THIS PAGE
TO A FRIEND
COMMITTEE FOR JUSTICE
1920 L Street, N.W., Suite 200
Washington, DC 20036FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Thursday, August 2, 2007
CONTACT: Curt Levey, (202) 270-7748,Southwick Resolution is Test for Red State Democrats One Way or Another, We ll Know Where Every Senator Stands
WASHINGTON, DC The Committee for Justice (CFJ) reacted today to the introduction of a Sense of the Senate resolution declaring that Fifth Circuit nominee and Iraq War veteran Leslie Southwick should receive a vote by the full Senate. The resolution, introduced by Senators Mitch McConnell and Arlen Specter as an amendment to pending legislation, is aimed at ending the obstruction of Judge Southwick s nomination in the Judiciary Committee.
"Forcing a vote by the full Senate is the right strategy," explained CFJ executive director Curt Levey. "Just do the math. Majority Leader Reid has made sure that all the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee are from blue states and thus free to engage in partisan battles. But Reid doesn t have that luxury on the Senate floor, where 20 of the Democratic senators are from states that voted for George Bush in 2004. Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska has already said he sees no reason to oppose Judge Southwick, and it s likely we ll pick up at least a few more red state Democrats.
"If I were a Democratic senator from a red state, I wouldn t want to go home for August recess and explain to my constituents why I shot down an Iraq War veteran at the behest of ultra-liberal groups like People for the American Way," said Levey. "Before those groups decided to target Judge Southwick, Democratic leaders assured their Republican counterparts that this nomination would sail through the Senate. Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, and Dick Durbin can get away with taking their marching orders from the Left. Byron Dorgan, Jon Tester, and Evan Bayh can't."
Levey pointed out that "red state Democrats running for reelection next year are the least likely to risk a vote against Southwick. Tom Daschle was defeated in 2004 because his strategy of filibustering judicial nominees made him look obstructionist and out of the mainstream. In putting forth this resolution, Republicans are betting that senators like Mary Landrieu, Mark Pryor, Max Baucus, and John Rockefeller don't want to be the next Tom Daschle in 2008.
"Democratic senators from the South will find it hard to vote against the Southwick resolution," Levey predicted. "After all, the obstruction of Judge Southwick is part of a larger pattern. Seven times President Bush has nominated a southern white male to the U.S Courts of Appeal, and seven times Senate Democrats have tried to block the nomination. I would think that southern senators such as Landrieu, Pryor, Jim Webb, and Bill Nelson would want to distance themselves from that pattern.
"Even a couple of blue state Democrats named Clinton and Obama will hesitate before siding with the obstructionists, Levey explained. If they oppose giving Judge Southwick a fair up-or-down vote on the Senate floor, they ll have to deal with the ramifications if elected president. President Clinton or Obama would then have a hard time arguing that their judicial nominees deserve an up-or-down vote.
"Responding to Harry Reid s vow to table the resolution, Levey said That s just one more piece of evidence that Judge Southwick has the support of a majority of senators. If Reid had the votes to defeat the Southwick amendment outright, he wouldn t be trying to obfuscate the issue with a motion to kill the amendment. Sen. Reid is mistaken if he thinks the American people can t figure out that a vote to table the amendment is a vote against this Iraq War veteran. Whether Reid s motion fails or succeeds, at the end of the day, we ll know where every senator stands."
The Committee for Justice is a non-partisan, non-profit organization devoted to promoting constitutionalist judicial nominees and the rule of law.
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For further information please refer to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml