Posted on 05/26/2005 10:23:35 AM PDT by Pikamax
Graham gets heat for deal His mediator role in filibuster drama upsets many in S.C. By LAUREN MARKOE Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON — In Washington, South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham is being lauded for helping pull the U.S. Senate back from the partisan brink of a filibuster crisis.
In South Carolina, the Seneca Republican is trying to control the damage.
“The calls won’t quit, and they’re almost all against Lindsey,” state Republican Party chairman Katon Dawson said.
Dawson counted more than 900 phone calls to party headquarters in 36 hours — mostly from people who helped elevate Graham from the House to the Senate in 2002.
Graham unleashed this anger Monday night, when, as part of a bipartisan group of senators, he announced a last-minute compromise to end the Senate’s filibuster crisis.
The deal — allowing some but not all of President Bush’s most conservative and controversial judicial nominees a vote on the Senate floor — was accepted by Senate leaders.
But Cheryl Dashnaw, a Summerville housewife and active Republican, is appalled by the senator she voted for two years ago.
“He’s helping the Democrats subvert the Constitution,” she said.
As for Graham’s next election, in 2008, Dashnaw said she will “look at other options who to vote for — but it won’t be him.”
But Graham said Tuesday he expects to regain his critics’ confidence when the compromise results in more of Bush’s conservative nominees winning spots in the federal judiciary.
Underscoring his “90 percent conservative voting record,” he said he disagrees with those who would have him spurn Democrats when the good of the country requires him to work with them.
“I will fight for the conservative cause, because I believe in it,” Graham said. “I will break away when I think the country needs me to break away to find a middle ground.
“But I will not use this job to hate people. There are some people on the right and the left, (who) expect you not only to vote with them, but to hate the people they hate. Count me out.”
In contrast to Graham, Jim DeMint — South Carolina’s junior senator since January — aligned with most GOP senators on the filibuster.
He decried Democrats for using the technique, which ties up the Senate floor indefinitely, to deny judicial nominees a vote of the full Senate.
“The wisdom or ignorance of this deal will be determined by whether the Senate fulfills its constitutional responsibility to give judicial nominees the respect and the courtesy of an up-or-down vote,” DeMint said in a statement.
In heavily Republican South Carolina, Graham this week is booking time on local radio and television stations from Greenville to Columbia, trying to sell the compromise to wary constituents.
Most already know him as a senator who often goes his own way.
Graham made headlines earlier this year as the Republican most willing to work with Democrats on overhauling Social Security. While he has a plan to introduce GOP-favored private accounts into the system, he also criticized Bush for focusing narrowly on the accounts.
Graham also has attracted attention for teaming with each of New York’s Democratic senators during the past two years.
With Hillary Clinton, he worked to increase benefits for members of the National Guard and Reserves. With Chuck Schumer, he is pressuring China to revalue its currency.
Would-be challengers take these alliances, and Graham’s role in the filibuster compromise, as an opening.
Charleston businessman Thomas Ravenel, who lost to DeMint in the 2004 GOP Senate primary, said Tuesday he is seriously considering challenging Graham in 2008.
“He’s the third senator from New York,” Ravenel said.
Asked about Graham’s sky-high approval rating in South Carolina — he is the most popular politician in the state according to a recent poll of S.C. Republicans — Ravenel said he wasn’t worried.
“That’s nothing a little bit of money can’t take care of,” he said, adding that voters need to learn more about Graham’s record.
Graham, however, will count on Republicans like Tom Fort, the secretary of the First Tuesday Republican Club of Richland and Lexington Counties.
Fort isn’t thrilled with the filibuster compromise, but he won’t blame Graham for working with the opposition when needed.
“There are a lot of Democrats in Washington, too.”
Graham basically became a bureaucratic politician out to save his hide representing himself and not the people who elected him to office. This maturation process usually begins on the 2nd term but Graham started early.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Isn't he the guy who, when he was first running for office, said something to the effect that he was running because the stuff Democrats were doing in government made him sick to his stomach?
I guess Democrats don't make him sick anymore. Well Sen. Graham, YOU make ME sick now!
He was afraid McCain would start looking for another girl friend if he didn't get on board. Lindsey Graham is a testosterone challenged sellout.
I agree with you.
But on his website, LG says:
WASHINGTON -- U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) tonight made the following statement on the agreement which clears the way for some of President Bush's nominees to be confirmed to the federal bench.
Graham said:
"The American people won tonight. The Senate is back in business. And I truly believe future judicial nominees will be treated better because of this agreement."
"The agreement allows up or down votes on deserving nominees and gives the Senate a chance to start over regarding future nominees. It's my hope both sides have learned from their mistakes and we can get back to the traditional way of doing business when it comes to judges.
"One of the major elements of the deal makes clear that if one of my seven Democratic colleagues decides to filibuster in the future because of an "extraordinary circumstance," I retain the right to vote for a rules change. It's my hope we never get to that point.
"With better communication and a spirit of putting the country ahead of ourselves, I believe we can avoid future filibusters.
"We are a nation at war which desperately needs a functioning Senate. Our men and women in harms way deserve Senators with personal courage and respect fo the institution. They are risking their lives to defend our freedom and those of us in the Senate should have the courage to put the welfare of the country ahead of our own personal political interests. That's the least we should do.
#####
I'm out baby!! I'm out!!!!!
That's all well and good, but when something as important as this is part of the 10%, don't be surprised when the people who put you into office get pissed.
I also think he won't be re-elected.
Graham was so smug, so full of himself when the compromise was announced. His condescending comments should insult all his supporters. He told Chris Matthews that the folks angry with him just don't get it. He belittled our intelligence with: We don't understand how the senate works, we don't understand he did this to preserve the senate, blah, blah, blah.
Well, there are other things he can do to try to get back in some good graces, like take a lead role in support of Bolton, for starters.
Oh, and after that, be very vocally supportive of the President's other judicial nominees from here on out. And when it comes time for the President to appoint a justice, Graham needs to go to the mat for the nominee.
Years ago, I heard Trent Lott caught in a bad moment on tv saying that Lindsey Graham was "light in the loafers". Maybe this is well known on the Hill, but not to his constituents.
Can senators be removed, and if so how?
Well, I only heard Trent Lott say it. Maybe he didn't know he was on a live mike, but the comment was aired on tv.
"Lispy"
At the time I thought he seemed to be exaggerating a little bit. Now I see that he felt early on he had to turn left to be reelected. So much for principled leadership, he was only thinking of what he would have to do to get elected again.
I faxed and wrote his office to remove my name from his list of past contributors for his traitorous actions on the judiciary and Social Security reform.
I love his "logic" here. If you vote against a bill, you HATE the person who drafted it and the people who vote for it. It's not just a disagreement or difference in view, it's HATE.
The voters need to send this nutjob home. This time next year, he should just be sitting around drooling in his mush.
Lindsey Graham needs a Prozac the size of a softball.
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.