The Anti-Sam Brownback Blog

The GOP is trying to enlist grassroots support (or at least make it look like grassroots support) to pressure Senator Sam Brownback into supporting the nomination of Harriet Miers. The Hew Hampshire Union Leader reports:

The White House effort to try to pressure Brownback and others through prominent Republicans in New Hampshire was first reported yesterday by the New Hampshire Union Leader. White House aides confirmed the account and said a similar effort was being made in Iowa.

Some GOP activists attending a Brownback appearance at St. Anselm College in Manchester Tuesday brought with them a letter to the senator signed by Republican National Committeeman Tom Rath and three others expressing confidence in Miers and asking that she receive fair treatment.

What does this say to me? The White House is desperate and feeling the heat from Brownback’s criticism. This is not about a yes or no vote. This is about Senator Brownback’s ability to fan the fire of indignation that is emanating from the religious conservative base. This also means that their straw polling of conservative Senators is showing support for Senator Brownback’s point of view. If he was all on his own they would paint him as an extremist and forget about it. As it is, Brownback is poised to lead a movement. As far as the White House is concerned, that makes him dangerous.

The laughable part about this whole scheme is that it is being executed in New Hampshire. Realistically, even if in 2008 Senator Brownback was riding high in the polls, he would still count a 3rd place in New Hampshire a victory. Many New Hampshire republicans are ideologically much closer to the libertarians. Brownback’s social conservatism does not poll well there and he has often met with less than enthusiastic crowds while in New Hampshire speaking.

As the initial furor over Mier’s nomination slows, there will likely be a lull in information for the next few weeks until the hearings begin. Additionally, the spectacle of multiple indictments in the Plame case will also increasingly vie for news time. For now, all of the important action is happening behind the scenes. Senator Sam Brownback is busy courting other members of the judiciary committee and feeling out the entire Senate for how they are leaning.

If it looks like there may be widespread opposition then Senator Brownback might want to moderate his crusade and focus his public rhetoric on her qualifications and intellectual capability. he would still be remembered as the first Senator who “got it” and would still be revered by the Christian Fundamentalists but he would avoid making negative impressions on the more moderate wing of the party.

If on the other hand it looks as though there are few Senators who strongly oppose Miers Senator Brownback will want to radicalize his public statements and focus more on his misgivings with her possible votes on social issues. If she turns out to be a shoe-in then there will be less press and he can carefully target his extremist message to those who will appreciate it.

I personally think there will be widespread opposition and believe that we will see Senator Brownback begin to moderate his tone an focus on her lacking credentials as a judge rather than her lacking credentials as a Christian Fundamentalist.

Pat Robertson of the 700 Club today threatened those who oppose Miers (ie Senator Sam Brownback). Via PFAW:

Robertson concluded by noting: “These so-called movement conservatives don’t have much of a following, the ones that I’m aware of. And you just marvel, these are the senators, some of them who voted to confirm the general counsel of the ACLU to the Supreme Court, and she was voted in almost unanimously. And you say, now they’re going to turn against a Christian who is a conservative picked by a conservative President and they’re going to vote against her for confirmation.’ Not on your sweet life, if they want to stay in office.

As Kos put it, this is a shot across the bow of the U.S.S. Senator Sam Brownback. It certainly devolves the discourse. Previously Senators like Brownback refrained from attacking those who support Miers and vice versa.

The real question is why would Robertson come out so strong. These were not gentle, nuanced words but incendiary grenades meant to get press and send a message. He must feel something is at stake. The obvious answer would be that he thinks Harriet Miers would be a strong social conservative judge. This may well be the case, but I also get the feeling that he was providing damage control for the White House. I don’t think he would have come out as strong on his own, at least publicly. He may be less concerned with the nomination of Harriet Miers than keeping his access to the President.

It seems that Senator Sam Brownback has some allies on the judiciary committee. While the Senators have previously publicly withheld their judgment, it appears that Senator Brownback’s views are shared by many of the aides and lawyers helping the committee prepare. From tomorrow’s New York Times:

As the White House seeks to rally senators behind the Supreme Court nomination of Harriet E. Miers, lawyers for the Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee are expressing dissatisfaction with the choice and pushing back against her, aides to 6 of the 10 Republican committee members said yesterday.

“Everybody is hoping that something will happen on Miers, either that the president would withdraw her or she would realize she is not up to it and pull out while she has some dignity intact,” a lawyer to a Republican committee member said.

