Pickering Battle Places Congress on Verge of 'Institutional Crisis'

CNSNews.com ^ | March 07, 2002 | Jeff Johnson

[Stand Watch Listen]

Capitol Hill (CNSNews.com) - Republicans and even some Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday acknowledged that extremely bitter battles surrounding the confirmation of President Bush's judicial nominees are endangering the entire nomination process.

"We're on the verge of an institutional crisis here, and both sides are responsible for it," said Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). "I fear we are edging toward a place where no one can be confirmed, that we'll all just continue to get more dug in and more partisan and the wheels will grind to a halt."

McConnell made his comments during a committee meeting that was to include a vote on the nomination of Judge Charles Pickering to the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The vote was postponed for the second time.

"The last thing on earth I want for this committee and for this Senate and for any future Senate is to have this totally devolve into a tit-for-tat situation where all we do is smear people who we don't like or who differ with us in their opinions," said Utah Republican Orin Hatch, the ranking minority member of the committee. "I'm sick of it and I'd like to end it."

Hatch charges that the "lynching" of Pickering's nomination "is the product of engineering by extreme left Washington special interest groups who are out of touch with the mainstream and have a political axe to grind."

One of those liberal special interest groups distributed a statement at the hearing.

"If the nomination of Judge Pickering is an indication of what we can expect with future Bush administration judicial nominees, then all his candidates should come with a warning label, 'Beware ... May be Hazardous to Women's Health and Civil Right,'" said a statement from Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion provider. "No judicial nominee should be considered unless they affirm a woman's civil and human right to make her own childbearing choices."

But Delaware Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden warned his fellow Democrats to carefully consider their reasons for opposing Pickering at next week's vote.

"I know some from the outside have argued that, because Judge Pickering has personal views relative to abortion different from mine, we should vote against him. I'd be careful what we wish for," Biden cautioned. "Because if it is based ... not upon his judicial rulings but personal beliefs relative to a social issue, when we have a Republican Senate again, it'll be a cold day in hell before we have anybody on the bench who is 'pro-choice.'"

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) concurs that Pickering's nomination has, in large measure, deteriorated into a battle over abortion.

"I'm concerned also, that what we have here with Judge Pickering is a warm-up for a later confirmation battle on the Supreme Court. And there's been a suggestion by some on this committee about a litmus test on Roe versus Wade," Specter said. "My 'pro-choice' views are well known, but I have supported nominees who have held different than my own personal views."

Sen. Jon Kyle (R-Ariz.) urged his colleagues to overcome the temptation to judge Pickering on his personal beliefs rather than his judicial qualifications.

"All of us in politics have infinite capacity to rationalize. I believe that all of us look for reasons to oppose someone whose views are politically different from ours, to one degree or another," Kyl admitted. "And, to the degree that we do that, it's not a good thing."

Specter agreed.

"Maybe it's too late for Judge Pickering," he said. "But it's my hope that, without the context of a specific nominee, that we'll declare a truce, an armistice and we'll try to arrive at some protocol."

He reminded his colleagues that their role in the nomination process at the committee level is limited.

"As we all know, the Constitution provides for confirmation by the Senate, not by the Judiciary Committee," Specter said.

New York Democrat Charles Schumer challenged Specter.

"That is a rationale to abolish all committees," Schumer charged. "I fail to see why the committee structure is any more flawed in the selection of judges than it is in any other. I don't think it's flawed."

Biden, however, concurred with Specter's assessment.

"The Constitution does not say the Senate Judiciary Committee shall advise and consent, it says the Senate shall give its advice and consent," he agreed.

Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) also took issue with the view that the committee process is somehow "broken."

"I would disagree with my colleagues on the committee who suggest that the problem we face today is a failure of the process," Durbin claimed. "The process was very fair to Judge Pickering."

Durbin believes the White House is "testing" the committee to see whether Democrats will approve of a nominee he, Durbin, views as too conservative.

"President Clinton knew that if he sent a nominee to this committee that was not at least moderate to right he didn't have a chance," Durbin charged. "That nominee would never get a hearing. That nominee would never be seriously considered. That nominee was going to have rough sledding at best."

Hatch immediately contradicted Durbin.

"If you think only moderate to conservatives got through, you didn't watch the committee and you didn't watch the Clinton judges," Hatch responded.

Specter suggested that Pickering's nomination be moved to the full Senate for debate and a vote, even if the committee gives him an "unfavorable" recommendation. Earlier this week, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) said such a move would be "unprecedented."

