Boycott Vermont!

The Weekly Standard ^ | 07/01/2002 | Hugh Hewitt

[Pokey78]

. . until Patrick Leahy allows votes on Bush's judges.

BOYCOTTS don't always work, but they usually annoy. Maybe it's time to annoy Vermont and its two senators, Patrick Leahy and James Jeffords, to get across how little the obstruction of judicial confirmations is appreciated.

Senator Leahy holds the chairmanship of the Senate's Judiciary Committee, a position he has abused from the moment he assumed it. Eight of President Bush's original eleven nominees to the federal bench have not been given so much as a hearing by Leahy, despite the fact that individually and as a group they represent the very best in American legal learning, practice, and thought. As former solicitor general Charles Fried said on my radio show in June, Leahy is denying these nominees their hearing not because they are unqualified, but because they are overwhelmingly qualified and would win the approval of the committee and the Senate.

This is only a one-man blockade, but it's working. Leahy raised the stakes recently by directing his staff to demand internal Department of Justice memos from the days when one nominee, Miguel Estrada, toiled as a deputy solicitor general. The administration will never release such material, so Leahy will have a new excuse for delay in his war against the nominees.

The stonewalling of the original eight Bush nominees has become a huge issue for the GOP base, and perhaps even beyond as the profile of the issue rises. Vermont's Jim Jeffords did Leahy no favor when, on the anniversary of his defection from the GOP, he pointed to Leahy in the crowd of well-wishers and remarked that he "slept better knowing that Pat Leahy is picking the judges." That is, of course, what Leahy is doing, but he and his allies prefer that it not be put so bluntly. This power in one senator's hands is obviously unconstitutional.

Genuine relief will arrive only if the GOP recaptures control of the Senate in the fall. In the meantime, though, perhaps the good people of Vermont should learn that their senators' behavior is not without its costs.

Leahy would not be the chairman with the power to obstruct all the nominees if Jeffords had not switched parties. Both are from Vermont. Rarely is accountability so clear in a matter of legislative obstructionism.

Vermont depends on out-of-staters' coming to its small preserve, in the summer months to hike and in the winter months to ski. But Vermont's senators are preventing courts that affect all 50 states from having their full complement of judges. Why spend money in a state that has so directly injured your interests in a functioning judiciary?

I think I'll say no to Vermont this year. Just as Leahy has said no to the nominees whose timely service might improve the circumstances in my state of California.

When I proposed this payback on the air and online last month, a few hundred people decided to act on the idea and dispatched notice of their decision to bypass Vermont to various hoteliers and the Vermont Chamber of Commerce (www.vtchamber.com). So many wrote, it seems, that notice was taken, though abruptly dismissed. "It's targeted at Senator Leahy and it's all wrapped around the judicial nominations," Chris Barbieri of the Chamber told Burlington's Channel 3. Barbieri allowed as how the Chamber had received 250 e-mails from individuals declining to go to Vermont this year. He was not impressed. "Two hundred and fifty boycott e-mails is really nothing significant. We get 8 million to 8.5 million visitors every year. We get about 5 million in the summer and fall, and 250-300 is really a drop in the bucket. It's not going to have an impact."

Senator Leahy agreed: "As everybody has said, this happens every year on one issue or another. And it ends up we just get publicity for Vermont and more people end up coming here."

The cumulative economic effect of saying no to Vermont is probably quite low. But some of the public is letting individual hotels, B&Bs, and ski resorts know why they won't be checking in this summer and fall. Those are unhappy hostelries. They are annoyed. Perhaps they will study the specifics of Leahy's atrocious actions. Perhaps they will get a clue as to why, as the New Republic's Michael Crowley has written at length, Leahy is unpopular within the Senate, even with some of his Democratic colleagues. He's a bully, and an arrogant one at that.

Under fire on the anniversary of the first nominations, Leahy took to the floor of the Senate to defend his tactics. He referred to another popular wartime president, FDR, and how FDR had tried to pack the courts. Leahy argued that his effort was like the successful effort to block FDR's court-packing plan.

When I played the audio for Arizona Republican senator Jon Kyl, also on the Judiciary Committee, he laughed and laughed. FDR's court-packing plan proposed a radical expansion of the Supreme Court, not the filling of existing vacancies by highly qualified nominees. And FDR sent the plan to Congress in 1937, four full years before he became a "wartime" president. But that's Leahy: Any smoke will do when the public's attention turns to his antics.

