Sunday, May 01, 2005

Calling Orrin on lies

I thought someone as supposidly pious as Senator Hatch shouldn't be lying so obviously. But thank goodness for Robert Gehrke, who points it out.
[Hatch is leading the charge against Senate Democrats' blockage of 7 of 200+ Bush judicial nominees]But during the Utah Republican's tenure as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, dozens of President Clinton's nominees never received an up-or-down vote, because their nominations were suffocated by procedural traps, a Tribune analysis of congressional records shows. Others were mired in the committee for years before being confirmed by the Senate.
Somehow, Hatch gets angry when people point out the blatant hypocrisy of saying a 41-person fillibuster is less democratic than his 1 or 2 person "blue slipping" of judicial nominees.

"That's all B.S. and they know it," Hatch insists. "I don't think anybody can say I didn't do my best." Your best to block Clinton's nominees that is. Plus, I can't believe you said B.S. I wonder how much he swears off the record, like when a take of his latest cheesey CD is bad.

Honestly, both parties are pretty childish about judicial nominees and it seems like there should be a better way to nominate and confirm than this tit-for-tat technique. Unfortunately, the constitution doesn't say the president has to nominate reasonable or broadly favorable judges, just that the Senate must "advise and consent" to the judge's confirmation. Maybe there should be a bipartisan panel that advises the president on what nominees would be good per se and have a good chance of support from 60 senators. Of course, the President could ignore those suggestions, but would do so at his/her own peril. Why don't they make a subcommittee of the judicary that is equally weighted and could give their advise to the president.

Facially, it seems like this would be constitutional and the subcomittee report could be placed for a vote before the whole Senate (and subject to a fillabuster) so that every egomaniac that is in the club of 100 wouldn't feel snubbed. But of course, that would take some cajones from the party in power to give a little bit up in the name of the country to fill out the judiciary with good judges who are not extremists from either side. And I for one am not going to hold my breath on that one.

No comments: