This makes me want to grab these people and ask them what country do they really want to live in. I realize it is their right, but the strong socialist fervor here is frightning.....I mean, if they could, they will claim that Ashcroft was riding in the Ryder truck with Timothy McVeigh if they thought it might stick....
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york011001.shtml
National Review
1/10/01 10:40 a.m.
Inside the Anti-Ashcroft War Room
They’re vowing to make this one bigger than Bork.
Inside the Anti-Ashcroft War Room
They're vowing to make this one bigger than Bork.
By Byron York, NR's White House correspondent
"We are here this morning to announce the formation of an extraordinary and unprecedented nationwide campaign of coalitions representing over 200 national organizations to oppose the nomination of John Ashcroft to be the attorney general of the United States," said Wade Henderson, head of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, at a news conference in Washington Tuesday.
He wasn't kidding. For the gathering, Henderson and his allies assembled representatives from nearly every liberal interest group in the country. But the public announcement was just a photo-op; the real work took place after the cameras stopped rolling, when Henderson and dozens of fellow activists held a secret meeting to plan their anti-Ashcroft campaign. From eyewitness accounts of that meeting, along with confidential documents distributed to participants, it's possible to sketch the outlines of a strategy that is indeed extraordinary - and which might make the Ashcroft confirmation the most contentious ever.
The gathering was held at the headquarters of the American Association of University Women, a tax-exempt charitable organization that bills itself as non-partisan and dedicated to advancing "education, research, and self-development for women." About 80 people packed a conference room, crowding around a large table, against the walls, and lining out the door. Among those taking part were representatives from People for the American Way, the NAACP, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the National Organization for Women, the National Abortion Rights Action League, Feminist Majority, the Human Rights Campaign, the AFL-CIO, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Workers, the National Education Association, Handgun Control, the American Association of University Women, the National Black Women's Health Project, Planned Parenthood, the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy, the Sierra Club, the American Bar Association, the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Also present were staffers from leading Senate Democrats, as well as the Senate Democratic Policy Committee.
According to people who were present, there was a nearly palpable sense of urgency and opportunity in the room. Several participants observed that the project was the biggest since the successful campaign to derail the Supreme Court nomination of Robert Bork. The group took little notice of other troubled Bush nominees, even on the day that Linda Chavez withdrew her name from consideration as labor secretary-designate. Ashcroft is the big one, they said, and we've got to make this a concerted effort.
The most important issue, of course, was an assessment of votes in the Senate. Organizers passed out a confidential draft of an "Ashcroft Target List" which divided the Senate into five categories: those definitely opposed to Ashcroft, those leaning against him, the undecided, those leaning for Ashcroft, and those definitely for him. Every Democrat except two was listed as against or leaning against Ashcroft (the two Democratic undecideds were Georgia's Zell Miller and Nebraska's Ben Nelson, both newly elected). What raised the hopes of many in the room was the fact that five Republicans - Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, and James Jeffords of Vermont - were listed as undecided. They were said to be "in play" and will be the targets of especially intense lobbying.
But how to do it? There was a debate over whether to press for immediate confirmation hearings or wait a few weeks to allow the controversy to build. Eleanor Smeal of Feminist Majority suggested a delaying tactic that would give the groups time to gather more information and momentum, but most other participants seemed to favor early hearings. They were especially anxious for the hearings to begin next week so that Vermont Democrat Patrick Leahy, who is chairman of the Judiciary Committee until January 20, would preside. (They didn't know it at the time, but they had already gotten their wish; not long after the meeting, the temporarily-Democratic Senate Judiciary Committee announced the Ashcroft hearings will begin next Tuesday.)
To get things going, and to make sure that effort is not duplicated, the meeting leaders established a set of committees, each of which was assigned to handle a specific task. They created a lobbying committee, a media committee, a research committee, and several others. The NAACP, which has already done extensive research on Ashcroft, was chosen to concentrate on his opposition to the nomination of black judge Ronnie White. The AFL-CIO will comb through a list of Ashcroft's travel while he was a senator, apparently in search of visits to "far-right" organizations. NARAL will focus on Ashcroft's record on women's issues. People for the American Way will help coordinate it all.
And the effort will go far beyond Ashcroft's time in the Senate. According to witnesses, the group spent a significant part of its time discussing Ashcroft's home-state record. The activists, says a person who was there, "are going back to every case that happened in Missouri during his tenure as attorney general and governor, every case he was in any way connected to."