Which is really the point behind a Vermont boycott--turning attention to Leahy's tactics. I have been careful to argue that trips to Vermont should be planned as soon as hearings and committee votes take place on the original eight nominees held hostage these 55 weeks. This is very different from demanding that nominees be confirmed. That decision is the job of the Senate--the entire Senate. If a well-qualified nominee failed in committee or on the floor, it wouldn't be Vermont's fault.

But the conduct of Vermont's two senators surely is Vermont's fault. The Chamber's flack and the tourism industry would be well advised to let Senator Leahy know their opinion on the matter. They may support him. But they may also be annoyed. After all, what's the harm in holding hearings on the president's nominees and allowing the senators to vote them up or down?


Hugh Hewitt is a nationally syndicated talk show host and a columnist for WorldNetDaily.

[Pokey78]

Need a Hugh Hewitt MEGA PING, King!

[capt. norm]

A friend of mine owns a travel agency that operates in 42 locations in states this (East) side of the Mississippi. He has drafted a (snail mail) letter to them on his stationery that should at least get their attention.

The letter quotes Vermont Chamber of Commerce's arrogant reply about how little they care about losing 250-300 visitors.

We will see how they react to the prospect of losing several thousand customers.

[eleni121]

Bump!

[Maceman]

I've been living in Metro Boston for thirty years. I've never been to Vermont, so I guess they won't notice if I start to formally boycott them.

Who wants to visit a New England state that doesn't have a coastline? Being land-locked in New England is kind of like being a flightless bird.

[ElectricStrawberry]

They DO have great camping, hiking, and fishing. However, since the lesbians took over the state, I have chosen to do my manly outdoor activities in New Hampshire, Gotta get outta Boston frequently in the summer and the Sagamore bridge blows.

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

Those who had no intention of visiting Vermont should boycott anything produced in Vermont as well. Hugh says to focus on tourism but don't give those nuts any of your money at all.

VVV Veto Vermont Vacations

[savedbygrace]

I'm way ahead of the curve on this one. I've been boycotting Vermont since I stopped eating Ben & Jerry's about 10 years ago.

[Clemenza]

No hay problema aqui. Vermont is so sickeningly yuppified, with "quaint" (read: inauthenitically rustic) town squares, really gay Bed and Breakfasts and is filled to the rafters with Volvos with Greenpeace stickers. I'll go to New Hampshire or even upstate New York before I visit that Fruitloop state.

[RonDog]

"...the point behind a Vermont boycott--turning attention to Leahy's tactics.

I have been careful to argue that trips to Vermont should be planned as soon as hearings and committee votes take place on the original eight nominees held hostage these 55 weeks. This is very different from demanding that nominees be confirmed. That decision is the job of the Senate--the entire Senate..." - Hugh Hewitt

No JUDGES? No SKIS! Let our judges go!

(AT LEAST let them go before the entire Senate, and OUT of Leahy's self-important committe.)

Hugh makes the "big time" (sort of) in this week's WEEKLY STANDARD!

July 1, 2002
Volume 07, Number 41

Articles

On a Big Issue, Bush Goes Wobbly
Why is the president endorsing a provisional Palestinian state?
by Fred Barnes
The Lessons of Lebanon
Iran and Syria sponsor an ominous arms build-up on Israel's northern border.
by Michael Rubin
Cloning and Congress
No ban is better than a phony ban.
by Wesley J. Smith

Boycott Vermont!
. . . until Patrick Leahy allows votes on Bush's judges.
by Hugh Hewitt

Jesse Leaves the Ring
Minnesota's tough-guy governor bows out.
by Jason Lewis

Way to go, Hugh!

If you listen to Hugh Hewitt, or read his WND commentaries,
this PING list is for YOU!
Please post your comments, and BUMP!

(If you want OFF - or ON - my "Hugh Hewitt PING list" - please let me know)

[Grampa Dave]

No Vermont Maple syrup nor Ben and Jerry's.

What else can I buy cott!

