- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
Obama Answers Letter, Rebuked By Specter
Email
ShareApril 16, 2008 1:05 PM
ABC News' Z. Byron Wolf Reports: Sen. Arlen Specter is holding a press conference Wednesday to discuss his Hodgkin's recurrence, but true to his new book "Never Give In," he spent the morning discussing judicial nominations on the Senate floor.
The Pennsylvania senator is the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee and has been trying to bring more attention to judicial nominations stalled on Capitol Hill.
Last week, in order to bring some media attention to the issue, Specter suggested senators sign a petition to take responsibility for initial consideration of three nominees away from the judiciary committee, and wrote letters to all three presidential candidates asking for their opinion.
The letters - which he released yesterday to the media - each included a hand-scrawled "Good Luck!" after his signature (presumably, the sentiment was most genuine for Sen. John McCain, the Republican candidate).
But only Sen. Barack Obama responded.
Obama, who pointed out in a letter that he doesn't sit on the Judiciary Committee, didn't take a position on discharging the nominees from committee consideration (or lack thereof).
The chairman of the Judicial Committee, after all, is Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-VT, one of Obama's most vocal supporters. So it would be surprising not only for Obama to go against Democrats generally on the issue, but more so for him to cross Leahy, who is in charge of scheduling hearings for the stalled nominees.
"As a former constitution law instructor," Obama wrote, "I fully appreciate the important work that our federal judges do and the need to fill judicial vacancies. However, I have great respect for the Senate's constitutional advice and consent role in the confirmation of these judges."
Obama goes on to say he'll defer to Leahy to schedule hearings and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to schedule votes.
On that point, there is some hope for stalled judicial nominees. A deal hatched between Leahy, Michigan Democrats and President George W. Bush to consider one of President Bill Clinton's blocked nominees from eight years ago in exchange for considering one of Bush's nominees right now was announced Tuesday.
Reid has pledged to hold three votes on circuit court nominees before the summer, but none of the three judges Spector wrote about to the presidential candidates is included in the deal.
Obama's response drew criticism from Spector Wednesday morning on the Senate floor even though the Illinois senator was the only one to respond.
"A senator's duties are not delegable. No senator can delegate to anyone else his constitutional responsibilities. The constitution does not refer to the judiciary committee. The constitution does not refer to the majority leader," Specter declared.
"Even if it did, that would not provide a basis for a senator duly elected, sworn, sworn to uphold the constitution, as I took an oath on five occasions, and as senator Obama has taken an oath," he continued.
"Every member of this body has taken an oath to uphold the constitution. The constitution says the Senate confirms."
April 16, 2008 in Kucinich, Dennis | Permalink | User Comments (81)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
geevil and WestCoastMessanger at least Obama has responded and that is a real courtesy between senators. Where is the Hill the Bosnian General's reply and where is' McNasty's response, no where. Obama has told Spector where to go if he needs help and some acceleration in the nomination process. But Spector is wrong in his reply and as usual he is playing partisan politics. God bless America and God bless Obama. OBAMA08.
Posted by: BKMC | Apr 16, 2008 2:06:06 PM
This question is for those of you on here saying Obama should be Vice-President before running for the Presidency:
How many vice-presidents have been ELECTED to be President of the United States after having served as vice-president?
Posted by: Susan | Apr 16, 2008 2:06:59 PM
Obama will be dreaming if he expects Hillary supporters will vote for him in he is the nominee.
McCain to be the next president. My gutt tells me he will pick Tom Ridge for the VP sport, ex PA governer.
McCain will cary OH, PA and FL easily.
Good Luck Obama suckers, just keep dreaming. We will never elect a marxist as our next president.
Posted by: Paul | Apr 16, 2008 2:10:19 PM
Voters are SICK of NON-ISSUES!
Have the Clintons learned NOTHING?
Posted by: Sam | Apr 16, 2008 2:13:35 PM
Susan, it is the only chance for either one of them to get a democratic white house. Divided they fail.
