Miguel Estrada: The President Must Take His Case To The People

CNSNews.com ^ | March 11, 2003 | Paul M. Weyrich

[Stand Watch Listen]

I am given to believe that some folks at the White House read this column, so with that in mind, and with apologies to you, dear readers, I will address this offering in the form of a memo to them.

Memo to White House staff
Re: The Miguel Estrada Nomination
March 11, 2003

Let us briefly review where we are, how we got there, and then discuss a plan of action to win the nomination.

Right now, as you know, the Estrada nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals is the pending business in the Senate some of the time.

The Republican leadership filed the first cloture motion, and there were 55 votes to shut off debate, 44 in favor of continuing debate. Those 55 included all 51 Republicans and 4 Democrats.

The Republican leadership says it will file as many cloture motions as is necessary to bring the Estrada nomination to a vote. Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle has announced, after a poll of his caucus, that he has at least 41 votes to continue debate ad infinitum.

A real filibuster is not contemplated at this time. Thus the Estrada nomination is set aside while the Senate conducts other business. I understand why the GOP leadership feels it can't conduct a 'round-the-clock filibuster at this time. What they tell me makes sense, but I regret it is the case because only with a real filibuster will there be a chance to win.

We got to this point, after Estrada was voted out of the Judiciary Committee on a party line vote, soon after Republicans took control of the U.S. Senate. The leadership felt that it had to file cloture in order to make it clear to the American public who was blocking Estrada's nomination and who was not. Their hope was that by publishing the vote, pressure could be put on some Senators in states with large Hispanic populations or Senators who are up for re-election.

Unfortunately, the left has more resources than Estrada's supporters do, and right now the calls coming into Senate offices are actually running against Estrada. These are not spontaneous grass-roots calls. These are calls generated by the left-wing interest groups, using paid help.

Here is the problem. Mr. Estrada is the President's nominee. If he loses, the President loses. Senators will be disappointed -- a few of them even bitter. But the real effect of losing the battle over Estrada will be on President Bush himself.

Not only will many of his other nominations be in jeopardy, but the precedent will have been set that it now takes 60 votes to confirm a judge to the court of appeals. This is probably unconstitutional but who is willing to take that issue on?

The point is, so much is at stake here that the President MUST win this fight. There is only ONE way that can happen. You know which Senators are most likely to tell their leadership that they can't stick with them because the pressure is too great. The President is going to have to go to those states and name those Senators and ask the people of the state to let the Senators know what they want them to do about Estrada.

This can't be done long distance. What the President says about this matter here in Washington, even if he mentions Senators by name, gets drowned out. But when he goes to a state to specifically point to an obstructionist Senator, the President is guaranteed a day and half of wall-to-wall coverage.

I know we are on the verge of war. I know the President badly needs his legislation to move this economy. But the stakes are that high on this nomination. Lose Estrada and the President's tax package becomes a tougher sell. Should the President get the opportunity to nominate someone for the Supreme Court, unless he wants to anger his base and appoint a liberal, forget that nomination. No matter what the qualifications, no matter how sterling the record, no matter what the ABA says, the nomination would be dead in the water.

I could tell, with that somber press conference last Thursday evening, the President has a great deal on his mind. He is feeling the burden of office. I hate to have to commend this course of action to you. There is no other; as will become evident when the Senate has its 7th cloture vote (the most ever) and the stalemate stands.

I don't expect my advice is worth more than you pay to get it (for benefit of the readers: nothing). This time, however, I hope you will pay attention to it. I see no other way to win, and win we must.

(Paul M. Weyrich is chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.)

Free Congress Foundation

[swheats]

Mr. President please start in South Dakota, then Nevada, there has to be a few reasons to stay in New York a day or two.

[churchillbuff]

It is still a oneway battle with the Liberal Media

As I noted in the previous post, Bush isn't using the forums that are available to him. He didn't say anything about Estrada at his news conference last week, even though he had the attention of most TV viewers. Does he really give that much of a d-mn about Miguel?

