Ashcroft persuaded the Old Boys in the Senate who were going to vote for Mr. White to change their minds because Ashcroft needed a campaign issue or this is the way I interpret the information.
Recently, Jesse Jackson commented on the tendency of the Senate members to pat each other on the back. They call it, "collegiality." I say the Senators betray the American people.
Here is quote from The Washington Post,
In any case, Ashcroft did not turn White's nomination into a referendum on the death penalty until he was locked in a reelection battle with Gov. Mel E. Carnahan (D-Mo.), who was under fire for commuting a killer's death sentence at the behest of the pope.
At White's confirmation hearing in May 1998, transcripts show, Ashcroft asked the judge about gay rights, abortion and the role of the judiciary, but nothing about the death penalty. It was only after his staff discovered that White had been the lone justice to dissent from the execution of a notorious cop-killer -- an anguished dissent that Ashcroft mischaracterized in a series of public broadsides -- that Ashcroft began gunning for White.
In October 1999, Ashcroft's public and private pressure persuaded his senior colleague, Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.), to withdraw his support for White. On the day of the vote, Ashcroft also delivered an impassioned plea to
the GOP caucus to sink the nomination.
So even though several Republicans -- including Sens. Orrin G. Hatch (Utah), Arlen Specter (Pa.) and even Strom Thurmond (S.C.) -- had voted for it in committee, they all deferred to the home-state senators on the floor, and White was defeated on a strict party-line vote.
"There was bipartisan support for Ronnie White," recalled Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (Vt.), the ranking Democrat on the judiciary committee.
Above excerpt from story entitled
Ashcroft's '99 Tactics In Spotlight
By Michael Grunwald
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 1, 2001; Page A01
Excertps from Washington Post
washingtonpost.com |