"That's not accurate. There is, in fact, precedent for moving appellate and even district court nominees to the floor for a vote even when they have not received favorable support from this committee," Hatch explained. "Based on our research since 1950, this committee has moved at least six lower court nominees to the floor for consideration either without a recommendation or with a negative recommendation after the committee has voted them down."

The Supreme Court nominations of conservative Judges Clarence Thomas and Robert Bork were also both referred to the Senate after receiving unfavorable votes in the Democratic-controlled Judiciary Committee. Thomas was eventually confirmed as a Supreme Court justice. Bork was rejected.

The committee agreed to hold Pickering's nomination over until March 14.

"We're really at a pretty critical moment here," Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) observed. "We could wisely use this week to think about, is there another way out of this mess, this train wreck we're headed into, before we get so far down the track that recovery from it becomes pretty tough."

[Stand Watch Listen]

Related Articles:

Still Pestering Pickering
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 19, 2002;
Author: John Nowacki

Dismantling Democracy through Judicial Activism
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 12, 2002;
Author:Tom Jipping

'A Troubling Pattern': Ideology Over Truth In Judicial Confirmations
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: February 10, 2002;
Author: Paul E. Scates

Democrats Blast Bush Judicial Nominee
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published: February 08, 2002;
Susan Jones

The Next Big Fight: The first major judicial-confirmation battle of the Bush administration.
Source: National Review: Published: Feburary 6, 2002;
Author:Byron York

SYMPOSIUM Q: Should the Senate Take Ideology into Account in Judicial Confirmations
Source: INSIGHT magazine; Published: February 4, 2002;
Authors:
Ralph G. Neas -- YES: The ideology of nominees for the federal judiciary matters more now than ever
Roger Pilon -- NO: Since judges apply law, not make it, the Senate's concern should be with judicial temperament

What is the Judiciary Committee Trying to Hide?
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: January 29, 2002;
Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Blasting Conservative Judges: Liberals Launch Their Campaign
Source: cnsnews.com; Published: January 24 2002;
Matt Pyeatt

Judicial Confirmation Lies, Deception and Cover-up
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: December 11, 2001
Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Senator Leahy Does Not Meet His Own Standards
Source:.cnsnews.com; Published: December 07, 2001
Author: By John Nowacki

Senator Daschle Must Remove 'Leaky Leahy' From Judiciary Committee
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: December 4, 2001
Author: Rev. Louis P. Sheldon

A Disgraceful Blocking of Nominees
Source: The Wall Street Journal (ltr to ed) Published December 3, 2001

Mr. Leahy's Fuzzy Math
Source: Washington Times;Published: December 3, 2001
Author:Editorial

Sen. Patrick Leahy; Our Constitutional Conscience?
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: December 2, 2001
Author: Paul E. Scates

Judicial confirmations called significantly low
Source: Washington Times; Published: November 30, 2001
Author: Audrey Hudson

Patrick Leahy - Words Do Kill
Source: PipeBombNews.com; Published: November 29, 2001
Author: William A. Mayer

Judicial Profiling
Source: The Wall Street Journal; Published: November 27, 2001

Sen. Leahy's judicial hostages
Source: Washington Times; Published: November 21, 2001

Judges Delayed is Justice Denied
Source: CNSNews.com ; Published: November 20, 2001;
Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Partisanship is Prevalent with Leahy's Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: November 15, 2001
Author: John Nowacki

Leahy And Daschle Are Coming Face To Face With Their Own Words
Author: John Nowacki

Obedient Democrats
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published October 26, 2001
Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Why is Daschle Blocking Judges needed to Try Terrorists when we Catch them?
Source: Banner of Liberty; Published:October 26, 2001
Author: Mary Mostert

Pat Leahy's Passive Aggressive Game
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: October 25, 2001
Author: John Nowacki

Operation Obstruct Justice
Source: Washington Times; Published: October 25, 2001
Author: T.L.Jipping

Daschle wins struggle over judicial nominations
Source: The Washington Times; Published: Oct 24, 2001
Author: Dave Boyer

Leahy doctrine ensures judicial gridlock
Source: Washington Times; Published October 22, 2001

Senate's judicial powergrab: Tom Jipping tracks Dems' assault on courts
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: June 28, 2001
Author: Tom Jipping

Dems Will Shut Down Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com Commentary from the Free Congress Foundation; Published: June 13, 2001;
Author: Thomas L. Jipping

[Saundra Duffy]

Now's their chance to put a stop to the witch hunts. Pickering must be confirmed. For God's sake, he was already confirmed! These bickering partisan senatorial democraps need to get on with the nation's business and stop letting special interest groups run the country. For victory & freedom!!!