These aides are not only “not convinced” about Miers, they are openly hostile. I don’t think I need to state just how much Senators rely on their aides for advice and counsel. The aides are enormously influential. Additionally, it appears that the republican Senators on the Judiciary committee are preparing for a fight. Not against the Democrats but against the President and his choice.

Republican staff members on the Judiciary Committee usually research and prepare arguments to defend the president’s nominees. But Republican staff members on the panel said committee lawyers were doing research to rebut the “talking points” the White House has provided for senators to support Ms. Miers’s nomination.

Why is this important to Senator Brownback’s eventual presidential run? This could legitimize his point of view as well as showing him in a leadership role. If he turns out to be the head of a coalition of conservative senators his profile will not only be that of an arch-conservative but also that of a leader who rides into battle for principle and can convince and inspire those around him.

For the moment it looks like Senator Brownback’s gamble has paid off. If conservatives on the committee end up joining him in dissent he will be remembered as the pioneer.

The Washington Times reported today that half of Senate Republicans remain doubtful about the President’s choice of Harriet Miers for the Supreme court:

What’s troubling for President Bush, however, is that 27 Republican senators — almost half of his party’s members in the chamber — have publicly expressed specific doubts about Miss Miers or said they must withhold any support whatsoever for her nomination until after the hearings.

Realistically speaking, most of the Senators that expressed their doubt to the Washington Times personally don’t care if Miers is installed on the court. This doubt is reflective of uncertainty about Brownback and whether he is going to mount a Christian Fundamentalist crusade against Miers. If he chooses that route, other conservative Senators don’t want to find themselves on the wrong side of righteous indignation.

All of this must feel weird to Brownback. He has never distinguished himself in the Senate and never had the spotlight. While some of his supporters claim this as positive “character” trait, I would claim he has alienated enough people on the hill that it is hard for him to advance any sort of agenda. Senator Brownback is not known for making compromises.

From the Financial Times:

Mr Specter insisted his committee would investigate whether there had been what he called a “back room deal” between Ms Miers and Mr Bush, committing her to overturn Roe v Wade. James Dobson of the leading social conservative group Focus on the Family has said he believes Ms Miers opposes abortion, based on conversations he has had with the White House. Senator Patrick Leahy, the ranking Democrat on the Senate judiciary committee, said Ms Miers told him she had given no such assurances.

Things are getting interesting. Dobson could possibly be subpoenaed by the judiciary committee. Does he actually have information or is he just lying?

Additionally, Brownback was interviewed on CBS’s Face the Nation and had this to say about the nomination:

But on the court, when–I think what you’re seeing are two things going on. Number one, a lot of us wanted to see somebody that was a well-formed jurist so that they had a track record of what they would do in key cases coming in front of the court. And we could have a debate with the country and within the Senate about what this means, if a person has already ruled, say, on some of the key cases of the day, and have that discussion. Harriet Miers doesn’t have that track record and doesn’t seem to be well-formed in her judicial philosophy, having never been on the bench.

And over a period of time–and this is the second point of what’s going on–is jurists have tended–that have been appointed by Republican presidents, to veer to the left over a period of time if they’re not well-formed in their judicial philosophy. And I think you’re seeing both of these at play: one, not a clear philosophical position; and number two, the potential over time of veering to the left.

All of this is pretty standard and nothing new. The Christian fundamentalists are very afraid of another David Souter. He is the bogeyman that haunts their dreams of a dominionist nation. By tapping into that frustration and fear, Senator Brownback is establishing himself as a “normal guy” with the Christian right. The more interesting part of the interview was later when Scheiffer asked:

After talking to her up at the Capitol this week you said publicly only that she’s a nice lady, and I’m told that you told some in private, according to Newsweek magazine, the confirmation hearings are going to `cut her up.’ Is that accurate?

Senator Brownback responded, “That… statement is not accurate.” I heard something very similar yesterday evening from an e-mail tip but with different wording. According to the tipster Brownback said the confirmation hearings are going to “chew her up”. So take it as you will… but it seems as though Brownback is worried about her intellectual ability. As he should be.

