Monday, February 17, 2003

 
Defending Clinton. Prosecuting Hatch.

Even as Bush attempts to ram one rightwing crackpot after another onto the federal benches, Orrin Hatch, who's claim to fame was blocking multitudes of Clinton nominees with legislative tricks, castigates current Senate Democrats for daring to filibuster the nomination of Miguel Estrada.

"Senate Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) [claimed Senate Democrats were trying] to block diversity in the courts by questioning Estrada's qualifications, which include a Harvard law degree and a high rating from the American Bar Association."

"He condemned any Democratic thoughts of a filibuster. 'To defeat this nominee in this manner would be unprecedented and a real shame for this body,'' said Hatch, who ushered Estrada through his panel to the Senate floor on a 10-9, party-line vote last week."

In form with the Republican tradition of hypocrisy, Hatch was usurping every effort made by our last elected president even as Clinton was making numerous efforts to reach across the aisle when nominating potential federal judges. And this despite opposition from progressive groups.

Bipartisan efforts made by Clinton:

For federal district courts, Clinton sought specific recommendations from senators:

"Senators Orrin Hatch and Trent Lott each suggested candidates for district court seats in their home states; Hatch pushed strongly for the nomination of Ted Stewart in Utah, and Lott recommended Allen Pepper in Mississippi. Despite concerns expressed by civil rights and environmental groups, both Stewart and Pepper were nominated by President Clinton and quickly confirmed."

~ Prior to the Supreme Court nominations of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.Press, Clinton was reported to have seriously consulted with Senator Orrin Hatch, both before and after he assumed control of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Is Bush even capable of showing the same bipartisan consideration? Ha!

~ In 1999, President Clinton accepted the recommendation of Republican Senator Slade Gorton and nominated Barbara Durham for a seat on the Ninth Circuit…despite objections from progressive groups.

In reponse to these acts of bipartisanship, Hatch altered a congressional procedure called the "blue slip policy". After he took control of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the mid-1990s, he began rigorously enforcing this policy, under which nominations could not move forward without the consent of both home-state senators.

In 1998, this policy was made explicit on the blue slips themselves. They stated that:

“[n]o further proceedings on this nominee will be scheduled until both blue slips have been returned by the nominee’s home state senators.”

Needless to say, a policy that had helped to force bipartisanship was mutated into a vehicle for partisan obstruction.

For example, when Clinton nominated Helene White from Michigan for a seat on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in January, 1997, then-Senator Spencer Abraham of Michigan refused to return his blue slip for more than three years. During that time, the Judiciary Committee took no action whatsoever on the nomination. By the time Abraham was finally pressured to return the blue slip late in 2000, senate action on appeals court nominees had already been halted by Hatch for the remainder of the year. Clinton renominated White in 2001, but Bush withdrew the nomination in March without any action by the Senate. The bottom line: the Hatch-led Judiciary Committee took no action on the White nomination, not even scheduling a hearing, for more than four years.

Also…

Senator Jesse Helms used his blue slip to block any action on all African-American nominees to the Fourth Circuit for more than four years. No African-American has ever been confirmed for a seat on the Fourth Circuit court of appeals, which covers North and South Carolina and several other southern states. In fact, it took a Clinton recess appointment in 2000 to bring the first and only African American ever to serve on the Fourth Circuit.

In addition, other Clinton appeals court nominees, such as Barry Goode of California, Elena Kagan of D.C., and Allen Snyder of Maryland, were blocked even when there was no home state Republican senator to object.

Overall, although not a single Clinton-nominated appeals judge was voted down by the Senate, as Hatch so proudly boasts, various delay tactics and legislative blockades translated to a Senate approval of only 61% of Clinton's appellate court nominees, compared with 87% of those nominated by Reagan. In 1999-2000, 19 out of 32 Clinton appeals court nominees, about 60%, were blocked from receiving a vote.

The fact of the matter is that during the 15-month Democratic Senate reign (2001-2002), the Democratic-led Senate has confirmed 80 judicial nominees… more nominees than were confirmed during the first 15 months of the Reagan, George H.W. Bush, or Clinton Administrations.

So when some idiot conservative cries about Democrats blocking Bush's judicial nominees, you tell them:

~ That's a GOP illusion. You see, while Republicans used despicable delay tactics (like the "Blue Slip" Policy above) in order to avoid Democratic nominees altogether, Democrats actually give the nominees hearings and votes. Crazy Democrats! It's the Republican delay tactics that keep the nominees from ever being included in the confirmation equation. Once taken into account, the GOP's record reveals its fetid stench.

When some conservative blowhard blubbers about how Clinton caused a "judicial crisis", you tell them:

~ When Democrats gained controlled of the Senate, they inherited 110 judicial vacancies – almost twice as many vacancies as existed when Republicans took control in 1995 (63). Today, after 80 confirmations, vacancies have decreased to 77 (including an additional 47 vacancies that have arisen since the shift in majority). By approving far more judicial nominees for this president than past senates did for other presidents, the Democratic-led Senate has reduced the number of vacancies and brought relief to the federal judiciary.

~ Also, vacancies on the Circuit Courts more than doubled during the period of Republican control of the senate, increasing from 16 to 33. Two-thirds of these vacancies (22) were considered "judicial emergencies" by the Administrative office of the U.S. Courts because of high caseloads. Republicans blocked Clinton nominees who were waiting to be confirmed to 15 of these 22 “emergency” vacancies.

When some bozo-boy GOPster dares to claim that Democrats are fighting "diversity in the courts" because the right-wing zealot, Miguel Estrada happens to be of Latin-American descent, do this:

~ Count silently to 10.

~ Refrain from physical violence…I know this is very difficult sometimes but please try your best.

~ Give them a short history of Republicans' record regarding Hispanic nominees. You see, Democrats have already confirmed six out of seven of Bush's Hispanic nominees (There is an eighth who will be considered once his record is complete). And even the 7th (Estrada) received a hearing, an action the Republican's found difficult to take during the Clinton Administration. The Republican record on Hispanic nominees during the Clinton Administration was abysmal. In fact, Senate Republicans blocked almost as many Hispanic nominees during the Clinton Administration as President Bush has nominated. Four Hispanic nominees never even received a hearing or a vote while Two more received hearings but no committee vote.

In the end, the Big Red Machine keeps lying about…well everything….but regarding this article, about the judicial nominee process and it's history. Not surprising, but certainly frustrating. On the bright side, I don't think that anyone with half a brain will fall for the "Democrats are blocking diversity" argument. What's amazing is that conservatives can actually say this with a straight face. But I guess that's one of the skills you gain when you have little sense of shame, only others do you blame.

Join our mailing list!

posted by Thomas Ball 4:21 PM