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

Nonsense. That press conference was specifically about Iraq.

President Bush has been speaking in public about Miguel throughout these past weeks. If the states want to protest the Dems., they can...and they are. Tomorrow there's a rally in Indianapolis..and in Daschle's home state: Tommy's not too popular at home: South Dakota Senators To Tom Daschle: Stop Obstructing the Estrada Nomination .

I know what the President's been doing on behalf of Miguel. I know what the GOP Senators have been doing...as well as Democratic Senators and the mainstream press. In case you didn't notice, the President has a few hundred other things on his plate, thanks in large part to the Democratic Party, the mainstream press and those who continue to be duped by their lies.

WE must get the word out. We did it in Florida...twice. What are you doing?

[churchillbuff]

Nonsense. That press conference was specifically about Iraq.

Exactly, and that's the problem - the press conference was only about Iraq, but it SHOULD have also been about Estrada, because for the first time, Bush had an audience of most Americans. His episodic comments about Estrada, in various limited forums, aren't being much reported or heard. If he'd used this press conference to talk about Estrada as well as Saddam, the anti-Estrada senators would be feeling heat today.

[churchillbuff]

WE must get the word out

So must Bush - - and when he has a nationally televised press conference (only the 2d or third of his presidency) and doesn't mention Estrada, he's not "getting the word out."

[votelife]

where have the FL Estrada rallies been?

[votelife]

bttt

[votelife]

My email to W:

Dear President Bush, With the Surpeme Court session getting ready to close, it may well be time for perhaps the most important domestic decision of your presidency: the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice(s). The main reason why I supported you in 2000 and why I wanted Daschle out of power in 02 (and 04) has to do with the courts. I want America courts to interpret law, not write law. During your presidential campaign you said Thomas and Scalia were your two model justices. Those are excellent models. The High Court needs more like them. Clarence Thomas recently said to students that the tough cases were when what he wanted to do was different from what the law said. And he goes by the law. This should be a model philosophy for our justices. Your father, President Bush lost his reelection campaign for 3 main reasosn, as far as I can see. 1. he broke the no new taxes pledge 2. David Souter 3. Clinton convinced people we were in a Bush recession (which we had already come out of by the time Clinton was getting sworn in)

I urge you to learn from all three of these: 1. on taxes, you're doing great. Awesome job on the tax cut. 2. good job so far on judicial appointments. I want to see more of a fight for Estrada, Owen, and Pickering, but I commend you on your nominations. 3. by staying engaged in the economic debate you'll serve yourself well

I have been thoroughly impressed with your handling of al Queida, Iraq, and terrorism. You have inspired confidence and have shown great leadership.

But I want to remind you that your Supreme Court pick(s) will be with us LONG after you have departed office. I urge you to avoid the tempation to find a "compromise" pick. Go for a Scalia or Thomas. Don't go for an O'Connor or Kennedy. To be specific, get someone who is pro-life. Roe v Wade is one of the worst court decisions I know of, and it's the perfect example of unrestrained judicial power.

I know the temptation will be tremendous on you to nominate a moderate. But remember who your true supporters are. I am not a important leader or politician. I am "simply" a citizen who has been an enthusiatic supporter of you. I am willing to accept compromise in many areas of government but I will watch your Court nomiantions extremely closely. What the Senate Dems are doing right now is disgusting, but as the President you have the bully pulpit to stop it. Democrats will back down if you turn up serious heat on them.

Moreover, I think public opinion is shifting towards the pro-life position. Dems will want you to nominate a moderate, but almost all will vote against you anyways. Pro-choice Repubs will likely still vote for you if you nominate a Scalia, after all, you campaigned on it. So Mr. President, I urge you to stick with your campaign statements and nominate justices who believe in judicial restraint, like Scalia and Thomas.

Happy Memorial Day and may God bless you and your family.