Hatch to Stalled Judicial Nominees: 'Hang In'

Reuters ^ | 09-05-03

[Brian S]

Fri September 5, 2003 02:05 PM ET By Thomas Ferraro

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch said on Friday he does not expect other stalled judicial nominees to follow Miguel Estrada's lead and drop their confirmation bids, but "we are always concerned."

"I've basically told them, 'Hang in there. We'll do our best to get you through,"' Hatch, a Utah Republican, told Reuters. "Let the process work."

Estrada got fed up with the process. After waiting more than two years for a Senate confirmation vote, Estrada asked President Bush on Thursday to withdraw his nomination to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Democrats, who denounced Estrada as a right-wing ideologue, had blocked the nomination with a procedural hurdle known as a filibuster. A majority of the 100-member Senate backed Estrada, but proponents were unable to get the needed 60 votes to end the filibuster.

Democrats are now filibustering two other appeals court nominees, Alabama Attorney General William Pryor and Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen. And they say they have to votes to block at least two more, U.S. District Judge Charles Pickering of Mississippi and California jurist Carolyn Kuhl.

Unlike the other stalled nominees, Estrada has a private practice, and backers noted there are problems keeping and attracting clients while in limbo about a possible judgeship.

Hatch, asked if he expected any other stalled nominees to withdraw, told reporters, "We are always concerned about that. But I personally don't think any of them will."

Hatch said Republicans will continue to press for the case for these and other nominees and look for a way to end filibusters against them.

Some Republicans have considered filing suit challenging the constitutionality of filibusters while others have explored trying to change Senate rules to outlaw them on nominations.

But lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle have warned such action would further strain relations in the Senate and make it more difficult to find common ground.

Democrats have said Bush could avoid future filibusters if he offers more mainstream judicial nominees.

[Coop]

Obviously we know where you stand.

I try to stand as far away from the malcontents as I possibly can. You know, the hysterical whiners who scream and shriek, yet rarely if ever offer alternative solutions. I much prefer the company of folks that actually attempt to find out what's going on and then attempt to find a solution. (fascinating concept)

But I suppose it is kind of a fun release to keep parroting:

24/7!!

24/7!!

Real filibuster! Squawwkkkkk! ~

[votelife]

Democrats have said Bush could avoid future filibusters if he offers more mainstream judicial nominees.

How about Bush could avoid future filibusters by:
1. Campaigning heavily in Dem obstructionists states
2. Cutting out pork SEVERELY, esp in Dem states
3. Getting good candidates to run against Dem obstructionists
4. Going on national TV and explaining how the Dems trashed Estrada

[Salvation]

Hang the dems!

[votelife]

we challenge the republicans from the RIGHT in the primary. For example, maybe in Alabama, Judge Roy Moore (10 Commandments) might challenge Shelby (former Democrat)

In PA, Toomey is challenging Specter.

You get the idea.

[rrrod]

just heard on the radio that the RATS are really celebrating this victory....wonder if hatch is joining them?

[votelife]

get a cell phone, then you can call for free. If you call on nights and weekends, you can leave messages and it's free.

[votelife]

thank you for fighting, both for Estrada, and also by being a conservative voice of reason in your family!

[rrrod]

yeppers!!!!!

[Spiff]

'Hang in there. We'll do our best to get you through,"' Hatch, a Utah Republican, told Reuters. "Let the process work."

Your best!? A fat load of good it did Estrada over the past year. Your best sucks and the process is broken.

[BureaucratusMaximus]

...yet rarely if ever offer alternative solutions...

Thats funny...its like PC parents won't don't spank their kids; they'll put them in time-out/talk to them all nicey till they're blue in the face/just let the kid walk all over them/etc. while the parent waits and hopes that eventually the kid will "get it" or something. Let me know when you let the pubbies out of time out ok? You prolly got until '04 at this rate.

[votelife]

I call the Senators all the time at night. You can call all 100. Some Senators have terribly long messages before you can leave one, esp Murray or Cantwell...

[votelife]

Bush could also avoid future filibusters by explaining to Delay that anything that Daschle, Hillary, or Kennedy want is DOA in the House, unless it it benefits the nation, but if they want it, it probably hurts America, so no loss there.

[fr_freak]

Oh, great and wise one, please tell me more so I may continue to enjoy my Kool-Aid in peace!

I did tell you more. Come up with a solution. You apparently will not or cannot.

Direct my anger!? What the hell do you think I'm doing!?

Throwing a tantrum, like a 4-year old. But at least they're cute.