Being the weekend, there is not much news on Senator Sam Brownback and the nomination of Harriet Miers. Most newspapers are running a compendium of quotes from the past week, focusing of the deepening rift in the Republican party. No one seems to be willing to make foolish guesses as to what will happen in the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings. Being that I am full of foolish guesses I see the following scenarios.:

1. Miers withdraws her nomination citing her mother’s failing health. Her mother’s health has been noted in several places and gives a face saving way of quitting the nomination fight. This would occur if conservative continues to grow. Likely the tipping point would be Dobson and his ilk reversing their earlier endorsements in the face of overwhelming grassroots opposition. I don’t see this as very likely, but it is an option to start all over. Then the White House would be forced to nominate an extremely conservative candidate. This would provide the fight the social conservatives want and re-solidify their support of the mainstream republican party. Brownback would be a winner in this scenario because he could claim he led the fight against Miers.
2. The nomination is killed in committee. This would occur if the White House continues its game of innuendo that has pleased no one. By continuing to hint that Miers may be anti-choice they run the risk of alienating the moderate Democrats (and Arlen Specter) that have expressed guarded support. At the same time Senators Brownback (KS) and Coburn (OK) seem to be demanding an outright declaration of hostility towards Roe. This could lead to Brownback, Coburn and Specter joining the Democrats in voting no in committee. Brownback and Coburn would be hoping the replacement nominee would be openly conservative and the Democrats and Specter would be hoping that an openly conservative nominee would be filibustered on the Senate floor. I think this has a moderate chance of happening. It really depends on the Democrats. If they think a full Senate filibuster of the next (hypothetically uber-conservative) nominee would be broken by the nuclear option or shot down by the Gang of Fourteen then they may want to stick with Miers. They also may be thinking that given Mier’s lack of knowledge regarding constitutional law it could be a boon for the Democrats to attack her on the Senate floor and show the country how she is completely unqualified.
3. The nomination is sent to the full Senate without a recommendation. This occurs when the committee votes 10-10 and would occur if Brownback and Coburn sided with all of the Democrats and Specter refused to jump ship or if Brownback and Specter defected leaving Coburn. This is also moderately likely. It again relies completely on the innuendo game referenced above and the grassroots of both sides.
4. The nomination is sent to the full Senate with recommendation. I think this is the most likely outcome. I think Brownback and Coburn will vote against Miers in committee, but Specter will vote for her as well as some moderate Democrats (Leahy et al). Then it will come to a floor fight with the full Senate. There are so many options from that point that I don’t want to speculate. Frankly, I think this avenue is the best for Democrats. It should be fun to eviscerate Mier’s credentials on the Senate floor.

It all comes down to exactly how much we learn about Harriet Miers in the next few weeks before the judiciary hearing. The Bush administration will attempt to continue to walk the tightrope of little information. It remains to be seen whether their base will allow it.

crossposted at the KU Young Democrats Blog

As I mentioned earlier, Senator Sam Brownback met today one-on-one with Harriet Miers. Tomorrow’s New York Times describes the meeting:

…Sam Brownback, Republican of Kansas, told reporters that in an hourlong meeting with him, Ms. Miers had steered clear of discussing Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that found a constitutional right to abortion, and had done little to assure him that she would be open to revisiting or overturning that case.

Brownback has stuck to his guns and is now rewarded with the kind of national attention he so desperately needs for his 2008 Presidential bid. The front page of the New York Times sets the agenda for the next day’s news cycle. Brownback is now big time.

The New York Times continues the analysis:

The Kansas senator is important for two reasons. First, he is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and it would be an embarrassment to President Bush if a Republican on the panel voted against Ms. Miers. Second, Mr. Brownback, a possible presidential candidate in 2008, is considered a leading voice for conservatives in the Senate. Should he vote against Ms. Miers, other Republicans contemplating White House bids could feel compelled to follow.

This vote is what will separate Brownback from McCain and other so-called moderates. I doubt many other GOP senators will bolt from the nomination, and that will be to Senator Brownback’s advantage. The more he appears as a lone crusader for the religious right, the better his chances are in the GOP primary.

From the Associated Press:

“There’s precious little to go on and a deep concern that this would be a Souter-type candidate,'’ Brownback said, referring to Supreme Court Justice David Souter, a little-known judge nominated for the court by the first President Bush who later turned out to be liberal on the bench.

“The circumstances seem to be very similar,'’ said Brownback, who will meet with Miers on Thursday. “Not much track record, people vouching for her, yet indications of a different thought pattern earlier in life.'’

Ouch. Talk about a code word for the religious right. Senator Brownback invoking the hatred of the conservatives over David Souter shows that he is bringing out the big guns.

It seems that Senator Brownback is still pushing forward on his plan to oppose Harriet Miers. I am eager to hear news of his meeting with her today and I find it interesting that the White House waited so long to arrange a meeting with a prominent conservative detractor. If Brownback comes out of this meeting praising Miers, we will know that she has promised him plenty. A turnaround at this point would be stunning.