Three Days of Questioning and All I Got Was This Lousy Earache
The Senate Judiciary Committee spent three days with the newest Supreme Court nominee, Samuel Alito. Over three days and hours of questioning and one would think that there would be a lot of information in Alito's own words that could tell us all we needed to know about him.
However, one would be wrong to think that about the hearings.
The Los Angeles Times sums up what you may have missed if you did not spend all morning and afternoon watching or listening to these hearings.
Choice cuts from that article:
Since Alito first sat down in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday, it has become clear that the process is as much about the senators and their own agendas as it is about the nominee. Several lawmakers have spent more time delivering their own stemwinders than they have asking questions of Alito. Nary a mind appears to have been changed.
The result has been a hearing regarded by many Capitol Hill veterans of past confirmation battles as one of the most colorless in modern memory. ("It's like the first half of 'The Wizard of Oz,' " one Democratic staff member said.)
Democrats tried to step up the drama Wednesday with more confrontational questioning, but the room remained heavy with a sense of inevitability.
The hearing "really isn't a forum for senators making up their minds as it is for advertising their views and trying to expose Alito's," said Elliot E. Slotnick, an expert on judicial nominations at Ohio State University.
Although Democrats largely have failed to fluster the nominee, let alone derail his confirmation, they have tried to use the hearing to depict him as an ideologue who probably would tip the balance of the Supreme Court sharply to the right.
Republicans have used their time before the television cameras to counter the Democrats' criticism, lob softball questions and shower Alito with praise.
....
"Since the politicians seem to have made up their mind, and the rest of this is simply playing out, I suspect that if there weren't TV cameras, this part of the hearing would be over by now," said Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.).
Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), who is thinking about running for president in 2008, found a sure-fire gimmick to get the cameras turned on him. Discussing a controversial Princeton University alumni group of which Alito was once a member, Biden clapped on a Princeton baseball cap. Every camera in the room swung to him, and the sound of shutters clicking was deafening.
Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) also understood the value of props in a hearing as dry and legalistic as this one. He pulled out and waved a pocket-sized copy of the Constitution. Again, cameras clicked.
Republicans had props of their own. Responding to Democrats' claim that Alito was being evasive and refusing to answer key questions, Kyl displayed a poster with quotes from the day's newspaper articles describing him as a forthcoming witness.
....
"They forgot that part of their role is to educate the American people" about Alito's record, said one activist who asked not to be identified while criticizing Democratic senators. "Some of them didn't go the additional step of thinking about how to reach other Americans whose minds haven't been made up."
Taking a more confrontational tack Wednesday, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) demanded a committee subpoena to obtain documents about the Concerned Alumni of Princeton, a conservative group that had opposed affirmative action and admission of women at the university.
When Kennedy proposed a closed-door meeting to vote on the subpoena, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the committee chairman, snapped at the challenge to his power to call the shots. "I'm not going to have you run this committee," he said with a crack of the gavel.
That was just one of several instances in which Senate power-brokers clashed over the chamber's internal rituals, leaving the nominee — the reason for the hearing — a mere bystander.
At one point, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) broke an unwritten Senate rule by criticizing a colleague when he was not present to respond: He pointed out that Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) had switched his position on abortion many years ago, and so was poorly positioned to criticize Alito for recanting past statements. Durbin later wanted to respond and explain his switch on the issue, but insisted on waiting until Coburn was in the room to do so.
After Democrats spent the day trying to portray Alito as evasive, a friend of corporations, a foe of abortion rights and a potential rubber stamp for presidential power, even they admitted that it was a tough message to get across in simple terms.
What a disappointment.
Both sides seemed to be more interested in fighting each other, especially now that cameras from the cable news networks were focused on this committee for the entire day, than finding out information about this Supreme Court nominee.
What happened to providing a public service?
What happened to informing the voter?
Yes, a voter who really cares can go around and search for Alito's previous records. However, judges in lower courts often do not have the chance to decide on the broad, Constitutional issues that the Supreme Court does and it would be very fair to the people of this nation to know what to expect in a Justice Alito.
The blame for this falls onto the entire Committee, both Democrats and Republicans. After commercials and camapigns to tell out Senators to confirm Samuel Alito even before he stepped into the Capitol, we finally had a chance to see him in action, to tell us all about what kind of Justice he wants to be.
And all we got was a clip of his wife crying....which promptly turned into a battle between Democrats and Republicans over what or who made Alito's wife cry.
