Party-Line Bloat
Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on Judge Alito. All ten Republicans on the Committee have already announced their support for him, even though he has not yet bombed an abortion clinic. Four Democrats (Kennedy, Leahy, Feinstein and Durbin) have already indicated that they will vote "no." That leaves Schumer, Kohl, Feingold and Biden. Feingold is the only one who may cast a "yes" vote.
Alito will join the ranks of distinguished jurists Clarence Thomas and Robert Pork as having barely eked through the Judiciary Committee (or in Pork's case, having gotten more "nays" than "yays" in that committee).
Senator Ben Nelson from Nebraska is the only Democrat who has indicated that he will vote for Alito. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, a Republican, has indicated that he has not made up his mind yet. Nor has Independent Jim Jeffords. Mark Pryor and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, and Bill Nelson of Florida, are all Democratic senators in "red" states, and the pressure is on them to vote "yes," lest they become Daschle-hammered.
Ken Salazar and Tom Harkin (shocker!) have already come out against Alito, as has, of course, John Kerry.
There won't be any suspense as to whether Alito has enough votes to gain confirmation - he has over 50 as we speak (in constrast, Clarence "White Man's Burden" Thomas could not bank on 50 votes when the nomination was sent for final vote; indeed, Dan Quayle had to be present for that vote in case a tie needed to be broken).
There probably won't be any suspense as to whether any Democrats will launch a filipuster, either. No one filipustered Thomas, despite his non-qualifications and a degree of evasiveness on his part that made Alito look like a motormouth. (I haven't even mentioned the Anita Hill stuff). Maybe a filibuster looked unseemly after the month-long confirmation process. 11 Democrats ended up voting for Thomas as well, so the party was hardly in unanimity over whether he should be confirmed/not confirmed.
Even though the Democrats seem to be in greater unanimity in their rejection of Alito, it still seems likely that he will not be filibustered. The Democrats are apparently worried that filibustering him might make them look either weak (apparently, they hate the status quo), or strong (which might cure them of Stockholm Syndrome, an unforgivable state of affairs). Sen. Feinstein said she would likely filibuster if she believed Alito's confirmation hearing remarks indicated he would be likely to overrule Roe v. Wade. After the confirmation hearings, she said, "Well, I can't filibuster someone just because I disagree with him personally (on Roe v. Wade)?" It is a unique ability to talk out of both sides of one's mouth, while lying out of each.
The only suspense left in this humorless affair seems to be whether 41 or more Democrats will actually vote no. The last time such a question was in play was when John Ashcroft's nomination as Attorney General was on the table. 42 Democrats voted "no" then. Oh well. If only Ashcroft were competing for the AG position against a dead man.
As the Michael Douglas character said in The American President, "America isn't easy. It's advanced citizenship. You've gotta want it bad." Translation: those of you on the left and right who, when Alito becomes confirmed, complain about his overly healthy mastication (and evacuation) of the Constitution, should, in many aspects, try looking in the mirror before demonizing him.
George Bush said he'd appoint a "Shrict Conshructionischt" (which to him was code for Thomas and Scalia, who are strict constructionists as per their prejudices only). He nominated Alito in accordance with his code message. How sad to think that the majority of the people who voted for him did not even understand this code, and cannot even identify the provisions of the Bill of Rights.
To paraphrase Harry Blackmun, I can't help but think that once Alito gets on the Supreme Court, that "the signs are very ominous.... And a chill wind blows."
Alito will join the ranks of distinguished jurists Clarence Thomas and Robert Pork as having barely eked through the Judiciary Committee (or in Pork's case, having gotten more "nays" than "yays" in that committee).
Senator Ben Nelson from Nebraska is the only Democrat who has indicated that he will vote for Alito. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, a Republican, has indicated that he has not made up his mind yet. Nor has Independent Jim Jeffords. Mark Pryor and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, and Bill Nelson of Florida, are all Democratic senators in "red" states, and the pressure is on them to vote "yes," lest they become Daschle-hammered.
Ken Salazar and Tom Harkin (shocker!) have already come out against Alito, as has, of course, John Kerry.
There won't be any suspense as to whether Alito has enough votes to gain confirmation - he has over 50 as we speak (in constrast, Clarence "White Man's Burden" Thomas could not bank on 50 votes when the nomination was sent for final vote; indeed, Dan Quayle had to be present for that vote in case a tie needed to be broken).
There probably won't be any suspense as to whether any Democrats will launch a filipuster, either. No one filipustered Thomas, despite his non-qualifications and a degree of evasiveness on his part that made Alito look like a motormouth. (I haven't even mentioned the Anita Hill stuff). Maybe a filibuster looked unseemly after the month-long confirmation process. 11 Democrats ended up voting for Thomas as well, so the party was hardly in unanimity over whether he should be confirmed/not confirmed.
Even though the Democrats seem to be in greater unanimity in their rejection of Alito, it still seems likely that he will not be filibustered. The Democrats are apparently worried that filibustering him might make them look either weak (apparently, they hate the status quo), or strong (which might cure them of Stockholm Syndrome, an unforgivable state of affairs). Sen. Feinstein said she would likely filibuster if she believed Alito's confirmation hearing remarks indicated he would be likely to overrule Roe v. Wade. After the confirmation hearings, she said, "Well, I can't filibuster someone just because I disagree with him personally (on Roe v. Wade)?" It is a unique ability to talk out of both sides of one's mouth, while lying out of each.
The only suspense left in this humorless affair seems to be whether 41 or more Democrats will actually vote no. The last time such a question was in play was when John Ashcroft's nomination as Attorney General was on the table. 42 Democrats voted "no" then. Oh well. If only Ashcroft were competing for the AG position against a dead man.
As the Michael Douglas character said in The American President, "America isn't easy. It's advanced citizenship. You've gotta want it bad." Translation: those of you on the left and right who, when Alito becomes confirmed, complain about his overly healthy mastication (and evacuation) of the Constitution, should, in many aspects, try looking in the mirror before demonizing him.
George Bush said he'd appoint a "Shrict Conshructionischt" (which to him was code for Thomas and Scalia, who are strict constructionists as per their prejudices only). He nominated Alito in accordance with his code message. How sad to think that the majority of the people who voted for him did not even understand this code, and cannot even identify the provisions of the Bill of Rights.
To paraphrase Harry Blackmun, I can't help but think that once Alito gets on the Supreme Court, that "the signs are very ominous.... And a chill wind blows."
posted by EnterCenter at 7:38 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home