Liberal D.C. Paper Critical of Democrats' Foot-Dragging

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Liberal D.C. Paper Critical of Democrats' Foot-Dragging

One of the nation's more liberal newspapers is chastening the Democrats over their handling of President Bush's judicial nominees.

The criticism is significant because of the source: an editorial in The Washington Post, a paper that tends to endorse the Democrats' political agenda. Although noting that the Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, has done better in recent weeks, the Post's editorial concludes his pace of dealing with Bush's nominees falls far below his recent predecessors.
entire story HERE (http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/8/92002c.asp)

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Judicial Nominations Scorecard:
The Senate Receives an "F"
Part I: A Statistical Survey
Congress is now in its August recess, with many members taking little time for vacation as they campaign for the November elections. Neither party has reason to solicit voter support based on its handling of President Bush's judicial nominations. Part I of our "Scorecard" focuses on some of the more significant statistics revealing how poorly both political parties have performed.
~~snip~~
The previous three presidents had 100% confirmation rate for their first eleven Court of Appeals nominees; the average time from nomination to confirmation was:

Reagan: 39 days
Bush I: 88 days
Clinton: 115 days
Max: 199 days
Average: 81 days
Bush II: As noted above, 8 of the current nominees have had no action on the Senate floor, although they were named 15 months ago
rest of the report @ Eagle Forum's Court Watch (http://www.eagleforum.org/court_watch/alerts/2002/scorecard-8-07-02.shtml)