I think mhking's sense of outrage at this tremendous defeat of the Senate Republicans (and it is a defeat, as much as many here would like to regard it as a blameless force of nature) is well justified and voter outrage, as one of the things that politicians fear most, does serve a useful motivating purpose. In addition, identifying a problem is usually half the battle. With that in mind, Coop, I find your comments to be smug and petty.

You challenge mhking to quit blaming the Senate Republicans and come up with a solution. Well, I challenge you to explain to all of us why we shouldn't hold the Senate Republicans accountable for this defeat. Explain to us exactly why it is that their hands were completely tied on this issue and how there was absolutely nothing they could do, no matter how willing they were to take risky but principled stands. I am not familiar with every parliamentary rule and procedure in the US Senate, but I am willing to bet that you aren't either. If you can describe, in detail, why we should believe that this derailed nomination was not a failure, then we will stop believing that Senate Republicans should be held accountable.

Bear this in mind: for most people, the power of the vote is the only recourse we have against unfavorable candidates, short of revolution. Therefore, it is pointless simply to sit back and blame the Democrats and say there is nothing we can do about it, because we do not vote for them as it is. Therefore, they are not afraid of losing the votes of people like us. All we can do, then, is enforce our demands on our representatives that depend on our votes by withholding that vote if they fail us. If you can post solid reasons why we shouldn't believe that the Senate Republican leadership failed us, then they will be safe. Otherwise, it is our duty to take into account their failure to represent us fully at next election. This kind of thinking may cause some short term pain, in terms of Democrat wins, but in the end, the Republican party will be more conservative and therfore will better represent us (don't worry, I would die before I voted Dem, but there are other parties out there, if the need arises). Voting for someone, regardless of character or true political views, just because they have an R next to their name is exactly what has brought so many RINOs into office, who then sell us out on key issues.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Mileage varies. It doesn't seem any sillier (or more inherently self-defeating) than mindlessly bleating "stay the course... b-a-a-a-a-h-h... stay the course... b-a-a-a-a-h-h," over and over again; nor metronomically droning "...200 years of precedent...*meep*... 200 years of precedent... *meep*..." really.

I can't help but notice that -- rather than suggesting any viable plan of action of your own (other than simply Sitting Down and Shutting Up, I mean) -- all you ever seem to offer, to date, is insults towards anyone demanding more accountability of their elected representatives than you do, yourself.

I also find it bizarrely fascinating that you label anyone expressing principled and legitimate disgareement with your stance, vis-a-vis this topic, as "dissidents." What, pray tell, do you suppose ought to be done with such "dissidents," ultimately...?

[BureaucratusMaximus]

You rock!

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Correction: "malcontents," rather than "dissidents." The point remains, however.

[rrrod]

"Oral Hatch demonstrates everything that is wrong with Congressional Republicans - no guts, no backbone, no cojones, and no brain"....this bears repeating

[Dane]

However, Bush could easily have seated his ENTIRE SLATE of nominees last week through recess appointments-

Of course maybe Estrada didn't want a recess appointment. It only lasts till Jan. 2005.

Maybe he wanted an up and down vote which the petulant democrats denied him.

[Ann Archy]

George Will said the Senate rules were changed so that ALL the Republicans had to be available to do the filibuster but that only ONE Democrat had to be there on the floor!!!

Who moved the rules??? Why not change the rules??

[Miss Marple]

Estrada is the one who quit. He has a private practice, and couldn't afford to be in limbo any more. I believe the rest of the nominees are state judges who will have employment until they are sworn in as federal judges (with the exception of Pryor, who is an attorney general, and he is in the same situation.) None of these people will drop out since there is no point to them doing so.

In my opinion, the problem we have is that the Rats have used an unprecedented filibuster threat with the knowledge that once a filibuster starts, there can be no other business done before the Senate.

The Rats also know full well that if we called for 24/7, their buddies in the media would portray the filibustering democrats as heroes (especially Saint Hillary) and would feature their speeches every night on the evening news. By the way, those filibustering can talk about anything, as in "Bush knew, Bush got us into another Viet Nam, Bush is in cahoots with his io buddies, etc. etc." I don't think we need a free Rat commercial every night on the evening news.

There has to be a way to turn this glee that the Rats are currently enjoying into another Wellstone moment. Perhaps, now that Estrada is no longer a nominee, he can speak out with some force. He can detail his experience on every talk show that will have him. There should be some good stories there, much as Mrs. Clarence Thomas revealed today in her Wall Street Journal op-ed.

The Rats must be shown as ruthless, vulgar, lying, unprincipled obstructionists.

And Estrada should be re-nominated if we can get a 60 vote majority. I also think we should start talking about the rules of the Senate, which most Americans don't know about.