**DONOTDELETE**
12-05-2001, 12:17 AM
A rebuke for Leahy
The entire Republican side of the Senate Judiciary Committee has scolded the Democratic chairman, Vermont Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, for using what they called "misleading" statistics to defend a "disgraceful" effort to block President Bush's judicial nominees.
The nine Republican senators — Orrin G. Hatch of Utah, Jon Kyl of Arizona, Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, Sam Brownback of Kansas, Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, and Jeff Sessions of Alabama — rebuked Mr. Leahy in a joint letter to the Wall Street Journal published yesterday.
Mr. Leahy had defended the pace of judicial confirmations in a letter published in the Journal on Nov. 13.
"In his letter, Sen. Leahy tries to use statistics and numbers to create the illusion that his committee is moving at a pace 'faster' than the last two administrations on Senate judiciary nominees, but his arguments are misleading," the Republican senators said.
"In fact, the first Bush administration saw 15 of its 24 first-year nominees confirmed by the Senate — a 62 percent confirmation rate. Similarly, in his first year, President Clinton had 27 of his 47 nominees confirmed — a 57 percent pace. Today, with the Senate nearing completion of its business for the year, the current President Bush has had only 18 of his 64 nominees confirmed by the Senate — or just 28 percent."
Even most pre-August nominations have been blocked, which the senators described as "downright disgraceful."
"The fact that many nominees have not been confirmed is not an accident. Liberal Democrats simply don't want judges seated on the federal courts with whom they disagree. There is no other explanation for the Judiciary Committee's failure to hold a hearing on more than two-thirds of the first 11 people nominated by the president — back in early May! Yet the Judiciary Committee stalls, even though the American Bar Association has rated a number of them 'well-qualified' to serve on the federal bench."
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/inpolitics.htm
images/icons/tongue.gif
The entire Republican side of the Senate Judiciary Committee has scolded the Democratic chairman, Vermont Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, for using what they called "misleading" statistics to defend a "disgraceful" effort to block President Bush's judicial nominees.
The nine Republican senators — Orrin G. Hatch of Utah, Jon Kyl of Arizona, Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, Sam Brownback of Kansas, Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, and Jeff Sessions of Alabama — rebuked Mr. Leahy in a joint letter to the Wall Street Journal published yesterday.
Mr. Leahy had defended the pace of judicial confirmations in a letter published in the Journal on Nov. 13.
"In his letter, Sen. Leahy tries to use statistics and numbers to create the illusion that his committee is moving at a pace 'faster' than the last two administrations on Senate judiciary nominees, but his arguments are misleading," the Republican senators said.
"In fact, the first Bush administration saw 15 of its 24 first-year nominees confirmed by the Senate — a 62 percent confirmation rate. Similarly, in his first year, President Clinton had 27 of his 47 nominees confirmed — a 57 percent pace. Today, with the Senate nearing completion of its business for the year, the current President Bush has had only 18 of his 64 nominees confirmed by the Senate — or just 28 percent."
Even most pre-August nominations have been blocked, which the senators described as "downright disgraceful."
"The fact that many nominees have not been confirmed is not an accident. Liberal Democrats simply don't want judges seated on the federal courts with whom they disagree. There is no other explanation for the Judiciary Committee's failure to hold a hearing on more than two-thirds of the first 11 people nominated by the president — back in early May! Yet the Judiciary Committee stalls, even though the American Bar Association has rated a number of them 'well-qualified' to serve on the federal bench."
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/inpolitics.htm
images/icons/tongue.gif