Appointee Would Likely Win in Court (Mary Frances Berry alert)

WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights' argument against seating a new commissioner named by President Bush probably wouldn't withstand a court challenge, congressional researchers say.

At issue is a seat held by commissioner Victoria Wilson, who was appointed by President Clinton after the death of Judge A. Leon Higginbotham Jr. Clinton noted in the appointment certificate that Wilson's term would expire when Higginbotham's would have, on Nov. 29, 2001.

Earlier this month, Bush appointed Cleveland labor lawyer Peter N. Kirsanow to a six-year term. Commission Chairwoman Mary Frances Berry objected vehemently to the appointment, saying federal law stipulates that Wilson, like all commissioners, was entitled to a six-year term. The commission refused to seat Kirsanow at its Dec. 7 meeting.

In a Dec. 14 memo to the House subcommittee on the Constitution, the Congressional Research Service said the civil rights panel's maneuver runs counter to Congress' intent when it reauthorized the commission in 1994. It said Congress meant for commission members to serve staggered terms so that no one president can stack the panel with appointees.

Allowing Wilson to remain for a full six years means her term ``would expire closer to, and perhaps coincide with, the set of four other expirations,'' said the memo, obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press.

``More than half of the offices ultimately coming due in one year or in relatively close proximity would substantially defeat the purpose of the structural scheme to regularize the period of time for which commissioners serve,'' the memo said.

It concluded that a reviewing court is likely to hold that the 1994 reauthorization did not undo the staggered term requirement, ``and that Mr. Kirsanow is entitled to the vacant position on the commission.''

Julia Tarver, an attorney for the civil rights panel, declined to comment on the dispute itself, saying it is pending before the District of Columbia Superior Court. As for the memo, she said, ``I don't think it's appropriate for anybody to comment about how a court would rule in this case.''

The civil rights commission was established in 1957 by then-President Eisenhower to monitor civil rights. The panel has no enforcement power and an annual budget of about $9 million for investigating civil rights complaints and publicizing its findings.

The commission sharply criticized the conduct of the 2000 election in Florida as well as the state's governor, Jeb Bush, younger brother of the president.

The civil rights commission was established in 1957 by then-President Eisenhower

Always an interesting point...and, he was with what party?

REPUBLICAN!

Again, proving that it is a Republican that actually tries to fix a problem (note: I don't believe that the commission is necessary anymore, but clearly Eisenhower, A REPUBLICAN, was well ahead of his time, considering it wasn't until 1964 that the Civil Rights Act was passed, coincidentally, BY REPUBLICANS!). The only thing that should have been done different is there should have been an expiration date after clear headway was made against the unfortunate race problems that our country had.

Which brings up an interesting point and something that I have been wondering about since this issue came up, so pardon the vanity rant/analysis.

At what point has the commission achieved its original goal?

Clearly, race relations are a thousand times better than they were in 1957, or 1964, or 1968. So, when are we (all people) going to realize that a black man (or woman) can go into a Holiday Inn anywhere in the country and actually get a room? Something that back in the 50's and 60's was a legitimate problem. Today, I use the same bathroom as some black guys I work with. I drink (actually fill up my water bottle) from the same water fountain that they use. Hey, you know what, I even go to the same restaurants with the same black guys, and (gasp) we even sit in the same booth.

Interestingly, I get called "cracker" or "white boy" (as in "you're a crazy white boy") an infinite amount more than I refer to my friends as "the n-word". Come to think of it and as everyone knows, black people use that word more than white people do...and that is fine, if that is what they want to do.

The intentions of the commission were to try to right these wrongs (hotels, restaurants, bathrooms and water fountains). In the meantime, the civil rights movement has had a vast effect. Maybe we can chalk it up to the age-old problem of "going to extremes". For blacks, it used to be legitimately REALLY bad. Now, blacks, via affirmative action, have received everything from 8a "set aside" contracts to college entrance, no to mention make-believe December holiday. One might conclude that the pendulum has swung completely the other way...things are good. We are, however, starting to see the pendulum swing back...back to normal.

Now, the commission is trying to right subtle (or even imaginary) wrongs. Government is not good a subtlety. It never has been and it never will be. The struggle for normalcy is over. Maybe it's should be the same for the commission.

Since the appointment document for Victoria Wilson from Bill Clinton plainly states that her appointment ends on "29 November 2001" she will lose. (Will she be required to repay her $2,000 per week salary for her "services" after her term expired? Enquiring minds want to know.)

Losing Wilson will cost Chaircritter Berry her majority on the Commission. But, in the meantime, another Commissioner's term is expiring. This one is a Congressional Appointment. On the alternating rule, the appointee should be a Republican. Will Senate Majority Leader Daschle pull a fast one and stick in another Democrat? Will Speaker Dennis Hastert of the House block such a ploy by Daschle?

Mary Francis Berry is like a bad cold that has settled in your chest and takes time and effort to dislodge. But for the health of the nation, this particular phlegm needs to be hoicked up, as soon as possible.

Congressman Billybob

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.