There are two ways to go:
1) Bounce him out of Judiciary.
2) Leave him as Chairman but with the private lecture that if he strays, he's gone.
Option 1 has risks. He could go semi-Jeffords and become a media darling to whom the reporters go whenever they need a quote to humiliate the GOP. He could also use his considerable seniority in the Senate to obstruct all sorts of things in revenge. We should not discount his power to do this. From his perspective, he's in his 70's, he's paid his dues to the party (and he has at least somewhat -- he did stymie the liberals on Clarence Thomas. He was very effective for us then), and he'd be outraged if he was publicly humiliated by the party.
Option 2 risks again his considerable power of seniority. He could Bork our nominees and defend himself in public, making it very hard to remove him after the fact. There is some way to reduce this risk. Possibly the WH can make him a player in the nomination process. "Consult" with him. Nominees do NOT, EVER, answer the abortion question. "I cannot comment on any matter relevant to a case that might come before me as a Justice on the Court." So the nominees will have to be well camouflaged anyway.
It's a tough situation. I think the optimal solution is to PROMOTE him to a "higher" committee and offer him enough sugar in that promotion that he accepts. That would be best. But if he doesn't consider any committee higher and won't accept the efforts to avoid humiliating him, we are facing Option 1's risks.
This is very true - unfortunately.
The better part of poker may be to leave him where he is - I have a notion that "W" knows just what he's dealing with - and may have an ace in his pocket.
I wonder which would be the worse - Specter as is or Specter pulling a Jeffords - and the resulting loosing a R Sen. and the resulting media frenzy and dims delight over another rep. Senator jumping ship.