Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Many fear that Senate deal could splinter

Senators from both parties predict that the unity shown in the filibuster compromise will not carry over.

By ANITA KUMAR
Published May 25, 2005

WASHINGTON - A day after a group of centrist senators averted a showdown that threatened the business and cooperation in the U.S. Senate, negotiators of the deal basked in the glow of victory.

But beneath the relief that the crisis was averted, many at the Capitol on Tuesday worried that the Senate remains as deeply divided as before the agreement.

Members of both parties complained that the bargain over the president's contentious judicial nominees cost them too much.

The negotiators - dubbed the Gang of 14 - have no plans to meet further on other issues; the deal is not a sign of unity on other issues.

The vague language in the agreement suggests the cease-fire may not last.

Some senators and congressional experts only expect the deal to hold up through one group of judicial nominees - perhaps a few months - or until Bush nominates a Supreme Court justice, putting the Senate right back where it was a few days ago.

"It's a temporary fix and it's going to come apart soon," said Bill Frenzel, a former Republican House member who studies Congress at the Brookings Institution. "Then we'll have a crisis all over. I think it could be a lot sooner than anyone thinks."

The Senate had prepared for an all-night debate Monday, expecting to end the next day with Republicans voting to change Senate rules to stop Democrats from using the filibuster - a parliamentary procedure to prolong debate - to block appeals court nominees.

But 14 senators - seven Republicans and seven Democrats - announced a deal that would allow a vote on some of Bush's most conservative nominees if Republicans stop threatening to strip Democrats of their ability to filibuster.

As a result, after four years of Democratic filibusters, Senate confirmation of Priscilla Owen to the U.S. appeals court is expected today. "It's about time," President Bush said. "These nominees have waited years for an up-or-down on the Senate floor, and now they'll get one."

As the Senate began deliberating Owen's nomination Tuesday, the debate continued over the long-term impact of the deal.

The compromise was hailed on Capitol Hill as a way to resolve the bitter impasse and move on with other Senate business, including an energy bill.

Reporters mobbed the Gang of 14 as they walked the halls, asking if they would tackle other divided issues, such as Social Security, or even try to take over the Senate from its partisan leaders.

"I took a risk. I think the Senate will be stronger for it," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and a negotiator. "This group has set in place momentum."

Other senators and outside experts, though, were skeptical, saying the partisanship that brought the Senate to the brink remains.

"They are not middle of the road," said Richard Born, a congressional expert at Vassar College. "The Senate is made up of true believers."

Conservative lawmakers and their allies, led by evangelical activist groups like the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family, were irked at the deal because they had hoped to change the rules before the president is called upon to appoint a new Supreme Court justice. After all, they put the GOP in power, and they expect and usually get results.

"The seven Republicans who participated in the deal need to explain what Republicans gained in this "compromise' that they did not already have," said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. "Peace won by the compromise of principles is a short-lived achievement."

Sen. George Allen, R-Va., criticized the deal as a "major disappointment on principle," because it did not guarantee a yes-or-no vote for all of Bush's nominees. Allen said he had been spoiling for a fight.

"It's disappointing for all of us who believe in the principle that persons should be accorded the fairness and due process of an up or down vote," he said. "It doesn't solve the problem. I wanted action."

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid scheduled a "unity event" to claim victory, but just as conservatives were frustrated, liberals were equally displeased. They had portrayed the nominees as right-wing ideologues and had pledged to do everything they could to stop them; the moderate Democrats who signed the compromise robbed them of their ability to do that.

Rep. Melvin Watt, a North Carolina Democrat and head of the Congressional Black Caucus, said he opposed the deal to "trade judges who oppose our civil rights for a temporary filibuster cease-fire. This deal is more of a capitulation than a compromise."

The senators involved in the negotiations were cautiously optimistic about a new spirit of cooperation. "If that good will can extend over to other business then that's good news," said Sen. Ben Nelson, a Nebraska Democrat and negotiator. "If good will springs out in the Senate, that would certainly be a benefit."

But they don't anticipate meeting on other issues. Even John McCain, R-Ariz., a chief architect of the compromise, called the group's impact on judicial nominees "an anomaly."

The agreement opened the way for yes-or-no votes on three of Bush's judicial picks and said the Democrats can filibuster two others. It said Democrats would filibuster future nominees only under "extraordinary circumstances," a vague term that senators were still trying to define Tuesday.

"I would hope this would last, and I hope they mean what they say," Florida Sen. Mel Martinez said.

But Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who has said repeatedly he was not a party to the negotiations, said on the Senate floor that he will not hesitate to try to change the rules - and eliminate filibusters - if he feels it necessary.

"I believe the memorandum of understanding makes modest progress, but falls far short of guaranteeing up or down votes on judicial nominees," he said. "It needs to be carefully monitored and executed in good faith."

The deal is expected to last through the 109th Congress - which ends next year - but Born and other experts expect that once the Senate gets through this group of nominees, the feud will erupt again. That would be especially true if Bush has an opportunity to nominate a Supreme Court justice.

Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., said he would have rather fought to the finish. "I hope the serial filibusters end," he said. "I hope it will last in perpetuity. But it may work. It may not."

[Last modified May 25, 2005, 00:56:01]