WP:Nominee Not Well Known to Senators:Reps Endorse, Dems Put Off Opinions

[DeepModem Mom]

Nominee Isn't Well Known to Senators Who Will Judge Him
Republicans Quickly Endorse; Democrats Put Off Opinions

By Charles Babington and Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, July 20, 2005; Page A11


Republican senators embraced the nomination of John G. Roberts Jr. to the Supreme Court last night, Democrats reserved judgment, and lawmakers from both parties said they knew comparatively little about the nominee and had no advance notice from President Bush.

Democrats, who acknowledged that their ability to challenge any nominee is limited, said they will quickly dig into Roberts's background and assess his record....The ability of Democrats to challenge Roberts will be constrained by several complications, including some of their own making. Within hours of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement announcement, Democrats demanded that Bush consult with them extensively, even as they broadly predicted he would not. Bush undermined the strategy when he and his top aides placed lengthy phone calls to more than half of the Senate's 44 Democrats, and when Bush invited top Democrats to the White House for a meeting.

While some Democrats complained that the calls had little substance, the sheer volume of them made it difficult for them to claim the president was vetting nominees without their input. Republican senators repeatedly called the level of consultation "unprecedented."

Several Democratic aides said their party may have squandered Bush's overture by suggesting a surfeit of possible nominees and responding individually to calls from the West Wing, instead of making one focused argument. The result, these aides said, was that Bush was free to disregard the advice without having to answer for any particular rejection.

The Democrats' biggest impediment to fighting Roberts, should they choose to do so, may lie in the hands of 14 senators who crafted a compromise in May without seeking the approval of either party's leadership. The deal, arranged by seven Republicans and seven Democrats, defused a showdown over judicial filibusters. It allowed several of President Bush's contested appellate court nominees to be confirmed, and preserved the right to filibuster future nominees -- including those for the Supreme Court -- but only under "extraordinary circumstances."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/19/AR2005071901837.html

[merwin]

1. Ya know, it is possible to talk with 100 democrats and ignore every one of

them. That doesn't suddenly make it bipartisan. "vetting nominees without their input" is still as valid as it was before Bush ever made a phone call to any of them.

[Demeter]

2. Other Than the Company He Kept--What Do We Know About Roberts?

Anybody who worked for Ken Starr, Reagan and Bush deserves a close examination, but on the whole, no red flags have popped out yet to disqualify Roberts. Yes, he's Catholic, and male, neither fact endearing to those of us who aren't. But does he have daughters? Is his wife happily married to him? Does he have a sense of history, or just a rigid ideology?

If we just move through this process quickly and push forward on treason and impeachment, we would do a lot of good for the country.