZZ on this issue was outstanding. Discussions were all over talk radio, cable TV, and the internet. Several reports of phone calls flooding Senators offices were made. Reportedly, Sen. Frist grilled Sen. Specter on this and told him flatly that the Judiciary Chairmanship is not guaranteed. Folks, this is winnable. We can not let this issue die.
Today’s goal is to STRATEGIZE. Things we know:
1. Sen. Hatch must resign the Chairmanship because GOP rules forbid him to hold it for more than 8 years.
2. Sen. Grassley is next in line, but because he is Finance Chairman he is forbidded to have both.
3. Sen. Specter is next in line, followed by Sen. Kyl who would make an excellent Chairman.
4. Seniority on Committee gives priority, but it still must be voted on. We need to find out the when, what, where, and how behind this vote.
There is an effort to try to persuade Grassley to resign his Finance Chairmanship and take the Judiciary. I support this. It’s a clean way to resolve this without changing the rules or ruffling of too many feathers. But having Grassley give up the coveted Finance Chair is a big if.
Let’s keep in mind the real goal here too as we strategize. We want Bush to appoint good conservative judges who will not go along with the judicial activism that currently runs rabid in our courts. There are two obstacles to this.
1. Democrat Filibusters.
2. Specter as Chairman of Judiciary.
The next 60 will determine how big the obstacles will be. In my opinion, what happens over the next 60 days are the most critical. We need to establish a clean path so Bush’s appointed judges can get voted on the full floor of the Senate. We must keep up the pressure on our Senators. If we let it die now, nothing will be done and we will have lost the best opportunity of our lives to make a difference in our Courts.
There is a preliminary petition at that is being worked on here. Please review it. Pro-Life Petition to Block Sen. Arlen Specter.
Exactly. A very intelligent post. And the President does not want his judicial appointments to focus on single issues. He wants strict constructionists.
This President campaigned for Arlen Specter's re-election. He and his Administration are satisfied that Specter will get the job done in Judiciary, and I concur. In fact, I believe most conservatives will be pleasantly surprised by the pace of rapid confirmations, including stalled confirmations.
As to this little campaign to deny Specter the Judiciary chair, it is doomed to failure. I do agree, however, that it keeps the heat on Specter and Frist to stay in line. On that basis it is useful I suppose but not especially necessary. Both men are grown-ups and know what needs to be done for the President and the opportunity to transform the federal judiciary.
Which is why it is FAR MORE IMPORTANT to convince Frist and the Republican majority to ADOPT A SENATE RULE CHANGE eliminating the filibuster rule for nomination confirmations. As I understand it, such a rule change only requires A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE, and cannot itself be filibustered if adopted as the first order of business when the Senate ratifies the rules for the coming session.
Yes, Specter needs to go, but that needs to be a SECONDARY target--not the primary one.
Bump. You are doing a great job so far.
Jon Kyl -
WASHINGTON, D.C. OFFICE 730 Hart Senate Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Phone: (202) 224-4521 Fax: (202) 224-2207
PHOENIX OFFICE 2200 East Camelback, Suite 120 Phoenix, Arizona 85016-3455 Phone: (602) 840-1891 Fax: (602) 957-6838
TUCSON OFFICE 7315 North Oracle Road, Suite 220 Tucson, Arizona 85704 Phone: (520) 575-8633 Fax: (520) 797-3232
You are exactly right. Specter shouldn't be on the committee at all. We need Republicans who will stand up for their President instead of cowtowing to their Demonrat brethren like Schumer, Kennedy, et. al.
... and the public agrees. Those Massachusetts judges did us a huge favor in driving this point home -- big time. We need to build on that momentum.
There is nothing wrong with putting Spector in the hot seat, but a messy public fight over Spector and abortion is exactly what the MSM is angling for. We need to go around, take a pass on this fight and move forward. Bush and Frist have other options with the Judiciary chair. I bet they are hard at work on them.
What we NEED to hear from the woodshed is CRYING not "WHOS YOUR DADDY"...
the political INCEST MUST STOP HERE AND NOW..
Additionally, Frist is running for President in 2008. He has to keep Specter in line, or his presidential ambitions will be in tatters, and quickly. The base won't stand for any nonsense from Frist or Specter.
For these and other reasons, I think we're gonna be fine with confirmation of Bush's nominees.
You state that "Specter will get the job done for the President." Examining his long record, and what he says now and in the past, I believe that Specter is committed to the pro-abortion position, and sincerely wants to do what he can to block judges who would overturn Roe v. Wade. This opposition can take lots of forms. He can leak information about judges he doesn't like, he can berate them in hearings, he can schedule witnesses that are unfavorable and give them a forum, even if they are lying weasels, he can delay the hearings for a long time to allow the NY Times to pound them for weeks on end until the President is willing to give up on a nominee--in short, he can torpedo nominees without actually coming out against the president. I think Arlen will do this as much as he can.