[ken5050]

Is Biden changing his tune?...will he vote to report out?

[Dog]

Biden really said this:

Biden, however, concurred with Specter's assessment.

"The Constitution does not say the Senate Judiciary Committee shall advise and consent, it says the Senate shall give its advice and consent," he agreed.

[WIMom]

It is not fun posting on every thread and annoying all of you. We are volunteers and do so because we love Free Republic and want to see it continue for a long time.

Ask yourself these questions:

Where is the first place I go to on the internet to find out what's happening with politics?
Am I getting any benefit from Free Republic?
Am I learning from Free Republic?

Free Republic is not free. It costs Jim Robinson tens of thousands of dollars to keep this forum running. There are almost 80,000 registered users on Free Republic and approximately 1,000 Freepers help keep this forum running. Those who do not have the ability to donate money could help by bumping the threads once in a while. I've been in a position where the funds were low and every penny was needed to pay for frivolous things such as food. Those who do have the means should be ashamed of yourselves. You are a FReeploader. Go ahead, flame me. I don't care. I contribute to Free Republic, and I for one do not want to see this forum dead.

If everyone who registered donated one measly dollar a month, we would never have to have a fundraiser again. Thus ending the silly graphics and posts. But, it's not happening, so we will continue this annoying process until we reach our goal.

Because The Constitution Still Matters - Freepathon Thread 2

Or Mail your check to:
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

To donate By Paypal:
Send PayPal direct to JimRob@psnw.com

[Dog]

Ken ..... I will bet you the DEMS have an internal poll saying that this fight over Pickering is not going well for them...

Now we see stories like these popping up..

[raisincane]

In Rush's parody, sung by Kennedy, "Lets bork again like we did that year. Let's bork again, like we did Robert. Lets bork again, its borking time." The dems have their borking agenda set, and if the elephants don't start stompin, its all over for Pickering and any future Bush nominees.

[Hacksaw]

Is Biden changing his tune?...will he vote to report out?

No, in rare moments Biden will show some values.

[ken5050]

Would you care to explain your statement?

[gonzo]

Dasshole if the primary roadblocker in Pickerings' case, leading the partisan attack.

Given his foot-in-mouth problems, this will probably backfire on him big-time.......FRegards

[Hacksaw]

Would you care to explain your statement?

Sure. When Dash-hole wanted to tire Strom Thurmond into a heart attack, Biden was one of the few ones who publicly suggesting sending a Dem home to balance out Strom leaving.

Don't get me wrong, I am no Biden fan at all, especially after the lies he told about Bork.

[StayoutdaBushesWay]

Ditto!

[counterrevolutionary]

Maybe Joe wants to look "statesmanlike" if he's planning on a run for President.

[SuziQ]

Specter suggested that Pickering's nomination be moved to the full Senate for debate and a vote, even if the committee gives him an "unfavorable" recommendation. Earlier this week, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) said such a move would be "unprecedented."
"That's not accurate. There is, in fact, precedent for moving appellate and even district court nominees to the floor for a vote even when they have not received favorable support from this committee," Hatch explained. "Based on our research since 1950, this committee has moved at least six lower court nominees to the floor for consideration either without a recommendation or with a negative recommendation after the committee has voted them down."

So little Tommy got caught in ANOTHER lie! I hope the Repub. Senators DO push to have Judge Pickering's nomination go before the FULL Senate. If they give up on him, then Planned Barrenhood and People for the UnAmerican Way will have won and will only come back even HARDER on the next candidate.

[ken5050]

OK, but then your statement should have begun with a "yes"..Biden's words, in this case, mean nothing, unless he's sending a signal that he's gonna vote to pass the nomination to the senate floor..of all the dems on the committee..he's the most likely

[ken5050]

He has negative numbers in a dem preference poll...

[Hacksaw]

So little Tommy got caught in ANOTHER lie!

Yes, Rush smoked Dash-hole on this. I am seriously considering signing up for Rush 24-7. Does anyone have any reccomendations?

[rohry]

Fox News has reported that Biden will vote against Pickering...

[RecallJeffords]

Can we quote him on that?

[ken5050]

True...either one Dem senator votes to send it to the floor, or, they might all scurry for cover and all of them vote to send it....in a display of "bipartisanship"...if, as suggested, their polls show this isn't playing well for them, they might bail........stragetically, it'd make more sense for the Dems to let Pickering through, then they can unload on the first Supreme Court nomineee..they can say "see..we're not partisan"..Of course, in about nine months, the dems are gonna be the MINORITY in the Senate..