Senate Democrats are playing hardball in their obstruction campaign against President Bush’s judicial nominees.
Mind you, Republicans thought they were the ones playing hardball recently by blocking appropriations bills to force confirmations. But most people equate government spending with government activity and, even more since Sept. 11, people want to see government activity. According to the Washington Times, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle met with President Bush on Oct. 22 and said simply that “Mr. Bush needed the spending bills more than Senate Democrats did.” Hence that article’s title: “Daschle Wins Struggle Over Judicial Nominations.”
The judiciary must be an important front in the war against terrorism. President Bush has nominated highly qualified individuals to the U.S. District Court in jurisdictions such as Washington, D.C., where they will be particularly needed in this effort. These include Richard Leon, a former deputy assistant attorney general and special assistant U.S. attorney, who is still waiting for a hearing. The judiciary cannot play this important role when more than 100 full-time positions sit vacant.
Even so, Senate Democrats are simply doing what they’re told by their far-left constituencies. Groups such as the leftist Alliance for Justice have switched from demanding confirmations when vacancies were low under President Clinton to now opposing confirmations when vacancies are high under President Bush. Hypocrisy, however, is a small price to pay for a judiciary that will deliver your political agenda.
Just look at AFJ’s complaints over the last few years compared to the current situation. In their 2000 judicial selection report, AFJ complained that “only eight of Clinton’s 26 appellate nominations” were confirmed. This year, the Senate has confirmed just four of President Bush’s 25 appellate nominations. One of those, Roger Gregory, was originally a Clinton nominee and another, Sharon Prost, a former Judiciary Committee staffer.
AFJ complained that “the Republican-controlled Senate confirmed only 39 judges” last year. This year, the Democrat-controlled Senate has confirmed just 12 of President Bush’s 60 nominees.
In their 1999 judicial selection report, AFJ complained that “the year ended with more circuit nominees still waiting for a Senate vote than were confirmed.” This year, the Senate has confirmed four circuit nominees while 21 still wait for a Senate vote.
AFJ complained that judicial vacancies only declined from 64 to 58 during 1999. This year, judicial vacancies have increased from 80 to 105.
AFJ complained that “nearly a quarter of all seats [on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit] were vacant at year’s end.” By the end of this year, half the seats on the Sixth Circuit, one-third the seats on the D.C. and 10th Circuits, and four of 15 seats on the Fourth Circuit will be vacant.
In its 1998 judicial selection report, AFJ complained that “the Judiciary Committee failed to process or take a vote on 17 nominees and the Senate failed to vote on four others.” This year, the Judiciary Committee has held a hearing on just 14 of President Bush’s 60 nominees. Though the Senate has confirmed an average of 39 nominees by November 1 over the past 20 years, this year the Senate has confirmed just 12 nominees.
AFJ complained that there were “50 vacancies on the federal bench” at adjournment. Vacancies today are 108 percent higher.
In July 1999, with just 66 judicial vacancies, AFJ president Nan Aron wrote in the San Francisco Chronicle that the president “has a duty to fill judicial vacancies and appoint jurists who share his views.” President Bush is attempting to do just that. Now, however, these same left-wing activists are singing a different tune and their obedient Senate Democrats are standing in the courthouse door.