Posted by: justme | Apr 16, 2008 2:15:43 PM
Does anyone else wonder why the "typical white women" in Obama's life - his Grandmother and Mother - are UN-typically silent and absent from the campaign?
Something doesn't smell right about that!
Posted by: SM | Apr 16, 2008 2:17:06 PM
SM, Barack's mother died of cancer. His grandmother did make a short ad for him.
Posted by: justme | Apr 16, 2008 2:19:28 PM
OK, neither candidate is perfect, but together they would be unbeatable.
Posted by: justme | Apr 16, 2008 2:20:34 PM
No matter how much you keep pushing for Obama/Clinton it's not going to happen. He has much better options available to him for VP candidate.
Posted by: Kevin | Apr 16, 2008 2:24:09 PM
WE the democrats will not have the white house, IF we cann't come together.
Posted by: justme | Apr 16, 2008 2:26:43 PM
I agree - stop pushing the Obama-Clinton ticket. Clinton has much better options.
Posted by: Alan | Apr 16, 2008 2:26:52 PM
Hillary supporters can connect more with McCain than Obama, call them "the bitter people who cling to guns, religion, anti trade, anti immigration and antipathy to people who do not look like them"
Posted by: Rick | Apr 16, 2008 2:27:41 PM
I don't think Clinton (as much as I want it) will get the nomination and even if she does she could lose Obama supporters, same as Obama will lose Clinton supporters and FL and MI. It should be Clinton/Obama. That gives us 16 years.
Posted by: justme | Apr 16, 2008 2:29:05 PM
Probably the same reason that people in most countries of the world are working towards and hoping that Obama is taking the oath in January. It's time for the view of the United States to change and McCain/Clinton are not in a position to implement the change. Treating the world like subordinates of the United States hasn't gone over well all these years, it's time for us to try being a member of the world community again rather than trying to dictate it. There's too much political baggage with Clinton and McCain is sworn to continue down the path of destruction that Bush has implemented.
Posted by: Kevin | Apr 16, 2008 2:36:21 PM
Kevin, Obama cannot win the white house without Hillary. Hillary cannot win the white house without Obama. Obama needs to be vetted, and HE NEEDS MORE EXPERIENCE, his resume is just too thin. But, if he had eight years as vice president he would gain the experience to be president.
Posted by: justme | Apr 16, 2008 2:39:54 PM
"Treating the world like subordinates of the United States hasn't gone over well all these years, it's time for us to try being a member of the world community again rather than trying to dictate it. There's too much political baggage with Clinton and McCain is sworn to continue down the path of destruction that Bush has implemented."
Keving: AMEN!
Posted by: Susan | Apr 16, 2008 2:41:00 PM
Kevin - Pray tell of this change? Please outline all the world changes under a Obama administration. Pull troops out of Iraq? When? Iran nukes? Israel? North Korea? China? India? NATO? NAFTA? World trade policy? Energy costs? I'll stop there and add more later.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | Apr 16, 2008 2:41:10 PM
justme
So you suggest that the more moderate Clinton supports give up their principle's to vote for someone who has a real vacuum in his legislative experience and whose paradigm is far far to the left? Better to vote for Nader.
Posted by: Aston | Apr 16, 2008 2:41:17 PM
That's funny, the polls are currently showing Obama beating McCain and that's with McCain having a free ride to this point. Those same polls are showing Clinton losing to McCain, but again with a free ride on the republican side. If Obama is beating McCain without even campaigning against him, I'm pretty confident that he stands a much better then average chance in November. After all, he took out the Clinton "machine" that was up by 40% in the polls and considered "inevitable" just about 7 months ago by introducing himself to the country.
Posted by: Kevin | Apr 16, 2008 2:42:56 PM
Who wants a democratic white house?????
Posted by: justme | Apr 16, 2008 2:42:58 PM
Post a comment
