am shocked!
Posted on 07/11/2007 8:56:12 PM PDT by Jean S
Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has fired an early volley in what Senate Republicans and conservative activists predict will escalate into another pitched battle with Democrats on judicial nominees.
Specter has accused Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) of breaking promises they made regarding Leslie Southwick, President Bush’s pick for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Specter aired his grievance with Reid and Leahy during a private meeting with leading conservative activists late Tuesday afternoon. Specter told those assembled that he was prepared to battle Democrats and asked if they also had an appetite for a fight, according to several people who attended the meeting. The activists assured Specter that they were eager to confront the Democrats on Southwick.
Building conservative grassroots support for Southwick would give Senate Republican leaders leverage to unify their caucus and oppose Democrats on the issue. Specter said in an interview yesterday that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) “has talked about some Republican action to put pressure on the Democrats to move the process forward.”
Recently, Specter and Leahy have had collegial encounters on judges, especially when measured by the partisan standard set by the committee in recent years. By faulting Democrats for ignoring assurances they made in private negotiations,
Specter has cast aside the drape of politesse that often hides behind-the-scenes Senate skirmishes.
Republican discontent over the progress of Southwick’s nomination reached a boiling point Tuesday because early in the day Reid told Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), Southwick’s chief advocate in the Senate, that the nomination had no hope of confirmation, according to GOP sources.
“I’m informed that Senate Majority Leader Reid told McConnell that he would bring [Southwick] to the floor before the Memorial Day recess,” Specter said in an interview. “That was undercut by Judiciary Committee action.”
Reid’s spokesman, Jim Manley, explained the change of mind.
“The more Senator Reid looked into Judge Southwick’s qualifications and some of his writings, the more concerned he became.
“Reid has made it clear that he wants to move as many nominations as possible, but it’s obvious Southwick will face strong opposition in the Judiciary Committee,” Manley added.
Specter said, however, that Leahy had promised that Judiciary Committee Democrats would allow the full Senate to vote on Southwick. Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) derailed that pledge.
“Sen. Leahy told me that he was prepared to voice vote Southwick out of committee,” Specter said. “Feingold raised an objection. In the intervening time, the positions hardened.”
Leahy could not be reached for comment by press time.
Feingold said he was “unaware of any agreement or promise made by Senator Leahy to report the Southwick nomination by voice vote.”
“It is clear that a majority of the committee opposes the nomination,” he said.
Southwick has drawn objections from Feingold and other Democrats because he joined two controversial opinions while serving on the Mississippi Court of Appeals.
In one case, Southwick joined a narrow majority to uphold the reinstatement of a white state employee who had lost his job for using a racial slur. In another, he joined a decision to award custody of an 8-year-old child to her father instead of her bisexual mother. The decision inflamed liberal activists for its pointed use of the word “homosexual” instead of “gay.”
Republicans argue that Southwick has an exemplary record. They note that he did not author the two controversial decisions highlighted by Democrats but merely joined the majority’s opinion. And they point out that the American Bar Association rated him unanimously well qualified, the highest possible rating.
“The purpose of the meeting was to inform us of what happened,” said Wendy Long, counsel for the Judicial Confirmation Network, a group that has supported Bush’s nominees. Long and more than a dozen conservative activists attended Tuesday’s meeting with Specter.
“He thinks it would be wise to fight, he is ready to fight, he is eager to fight and he wants to know if we would do the same,” Long said, summarizing Specter’s interaction with conservatives. “Every person in the room was very enthusiastic about a fight.”
The vice president of government affairs at the Family Research Council, Tom McClusky, who also met with Specter, said conservatives have rallied behind Specter’s call to keep Southwick’s nomination alive.
“The response he got was a unanimous ‘Yes!’” McClusky said.
Specter’s role in marshaling conservative groups to push back against Democratic opposition to Southwick shows how his relationship with them has evolved since taking over the senior Republican slot on Judiciary.
Conservative activists strongly opposed Specter’s ascension to the chairmanship of the Judiciary Committee in 2004 because of statements he had made about judicial nominees who oppose abortion rights. Immediately after the election, Specter told reporters that he thought it unlikely the Senate would confirm a Supreme Court nominee who would overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which established the right to an abortion.
Now conservatives are rallying around Specter.
“Specter has exercised a good deal of leadership,” said Long, of the Judicial Confirmation Network. “People are very grateful to him for being willing to show leadership on this.”
He has been a Senator for HOW long? Surely this can’t be a surprise to him.
This sad excuse for a man tells whoever he’s talking to what they want to hear, based on what he perceives as his own best interests. We all know people like this. It is pathetic.
As my daughter says, “Yah, duh!”
CA....
Another Machiavellian dung eater
Even among these types one has to keep their word because so many back room deals are made that nothing would get done.
Well duh.
Republicans are idiots.
Maybe I’m too sceptical - but I don’t trust Specter as far as I can throw him!
For him to say he is now going to take the fight to the Dims is like saying a bear is going to eat his own hand!
There is something suspicious about all this - like others have said - why would he suddenly “want to take the fight to the Democrats??”
He WILL turn on the Republicans who help him - on a dime!!
Personally, I like to think of Arlen Specter as a "fornicating coprophage".
Since when is "homosexual" a slur? Is "heterosexual" also a slur? Should I become inflamed if someone calls me a heterosexual? Homosexuals ruined the word "gay."
Exactly, Arlen is just now waking up? He needs to resign. for the good of the country...
What do you expect from a DemocRat who calls himself a Republican?
am shocked!
Our President deserves Specter after all he resurected this RINO from ouster in his last election.
I wouldn’t let Arlen rake my lawn.
There's a sentence that can be used over and over again. Write that one down, Arlen.
My question...what did Arlen give up to extract this alleged promise from the Dems?
I’ll bet Spectre still follows through with whatever he conceded to them, even if they violated their promise...
Democrats broke promises? Democrats lied? Dog bites man?
Hey Snarlin’ Arlen, Democrats LIE...so do you!!
Only a certified schmuck would take the word of a Democrat on anything. What does Scottish Law tell you to do in situations like these, Arlen?
What if the poster added the Phone Numbers and E-Addresses of the Congress critters in the story they post?
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.