It’s certainly not a shock to see certain Republicans, such as former Congressman Bob Schaffer, loyally promoting President Bush’s suggestion that Harriet Miers is a perfect fit for the Supreme Court. However, those same folks behind the hastily assembled “CO for Justice Miers” coalition haven’t any business trying to intimidate Sen. Ken Salazar into doing the same.
Nor should they be taking Wayne Allard for granted.
Salazar sees Miers as an “unknown quantity,” and before he decides his vote we expect him to examine her qualifications and judicial philosophy. Allard is a Bush loyalist who has rarely, if ever, opposed the president’s judicial nominees. But he too should give Miers open-minded consideration.
Members of the local Miers coalition, including former U.S. Attorney Mike Norton and Colorado GOP chair Bob Martinez, say they trust the president’s judgment and believe Miers would bring a fresh perspective to the court. They have urged Salazar to vote with Allard to confirm her, calling it the “sensible conclusion.”
They seem to take Allard’s support for Miers for granted. But neither Salazar nor Allard should rush to judgment. Miers must defend her suitability if the Senate is to confirm her to a lifetime position.
In a commentary last week, Schaffer said it was “essential for Colorado that Allard and Salazar agree again on the justice President Bush will next nominate.” He wrote this before Bush had even decided whom to nominate, explaining his logic this way: “After all, both senators represent the exact same Western constituency whose firm opinions on liberty are never quiet and never ambiguous.”
Oh, where to begin?
First of all, Colorado doesn’t need two Wayne Allards. Did Ben Nighthorse Campbell vote in lockstep with Allard?
Secondly, though it’s true that both senators represent the same state, no one ever expected that one man’s decision was the other’s obligation.
Third, consider that Colorado voters are roughly one-third Republican, one-third Democratic and one-third independent. There’s lots of elbow room.
Fourth, there is Pete Domenici and Jeff Bingaman in New Mexico – two senators who represent the exact same “Western constituency.” Well, you get the drift.
Allard and Salazar both need to weigh their decisions with utmost care.
Meanwhile, Miers’ appointment has angered some big-name commentators who seem to think Miers may not be conservative enough to advance their ideological agenda. That alone ought to give pause to all 100 members of the Senate.
Columnist George Will and radio personality Rush Limbaugh have led the charge. Will wrote that he saw “no evidence that she (Miers) is among the leading lights of American jurisprudence, or that she possesses talents commensurate with the Supreme Court’s tasks.”
Others, like Focus on the Family leader James Dobson, support Miers after having received some sort of special wink from the White House. “Some of what I know I am not at liberty to talk about,” he told The New York Times. Dobson and other conservatives apparently got a call from Karl Rove before Bush announced his decision Monday morning.
Miers is a born-again Christian and Dobson apparently has reason to believe she opposes abortion. However, Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., says he’s prepared to oppose Miers if she, like Chief Justice John Roberts, considers Roe vs. Wade “settled law.” Apparently he didn’t get the wink from Rove, at least not yet.
Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch said after meeting with Miers that he’ll support her, and he expects other conservatives to follow suit.
“A lot of my fellow conservatives are concerned, but they don’t know her as I do,” Hatch said. “She’s going to basically do what the president thinks she should, and that is be a strict constructionist.
“It’s a conservative president who nominated her,” he added. “They ought to take him at his word.”
Should Allard follow anti-Miers voices like Will and Limbaugh, or pro-Miers proponents like Dobson and Sen. Hatch? We believe Colorado’s senators should be open-minded about the Miers nomination until her suitability comes into focus.
