Partisan Divide Evident as Alito Debate Opens (Partisan Rag's Naked Bias Evident -- BARF ALERT!)

Seattle Times ^ | 01/26/2006 | Mayra Reynolds/Los Angeles Times

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

WASHINGTON — In an exchange of speeches that increasingly focused on presidential powers and whether President Bush had exceeded them, the Senate on Wednesday began formal debate on the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.

No firm date has been set for a Senate vote, although both Democrats and Republicans say they expect it to be before the president's State of the Union address Tuesday.

With no Democratic filibuster expected, Alito's confirmation on a largely party-line vote appears all but certain. Almost all of the Senate's 55 Republicans and one Democrat, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, either have announced their support for him or are expected to do so.

As a result, the debate over his nomination is serving as a showcase for two other controversies: warrantless eavesdropping on individuals in the United States and reauthorization of the Patriot Act.

"The reason presidential power issues have come to dominate this confirmation process is that we have clearly arrived now at a crucial juncture in our nation, and on our highest court, over the question of whether a president of the United States is above the law," said Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. "The framers knew that unchecked power leads to abuses and corruption, and the Supreme Court is the ultimate check and balance in our system."

In their Senate floor speeches, Democrats repeatedly complained that as a federal appellate judge, Alito has appeared to defer to executive authority to such a degree that they fear he will acquiesce to presidential claims of expanded powers, especially President Bush's assertion that he had the right to bypass a special surveillance court and order National Security Agency eavesdropping on people in the United States without court warrants.

"The founders understood human nature. They got it. They knew that unchecked power would lead to abuses, and we've seen some of that right here in Washington over the last five years," said Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.

Republicans accused Democrats of "smearing" Alito and unfairly representing his views.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said Alito "is highly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court." Democrats, he said, "are so intent on manufacturing a case against this nominee that they brush aside this seemingly minor detail of his qualifications as if it were just an annoyance."

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said Wednesday she will vote against Alito, citing his "troubling record" on abortion and other issues and a fear that he "does not have the independence to be an adequate check on government abuse of our rights."

"With our rights and freedoms on the line, I will not take a chance on Judge Alito because I have serious questions about his independence and commitment to protecting our rights and liberties," said Murray, who voted last year to confirm John Roberts as chief justice.

Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., who voted against Roberts, has not said how she will vote on Alito.

[tet68]

Hold on Hill, let me "put some Ice on that" for you.

"The founders understood human nature. They got it. They knew that unchecked power would lead to abuses, and we've seen some of that right here in Washington during the
Clinton co-Presidency," said Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.