[RonDog]

See also:

Leahy Dismisses Conservative Boycott Of Vermont - Hugh Hewitt says "Let's FReep these CREEPS!"
WCAX-TV (Burlington, Vermont) | 06/02/2002 | Andy Potter, Channel 3 news
Posted on 6/4/02 7:18 PM Pacific by RonDog

Leahy Dismisses Conservative Boycott Of Vermont

Burlington, Vermont - June 2, 2002

A radio talk show host is launching an attack against Senator Patrick Leahy reminiscent of the battle over civil unions. When Vermont adopted the landmark legislation giving homosexual couples the rights of marriage, an explosion of angry letters and emails flooded in from around the country. Some threatened to boycott Vermont entirely. Now comes another frenzy -- aimed at Leahy for blocking conservative judges from appointment to federal courts.

Leahy wins applause almost everywhere he goes here at home. After all, he's brought back a lot of federal money during his 28 years in Washington. The new City Market in Burlington never would have been built without the grant that Leahy secured. The crowd at the market's grand opening on Saturday was glad that he held up several Bush administration nominees to federal court -- including personal favorites of Attorney General John Ashcroft. Leahy joked, "I'll tell Attorney General Ashcroft I will speed up the process when he speeds up sending better people." the crowd cheered its approval.

But outside Vermont, among conservatives, Leahy has become a national lightning rod. The latest strike against him comes from syndicated radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt, who launched an email campaign to boycott Vermont tourism.

"It's targeted at Senator Leahy and it's all wrapped around the judicial nominations," Chris Barbieri of the Vermont Chamber of Commerce acknowledged. But he's not too worried. As a result of Leahy's block against the judicial nominations, the Chamber has received 250 emails threatening to cancel visits to Vermont.

"250 boycott emails is really nothing significant," he told Channel 3. "We get eight to eight-and-a-half million visitors every year. We get about five million in the summer and fall, and 250-300 is really a drop in the bucket. It's not really going to have any impact."

Leahy also dismissed the boycott: "As everybody has said, this happens about every year on one issue or another. And it ends up we just get publicity for Vermont and more people end up coming here."

"A rainy weekend in the summer costs us a lot more tourist business than this will ever cost us," Barbieri added.

Leahy says he'll move ahead with the majority of judge nominations, but don't expect him to budge on account of a boycott that appears to be a bust... more

Hugh asks that we:
1 - E-mail the Vermont Chamber of Commerce, at www.vtchamber.com [online "contact us" page].
2 - E-mail mtownsend@bfp.burlingtonfreepress.com [editor of the Burlington Free Press]

Let them know that we will cancel all travel plans to Vermont, and tell all of our friends to do the same, until Senator Patrick Leahy (RAT, Vermont) releases his "hostages" - and allows an "up or down" vote on ALL of President Bush's judicial nominees before the FULL SENATE!

[leilani]

Absolutely! Vermont syrup? Uh-uh. Vermont furniture, nope. Vermont lobster (oh boy, this is hard) NO, NO NO! It's time to fight back. Spread the word. VERMONT SUCKS & all of their products poison tiny little children.

[Angelique]

Congrats to Hewitt. Let's get another campaign going. Leahy sure is cocky.

[DLfromthedesert]

Oh, hurray for Hugh!! Love the Weekly Standard!! I'm a charter subscriber.

It's about time they give Hugh some space; he sure gives them a lot of plugs.

[Victoria Delsoul]

Thanks Ron.

Bump!

[Dan from Michigan]

There's a term for that - 'flatlander'....

[Dan from Michigan]

BTW - All the Green Mtn boys are rolling in their graves.

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

Boycott Vermont...and Freep the press on their silence re. the Senate. What the Senate is and isn't doing is putting our nation at risk. Most Americans have no idea what mischief these Senators are working ...which is the only reason they're still in office and not tarred and feathered and living outside our borders...Leahy, Daschle, Reid, Kennedy, Edwards, Clinton, Benedict Arnold.

[RonDog]

Wow, RC. That is a GREAT remake of a classic WWII poster:

Crack the Axis
by Charles Allen

from
"Powers of Persuation: Poster Art of WWII"
at
The National Archives

Not sure about comparing "Leaky Leahy" to a Nazi, but he **is** a NUT, and he **is** putting political partisanship ahead of the very serious needs of his country in this time of war.