You are right to note that the committee numbers will change to give the GOP a majority of 2, so this factor makes it conceivable that Specter could be on or even chair the committee and not be able all by his lonesome to keep nominees from reaching the floor. A vote against a nominee by Specter will send a signal of blood in the water to the lib media, but they could still get to the floor. So, if you were to let Specter have the chairmanship, the only way to do it is to call him in to a serious meeting of the Senate leadership and judiciary committee members, maybe in the Oval Office with the President. In that meeting, you lay down the law to Arlen. You tell him that the President's standards for judicial nominees are well known. They must be extraordinarily well qualified. They must NOT be judicial activists, but the types who understand that judges interpret the law. The President believes that the Constitution should be interpreted in accord with the original intent of the founders, and that changes should come through amendment. "Do you disagree Arlen? If so, run for President, but don't be chairman. You will be expected to support and push hard for nominees who share the President's values. That's who he will send up. And you can be sure that they will all be vetted for qualifications and background."
Arlen must be told that if he is not willing to take the chairmanship under those terms, then don't take it. If he says he will support the President's nominees, but it turns out he doesn't, he should be assured by all the other members of the committee that he will lose his chairmanship but quick.
Do that to Arlen, and I will go along with letting him be chair, reluctantly. But I'd feel safer if they just took it away from him, gave him something else to soothe his fragile ego and kept the most important post in someone like John Kyl's hands.
Regarding the filibuster, you are very mistaken about the nature of the rats. I guarantee you, and feel free to bookmark this, the first time that President Bush sends a Scalia type nominee for a Supreme Court position, the Rats will do everything in their power to block him/her, including filibuster. The court is their whole ball of wax, the keys to the kingdom, and as soon as they feel it is threatened, they will go nuclear, to use a phrase. That includes filibuster. They can do no less, NOW and NARAL and Emily's List and the ACLU will demand it.
We might have a few Dims who don't go along with the filibuster, but we might have a few Pubbies, including Arlen, who support it. They can lose 5 Dems and still succeed in a filibuster, and so they will let Dorgan and Baucus and Hegel and a few others opt out, but keep the others disciplined and in line. Bank on it.
Therefore, it is vital that the Senate rules on filibuster be changed, in the organizing resolution, to limit filibusters on judicial nominees. Otherwise, we will have gained nothing on this issue in this election, and the conservatives will punish the GOP in 2 and 4 years.
I agree, Frist will do what it takes now to keep the new Judiciary Chair in line, no matter who it is. Did you see Frist get all full of energy and spunk when the Republicans won those additional seats? He looked like he was going to explode with enthusiasm. Frist is a good person, he has promise.
If the ratio is 11-9 and one of the 11 votes with the 9, we have a tie.
If the ratio is 10-8 and one of the 10 votes with the 8, we have a tie.
Except for when the Senate was split 50-50 and a special rule was agreed upon by Lott and Daschle, a tie results in NO action, i.e. the nomination does not go to the floor.
Or am I not understanding something that you understand?
But I do not want division within the Republican Party.
Right now, either 6 out of 10 members of Judiciary must vote against (technically, 6 out of 9, since it would be unlikely that Specter would vote against himself).
This could be the issue of division that fragments the party.
The easy path is for either Specter to resign from that Committee (because of being offered a better one), or Chuck Grassley stepping down from Finance to chair Judiciary at this most critical point in the history of our country.
It is my opinion that we have reached a crossroads.
Which fork in the road taken is now in the grasp ofBill Frist, Chuck Grassley, and Arlen Specter.
Specter cannot continue as Chair of Veterans Committee. term limits apply.
Prayer is also needed besides action. Many people prayed for this election. They must continue to pray, or else this country will go down a very dangerous path.
There you go again...
We're fighting now, somewhat behind the scenes, to ensure that Specter doesn't get a simple committee chairmanship. We're actually avoiding a nasty, internal abortion fight, that would be trumpeted by the Old Media, by getting Specter out of there now instead of waiting until he gives aid and comfort to the Democrats and becomes an obstacle to Bush's pro-life judicial nominees.
The Senate will caucus as early as NEXT WEEK on this issue. We have to strike NOW and not wait around to see what direction Bush and Frist may or may not take. We also need Bush and Frist to know that a large and vocal block of the Republican base will not tolerate a Specter chairmanship lest they just want to cross their fingers and hope that Specter plays nice.
If you don't like what we're doing then stay out of the No Specter threads. We've got work to do and we don't need your constant distraction.
One more point for you to consider. The Massachusetts Supreme court cemented in the publics eye what judicial activism meant and what strict construction is all about. The Massachusetts Supreme court did us a huge favor. The public was watching and they didn't like it one bit. This directly works against the dems trying to filibuster judges that are presented to the public properly, that is they interpret the law not make it up. What Bush was saying is he saw this and is going to use it to build off of. We would be wise to follow his lead.
bump
A tie vote with a favorable recommendation is considered a victory to the floor.
But the larger point is that this is superfluous. We won't see close votes or tie votes, the electorate has spoken. We'll see lots of crossover votes for the President's nominees both in committee and on the floor.
What happened to Daschle and the overall election results has sent a permanent chill in RAT antics and filibusters. It's just how Washington works.
Further, this President is not gonna appoint rabid pro-life activist judges. However, he will appoint strict constructionists, including some who have proferred an article or opinion on the constitutional merits (and lack thereof) of Roe v Wade.
Conservatives should keep expectations in check. We will transform the federal judiciary by the end of Bush II, and Roe may indeed be overturned, or it might not. But our agenda is much larger than just Roe.
Gary Bauer was not elected President; George W. Bush was. Important distinction to keep in mind.
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.