- $1 billion Empire State Building IPO: why it won't be like Facebook IPO
- In surprise move, GOP leaders admit defeat in payroll tax battle
- More than 30,000 Germans turn out against anti-piracy treaty ACTA
- Does Obama blueprint reduce budget deficit fast enough? (+video)
- Pentagon budget: Does it pit active-duty forces against retirees? (+video)
Pivotal days for Frist and the GOP
The Senate majority leader faces a test of party loyalty and leadership as 'nuclear option' on judicial nominees draws near.
(Page 2 of 2)
But instead, he's investing more and more time and political capital on the fight over judges. Conservative activists say the most likely venue for a showdown over Senate rules will be the debate over confirmation of Priscilla Owen of Texas. "She's got a great story," says Manuel Miranda, chairman of the National Coalition to End Judicial Filibusters. A former nominations counsel for Senator Frist, Mr. Miranda resigned from the majority leader's office after leaking strategy memos from activist groups to Senate Democrats on which nominations to filibuster. Winning the fight over judges is "vitally important for his political future," says Miranda. "But even if he were not to run for president it's important for his legacy. He knows he will not be remembered for the class-action bill or the healthy forest initiative."
The top scorer on the 1977 Texas bar exam, Justice Owen broke the "glass ceiling" for women in top corporate law firms in Texas, while helping her widowed mother in Waco and teaching Sunday School. She was reelected to the Texas Supreme Court in 2000 with 84 percent of the vote, the highest of any judge that year.
Democrats say that Owen is a judicial extremist and legislates from the bench.
Frist's office is not confirming reports that the Owen nomination will be the first to the Senate floor for a vote and test of the nuclear option. "They haven't made a final decision, but Owen has been waiting the longest... four years for a vote. Her story is a compelling one," says spokesman Bob Stevenson, who says the majority leader still has several offers of compromise on the table, some of which have not been made public. "We are hopeful, but not terribly optimistic, that we can resolve this" without resorting to the nuclear option.
But it's a high risk operation, regardless of the outcome. Even if he prevails on judicial nominees - with or without the nuclear option - other potential rivals in 2008, such as Sen. George Allen (R) of Virginia, are on record with conservative activists pushing harder and earlier for a showdown over judges.
"Frist is going to get remarkably little credit if it passes, and he will get virtually all of the blame if it's defeated. That's poor positioning," says Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia.
At the same time, Frist's participation in a controversial "Justice Sunday" rally on judges last month, sponsored by religious conservatives, rankled many moderates.
Last month, Frist offered Democrats extended debate on controversial nominees, in exchange for assurances of a floor vote on all nominees. That offer extends to controversial holds that Republican senators put on some 60 of President Clinton's nominees. Democrats have countered with proposals to allow a vote on less controversial judicial nominees, if Republicans gave up the nuclear option. But so far such compromises have been rejected.
While some GOP leaders claim they have the votes to prevail in a floor vote on a rule change over filibusters, moderates urge caution. "The United States Senate today stands on the edge of the abyss," said Sen. Arlen Specter (R) of Pennsylvania, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said Monday. "But if we cease this aimless game of political chicken, we can restore the Senate to its rightful place as the world's greatest deliberative body."
Page:
1 | 2



