You are absolutely correct! Ashcroft will not be defeated because he has
special privileges because he was a former Senator. He is treated differently
from someone who does not have past Senate ties. Many people, including
Jesse Jackson have mentioned this connection.
They call is the" collegiality of the Senate."
Also, the Senate is split and for one reason or another Democrats will vote
for Ashcroft.
Should the the American people should allow the Senate to
put their opinions ahead of their constituents? I believe Senator
Specter is aware of the potential problem or at least a potential political
problem for him because I've heard he may be in trouble with people back home
over the Ashcroft nomination.- JMOP, Mephisto
Here are some excerpts from from Ashcroft committee members.
The scope of the Judiciary Committee's debate about Ashcroft was captured in the differing
positions taken by two previously undecided members, Feingold and Herb Kohl, who is
also a Wisconsin Democrat.
Kohl labeled Ashcroft's opposition to abortion ''extreme,'' and said Ashcroft held
a ''radical view'' against gun control and had ''deliberately injured'' gay and minority nominees
for federal positions. That left Ashcroft out of the ''public mainstream,'' the senator said.
''I believe that he will not be the people's lawyer. I believe that he will push and prod the law to
conform with his own strongly held beliefs,'' Kohl told his colleagues in the Senate committee room.
Feingold said he had decided to support the nominee, even after personal visit
yesterday afternoon from Senator Edward M. Kennedy, a leading Ashcroft opponent.
Feingold said he deferred to the president's right to pick his Cabinet.
While saying he was troubled with Ashcroft's positions on school desegration, gay and minority
nominees, and other issues that emerged during four days of hearings, Feingold concluded:
''The Senate has nearly uniformly sought to avoid disapproving nominations because of their philosophy
alone, and I believe that we should not begin to do so now.''
*******
"Kennedy had championed abortion rights, civil rights, and gun control in joining foes
of the nomination. Yesterday, in formally announcing his nay vote, he condemned Ashcroft
for ''engaging in a remarkable revisionist remaking of his record'' during his confirmation hearings.
''But actions speak louder than words, and in the case of Senator Ashcroft,
his 30-year record of intense opposition on so many critical issues involving
civil rights, women's rights, gun control, and nominations speaks volumes and
demonstrates clearly and convincingly that he is the wrong person
to be attorney general of the United States,'' Kennedy said.
The other Massachusetts Democrat, John F. Kerry, issued a statement
saying he planned to vote against Ashcroft on the Senate floor.
''John Ashcroft's heart is not in question. His faith is not in question.
His professional capacity is not in question.
''John Ashcroft's record, however, is in serious question - and it reveals
a series of actions motivated by ideology that have not just placed him firmly
outside the mainstream, but which demonstrate a tendency to distort the truth
in pursuit of ideological ends,'' Kerry said.
While all nine Republicans on Judiciary Committee supported Ashcroft, one moderate,
Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, hinted he would look
closely at judicial nominees who might hold political views as conservative as Ashcroft's."
*********
A group of Democratic Vermont state legislators urged their state's lone
Republican US senator, James Jeffords, to join Leahy in opposing the nomination.
The two dozen lawmakers said a vote in favor of Ashcroft would put Jeffords' party obligations
ahead of the state's interest.
But Jeffords said he plans to support Ashcroft out of deference to the president.
Excerpts from The Boston Globe
This story ran on page A01 of the Boston Globe on 1/31/2001.
© Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper Company.
boston.com |