As reported by NRO on Monday, the group is receiving help from veterans of the late Mel Carnahan's bitter race against Ashcroft last year. Many of the charges that are now being directed against Ashcroft were issues in that race, and the Carnahan forces were known to hold a particularly passionate animosity toward Ashcroft, which makes them good friends of the interest groups. "The Carnahan campaign has been so generous," one organizer said. But others stressed that Jean Carnahan, the governor's widow who is now senator from Missouri, plans to keep a low profile in the controversy and will not openly associate herself with the anti-Ashcroft movement - even as her supporters play an active role in it.
Because of the intensely political nature of the battle, some participants expressed concern about their groups' participation - after all, many of them are tax-exempt, supposedly non-partisan 501(c)(3) organizations. "A lot of you have asked me, because you're foundations and non-profits, what you can and cannot do," one organizer told the crowd. The group had an expert on hand to reassure the activists that there are ways to tailor their roles in the stop-Ashcroft movement to make them appear completely within the law. Many foundations, for example, list their mission as conducting "research" for whatever cause they espouse - and what is the Ashcroft campaign if not "research" into an issue of great public importance?
As the meeting dragged on, an overall strategy began to emerge. As they have in so many previous fights, the advocacy groups decided to adopt the theme that Ashcroft is "extreme" - even "extreme among extremists," as one said. "This is a man whose record you've heard is so extreme, so out of the mainstream, that it would be incredibly irresponsible for any of us, any one of our organizations, not to step forward and fight against this nomination," Kate Michelman of NARAL said at the groups' news conference. Added Mike Barnes of Handgun Control: "Mr. Ashcroft apparently believes in the so-called insurrectionist interpretation of the Second Amendment. This is the same extremist theory subscribed to by Timothy McVeigh and so-called militia groups."
While that might seem silly were it not in so serious a context, it is no doubt just a preview of what is to come. And what is striking about the anti-Ashcroft effort is the sheer imbalance of the fight. There is no pro-Ashcroft coalition, and there is no conservative group with the clout and resources to match the biggest organizations aligned against the attorney general-designate. Unless George W. Bush decides to devote his full strength to pushing the nomination through the Senate, John Ashcroft might find himself all alone against overwhelming firepower.
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york011001.shtml
National Review
1/10/01 10:40 a.m.
Inside the Anti-Ashcroft War Room
They’re vowing to make this one bigger than Bork.
Inside the Anti-Ashcroft War Room
They're vowing to make this one bigger than Bork.
By Byron York, NR's White House correspondent
"We are here this morning to announce the formation of an extraordinary and unprecedented nationwide campaign of coalitions representing over 200 national organizations to oppose the nomination of John Ashcroft to be the attorney general of the United States," said Wade Henderson, head of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, at a news conference in Washington Tuesday.
He wasn't kidding. For the gathering, Henderson and his allies assembled representatives from nearly every liberal interest group in the country. But the public announcement was just a photo-op; the real work took place after the cameras stopped rolling, when Henderson and dozens of fellow activists held a secret meeting to plan their anti-Ashcroft campaign. From eyewitness accounts of that meeting, along with confidential documents distributed to participants, it's possible to sketch the outlines of a strategy that is indeed extraordinary - and which might make the Ashcroft confirmation the most contentious ever.
The gathering was held at the headquarters of the American Association of University Women, a tax-exempt charitable organization that bills itself as non-partisan and dedicated to advancing "education, research, and self-development for women." About 80 people packed a conference room, crowding around a large table, against the walls, and lining out the door. Among those taking part were representatives from People for the American Way, the NAACP, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the National Organization for Women, the National Abortion Rights Action League, Feminist Majority, the Human Rights Campaign, the AFL-CIO, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Workers, the National Education Association, Handgun Control, the American Association of University Women, the National Black Women's Health Project, Planned Parenthood, the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy, the Sierra Club, the American Bar Association, the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Also present were staffers from leading Senate Democrats, as well as the Senate Democratic Policy Committee.
According to people who were present, there was a nearly palpable sense of urgency and opportunity in the room. Several participants observed that the project was the biggest since the successful campaign to derail the Supreme Court nomination of Robert Bork. The group took little notice of other troubled Bush nominees, even on the day that Linda Chavez withdrew her name from consideration as labor secretary-designate. Ashcroft is the big one, they said, and we've got to make this a concerted effort.
