|
Bush declines to fight Democrats on nominations
Robert Novak writes:
Senate Republicans are tiring of the battle to confirm contested judicial nominees, indicating that Sen. Edward M. Kennedy’s Democratic plan to prevent President Bush from shaping the federal judiciary is succeeding.Between the lines one can pick up the real story here—that Bush has not involved himself seriously in this fight, and the Republican senators are confronted with having to carry on by themselves and they don’t quite see the point. To understand the GOP’s feelings, imagine how the armed forces would feel if the president put them in a tough, grinding confrontation against a determined foe, and didn’t back them up with words of support and with actions demonstrating the will to victory. If Bush showed real support for the Congressional Republicans in this nominations battle, if he carried the issue to the public the way Ronald Reagan did at key moments, if he exposed the outrageousness of the Democrats’s unprecedented attempt to stop all his judicial appointments, then he could win. But Bush has done none of those things. He has declined to invest any political capital in this fight, which is, after all, his fight. Why, then, should Senate Republicans go on hopelessly slogging away in the trenches?
The Democrats have become a leftist party that views politics as war. But Bush does not have it in him to engage in a serious political battle with Democrats. Comments
So a number of key Republicans now take the view that judicial nominees aren’t an important issue. I wonder just what on earth would constitute an important issue for these people? Keeping the borders open for cheap labor? Making sure the H1B and L-1 visas are issued in even greater numbers so the Gramscian Bobos who own the tech industry can increase their bonuses? I find it absolutely amazing that a party with clear majorities in Congress and a very popular President will cave in to the likes of the drunken Senator from Chappaquidick on an issue of this import. They demonstrate an uncanny ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Perhaps they should all move to France, where their cowardice would be more appreciated. Posted by: Carl on April 22, 2003 5:27 PMCarl, a very, very, very good post. Every word of it. A very good post. Posted by: Unadorned on April 22, 2003 11:07 PMA larger problem is that, for the most part, neither the GOP nor its leading intellectuals are willing to confront the deeper problem of judicial usurpation. It’s foolish to think we can correct this massive problem by failing to attack it at its source (the judiciary’s inflated power), but rather by trying to fill the judiciary with “our own people.” Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution gives Congress authority, with simply majority votes, to reduce the judiciary’s role decisively: In all other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and such under such Regulations as the Congress shall make. Just like that, Congress could take, say, the issue of abortion out of the hands of the courts. If that doesn’t work, there are other methods. In the event of a constitutional struggle, Congress will defeat the courts, if it has the mettle for such a confrontation, which clearly it does not. Even conservatives do not propose such things; and when they do: http://www.firstthings.com/menus/ft9611.html they tend to be shouted down by their own. Posted by: Paul Cella on April 23, 2003 4:36 AMI have seen from some sources that Mr. Bush wants to put his White House Counsel on the Supreme Court, who is a Hispanic liberal. He will fight for THAT nomination. We may yet see a change in administrations in 2004. Posted by: David on April 23, 2003 11:53 AM |