Search  About Salon  Table Talk  Newsletters: subscribe/unsubscribe  Advertise in Salon  Investor Relations

 
 

Salon.com

[Arts & Entertainment][ Books ][ Comics ][ Mothers Who Think ][ News ][ People ][ Politics ][ Sex ][ Technology ][ Audio ]

Article Finder
Politics


 


politics

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., left, speaks with Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., before Feingold cast the lone Democratic committee vote for John Ashcroft on Tuesday.


Ashcroft's win, the left's loss
The battle over the attorney general nomination caused friction and division -- within the Democratic Party.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Feb. 2, 2001 | WASHINGTON -- After all the protests that followed his nomination, the actual vote to confirm John Ashcroft as attorney general was a dramatic letdown, even though the final tally, 58-42, was closer than many on both sides had predicted. At 1:45 p.m. EST Thursday, when the vote was scheduled to take place on the Senate floor, fewer than half the senators were present. The latecomers straggled in one at a time, raised a hand to be recognized by the vote counter, gave a tiny sign -- a nod, a thumbs up/thumbs down or a frequently inaudible "yea" or "nay" -- and then milled about, chatting with their colleagues.

Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, cut out of the proceedings early to gloat about Ashcroft's victory to the press. Though he claimed at more than one point that he was gratified to have any support from Democrats, Hatch's demeanor told another story. When asked if he had feared a filibuster by Democrats, Hatch replied quickly, "They didn't have the guts."




Print story


E-mail story


View Salon privately with SafeWeb


They certainly didn't have their act together, and the Republicans did. From the beginning of the Ashcroft battle, the Democratic Senate coalition was doomed to the defeat it suffered by a shaky foundation of shifting priorities. The Democrats were torn between an ideological wing that violently opposed Ashcroft and a pragmatic wing that wanted to appear to be giving the Bush administration a fair start.

When then President-elect Bush chose Ashcroft for the top law enforcement spot on Dec. 22, a broad spectrum of left-leaning interest groups quickly coalesced to fight him. Among them were the gay rights group Human Rights Campaign, the Sierra Club, the anti-gun Million Moms March, the NAACP, the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League and People for the American Way. According to these organizations, Ashcroft was wrong on every one of their ideological issues.

But what he wasn't was dirty. There was no hint of scandal in Ashcroft's record -- certainly not by the standards set by the Clinton administration or the incoming president. Vouching for Ashcroft's good character were two prominent Democratic senators -- Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Robert Torricelli of New Jersey -- who managed to say positive things about him before someone told them that there was going to be a fight.

The selection of Ashcroft, a rather obvious nod to the Christian right, showed that Bush never accepted the Democrats' premise that his slender victory compelled him to pull together a compromise Cabinet. Instead, in this case, he made a traditional appointment, choosing someone beloved by an important constituency, his party's social conservatives, who had rescued Bush from the primary challenge of Sen. John McCain, stayed in the background at the scripted smilefest of the Republican Convention and held their tongues as Bush distanced himself from core conservative stands on abortion and gay rights during his debates with Al Gore.

Bush kept mum about most issues throughout the 36-day-long Election Night, and built his transition team on the shoulders of pragmatists and ideological agnostics like Colin Powell. Ashcroft was the clear peace offering.

No Republican ever voiced a peep against Ashcroft, and Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., boasted that the GOP had 50 solid votes and would have a tie-breaking vote from Dick Cheney by Inauguration Day. Who cared what the Democrats did?

But Democrats did have their chance. Thanks to the fluke of an evenly split Senate and a lame-duck Democratic administration, they had two weeks' worth of majority rule in the Senate, and could have set the tone of the confirmation hearings. They had more than enough members to sustain a filibuster, and the army of Ashcroft opponents compiled enough of his career lowlights to supply rationalizations for those who wished to vote against him.

But then two crucial events tilted the balance irrevocably in Ashcroft's favor. First, Lott struck a historic compromise with Senate Democrats on Jan. 5, granting them a greater share of power than they were entitled to as the minority party. The agreement was reached over the objections of some of Lott's fellow Republicans, and Democratic leader Sen. Tom Daschle of South Dakota declared it a near miracle. "This is a classic case of extending the hand of friendship," Lott said. He also suggested that the friendly hand -- and the deal -- could be withdrawn if the Democrats didn't play nice.

. Next page | Unlucky Linda
1, 2, 3




Photograph by AP/Wide World Photos/Kenneth Lambert


 



Don't get sunburned! Cover up with a Salon T-shirt this summer.




Extra goodies and great services in
Salon Plus

____
 



 
 
____
 
   
 
____
 


 

 
 
  Current Stories
  • A presidential aura With the crowds growing, the campaign money flowing and the media swarming, John Kerry is looking more and more like the front-runner.
    By Tim Grieve
  • Among the Democrats On a big night for the sitting president, his Democratic challengers gather together to rally the faithful -- and crack Bush jokes.
    By Jake Tapper
  • Drunken sailor economics Bush's bloated budget will likely put the U.S. over $1 trillion in debt. But criticize it, and the White House calls you soft on terror.
    By Jake Tapper
  • Poisoned fairways Among the big winners in Bush's proposed rollback of pesticide restrictions? The politically untouchable golf industry, where dangerous chemicals are par for the course.
    By Jake Tapper
  •  

    shim shim shim shim shim shim shim
    shim
    shim

    Salon News A Salon-eye view of the day's news, with investigative reports, analysis and interviews with newsmakers.

    shim
    shim



    Salon  Search  About Salon  Table Talk  Newsletters: subscribe/unsubscribe  Advertise in Salon  Investor Relations


    Arts & Entertainment | Books | Comics | Mothers Who Think | News
    People | Politics | Sex | Tech & Business and The Free Software Project
    Letters | Columnists | Salon Plus | Salon Shop


    Reproduction of material from any Salon pages without written permission is strictly prohibited
    Copyright 2005 Salon.com


    Salon, 22 4th Street, 16th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103
    Telephone 415 645-9200 | Fax 415 645-9204
    E-mail | Salon.com Privacy Policy