The most important issue, of course, was an assessment of votes in the Senate. Organizers passed out a confidential draft of an "Ashcroft Target List" which divided the Senate into five categories: those definitely opposed to Ashcroft, those leaning against him, the undecided, those leaning for Ashcroft, and those definitely for him. Every Democrat except two was listed as against or leaning against Ashcroft (the two Democratic undecideds were Georgia's Zell Miller and Nebraska's Ben Nelson, both newly elected). What raised the hopes of many in the room was the fact that five Republicans - Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, and James Jeffords of Vermont - were listed as undecided. They were said to be "in play" and will be the targets of especially intense lobbying.
But how to do it? There was a debate over whether to press for immediate confirmation hearings or wait a few weeks to allow the controversy to build. Eleanor Smeal of Feminist Majority suggested a delaying tactic that would give the groups time to gather more information and momentum, but most other participants seemed to favor early hearings. They were especially anxious for the hearings to begin next week so that Vermont Democrat Patrick Leahy, who is chairman of the Judiciary Committee until January 20, would preside. (They didn't know it at the time, but they had already gotten their wish; not long after the meeting, the temporarily-Democratic Senate Judiciary Committee announced the Ashcroft hearings will begin next Tuesday.)
To get things going, and to make sure that effort is not duplicated, the meeting leaders established a set of committees, each of which was assigned to handle a specific task. They created a lobbying committee, a media committee, a research committee, and several others. The NAACP, which has already done extensive research on Ashcroft, was chosen to concentrate on his opposition to the nomination of black judge Ronnie White. The AFL-CIO will comb through a list of Ashcroft's travel while he was a senator, apparently in search of visits to "far-right" organizations. NARAL will focus on Ashcroft's record on women's issues. People for the American Way will help coordinate it all.
And the effort will go far beyond Ashcroft's time in the Senate. According to witnesses, the group spent a significant part of its time discussing Ashcroft's home-state record. The activists, says a person who was there, "are going back to every case that happened in Missouri during his tenure as attorney general and governor, every case he was in any way connected to."
As reported by NRO on Monday, the group is receiving help from veterans of the late Mel Carnahan's bitter race against Ashcroft last year. Many of the charges that are now being directed against Ashcroft were issues in that race, and the Carnahan forces were known to hold a particularly passionate animosity toward Ashcroft, which makes them good friends of the interest groups. "The Carnahan campaign has been so generous," one organizer said. But others stressed that Jean Carnahan, the governor's widow who is now senator from Missouri, plans to keep a low profile in the controversy and will not openly associate herself with the anti-Ashcroft movement - even as her supporters play an active role in it.
Because of the intensely political nature of the battle, some participants expressed concern about their groups' participation - after all, many of them are tax-exempt, supposedly non-partisan 501(c)(3) organizations. "A lot of you have asked me, because you're foundations and non-profits, what you can and cannot do," one organizer told the crowd. The group had an expert on hand to reassure the activists that there are ways to tailor their roles in the stop-Ashcroft movement to make them appear completely within the law. Many foundations, for example, list their mission as conducting "research" for whatever cause they espouse - and what is the Ashcroft campaign if not "research" into an issue of great public importance?
As the meeting dragged on, an overall strategy began to emerge. As they have in so many previous fights, the advocacy groups decided to adopt the theme that Ashcroft is "extreme" - even "extreme among extremists," as one said. "This is a man whose record you've heard is so extreme, so out of the mainstream, that it would be incredibly irresponsible for any of us, any one of our organizations, not to step forward and fight against this nomination," Kate Michelman of NARAL said at the groups' news conference. Added Mike Barnes of Handgun Control: "Mr. Ashcroft apparently believes in the so-called insurrectionist interpretation of the Second Amendment. This is the same extremist theory subscribed to by Timothy McVeigh and so-called militia groups."
While that might seem silly were it not in so serious a context, it is no doubt just a preview of what is to come. And what is striking about the anti-Ashcroft effort is the sheer imbalance of the fight. There is no pro-Ashcroft coalition, and there is no conservative group with the clout and resources to match the biggest organizations aligned against the attorney general-designate. Unless George W. Bush decides to devote his full strength to pushing the nomination through the Senate, John Ashcroft might find himself all alone against overwhelming firepower.