And people wonder why the public doesn't know or doesn't care about such things.
We get aches in our ears just trying to follow this.
However, one would be wrong to think that about the hearings.
The Los Angeles Times sums up what you may have missed if you did not spend all morning and afternoon watching or listening to these hearings.
Choice cuts from that article:
Since Alito first sat down in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday, it has become clear that the process is as much about the senators and their own agendas as it is about the nominee. Several lawmakers have spent more time delivering their own stemwinders than they have asking questions of Alito. Nary a mind appears to have been changed.
The result has been a hearing regarded by many Capitol Hill veterans of past confirmation battles as one of the most colorless in modern memory. ("It's like the first half of 'The Wizard of Oz,' " one Democratic staff member said.)
Democrats tried to step up the drama Wednesday with more confrontational questioning, but the room remained heavy with a sense of inevitability.
The hearing "really isn't a forum for senators making up their minds as it is for advertising their views and trying to expose Alito's," said Elliot E. Slotnick, an expert on judicial nominations at Ohio State University.
Although Democrats largely have failed to fluster the nominee, let alone derail his confirmation, they have tried to use the hearing to depict him as an ideologue who probably would tip the balance of the Supreme Court sharply to the right.
Republicans have used their time before the television cameras to counter the Democrats' criticism, lob softball questions and shower Alito with praise.
....
"Since the politicians seem to have made up their mind, and the rest of this is simply playing out, I suspect that if there weren't TV cameras, this part of the hearing would be over by now," said Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.).
Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), who is thinking about running for president in 2008, found a sure-fire gimmick to get the cameras turned on him. Discussing a controversial Princeton University alumni group of which Alito was once a member, Biden clapped on a Princeton baseball cap. Every camera in the room swung to him, and the sound of shutters clicking was deafening.
Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) also understood the value of props in a hearing as dry and legalistic as this one. He pulled out and waved a pocket-sized copy of the Constitution. Again, cameras clicked.
Republicans had props of their own. Responding to Democrats' claim that Alito was being evasive and refusing to answer key questions, Kyl displayed a poster with quotes from the day's newspaper articles describing him as a forthcoming witness.
....
"They forgot that part of their role is to educate the American people" about Alito's record, said one activist who asked not to be identified while criticizing Democratic senators. "Some of them didn't go the additional step of thinking about how to reach other Americans whose minds haven't been made up."
Taking a more confrontational tack Wednesday, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) demanded a committee subpoena to obtain documents about the Concerned Alumni of Princeton, a conservative group that had opposed affirmative action and admission of women at the university.
When Kennedy proposed a closed-door meeting to vote on the subpoena, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the committee chairman, snapped at the challenge to his power to call the shots. "I'm not going to have you run this committee," he said with a crack of the gavel.
That was just one of several instances in which Senate power-brokers clashed over the chamber's internal rituals, leaving the nominee — the reason for the hearing — a mere bystander.
At one point, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) broke an unwritten Senate rule by criticizing a colleague when he was not present to respond: He pointed out that Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) had switched his position on abortion many years ago, and so was poorly positioned to criticize Alito for recanting past statements. Durbin later wanted to respond and explain his switch on the issue, but insisted on waiting until Coburn was in the room to do so.
After Democrats spent the day trying to portray Alito as evasive, a friend of corporations, a foe of abortion rights and a potential rubber stamp for presidential power, even they admitted that it was a tough message to get across in simple terms.
What a disappointment.
Both sides seemed to be more interested in fighting each other, especially now that cameras from the cable news networks were focused on this committee for the entire day, than finding out information about this Supreme Court nominee.
What happened to providing a public service?
What happened to informing the voter?
Yes, a voter who really cares can go around and search for Alito's previous records. However, judges in lower courts often do not have the chance to decide on the broad, Constitutional issues that the Supreme Court does and it would be very fair to the people of this nation to know what to expect in a Justice Alito.
The blame for this falls onto the entire Committee, both Democrats and Republicans. After commercials and camapigns to tell out Senators to confirm Samuel Alito even before he stepped into the Capitol, we finally had a chance to see him in action, to tell us all about what kind of Justice he wants to be.
And all we got was a clip of his wife crying....which promptly turned into a battle between Democrats and Republicans over what or who made Alito's wife cry.
And people wonder why the public doesn't know or doesn't care about such things.
We get aches in our ears just trying to follow this.
posted by Will at 11:54 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home