Stopping Haynes is Necessary

Conservatives place their all behind William Haynes

5 June 2006

Source: Washington Post

The turn of conservative groups to knocking Sen. Graham for using his judgement to solve a problem is alarming. He was part of the historic Group of 14 and now is being derided for standing on principle and blocking Fourth Circuit nominee William James Haynes becasue of concerns and questions about the torture policy that he supported in Defense Department memos.

The Committee for Justice, who isnow trying to persuade Sen. Graham to allow a Committee vote on Mr. Haynes dod no such service to the stalled nominees of President Clinton. In fact their appraoch was quite different, they recoomeended a discharge petition be filed from a majority of the Senators on the floor. Now they are doing no such thing because they want to make a point about Sen. Graham: He does not support an up-or-down vote on nomiees. This is incorrect his floor speeches from 2003 and participation in the Compromise show his support for an up-or-down vote.

Lindsey Graham is now Sen. Graham becasue he ran opposed to obstruction through filibusters or the use of Senate Rule XXII once a nominee was on the floor. He never said that he was against use of committee procedure to block the nomination, which is where it should be done when concerns and questions arise about a nominee. He does remeber that he is for an up-or-down vote.

If Sen. Graham says he is not formally blocking Mr. Haynes, than I believe him. The main concern is over the advice he gave the administration on the treatment of detainees while he was the General Counsel for the Department of Defense. These are valid concerns and questions for all Senators. It is also a valid reason to block the nomination in Committee rather than having a politically charged that focuses on the torture issue and paints all those who vote for Mr. Haynes as in support of detainee torture. Sen. Graham is trying to save the party and America the embarassment of confirming this judge if there is even a majority of floor support. If a majority od Senators support the nomination then they should sign for him to be discharged from committee.

Mr. Haynes has languished since 2003 becasue of the concerns about torture and the memos.

This opposition on one of the pet peeves of his base shows extraordinary courage and a willingness to stand for basic principles. Someimes principles come into conflict as they have in the case of Mr. Haynes, where an up-or-down vote goes against not torturing people. It is that simple. Sen. Graham standing up against torture is at this point more important than facilitating an up-or-down vote.

Sen. Graham needs to stand strong, which I have no reason to beilieve that he will cave in to pressure, and say once again to the base you are wrong. He was able to accomplish this after joining the Group of 14 that prevented the nuclear option.

Thomas Ravenel is used as a threat to attempt to coral Sen. Graham into a box so that he does not show his wonderful independence. In fact Mr. Ravenel has shown up on the radar before both when he wrote a open letter to Sen. Graham in 2005 that demanded confirmation of all the presidents judicial nominees and before that every time he votes against a trade agreement. Mr. Ravenel always says when he speaks out that he "may mount" a primary challenge in 2008.

The groups are hypocritical if they expect Mr. McCain to abandon his stand against torture just to satisfy a desire to confirm a presidential nominee. They need to think more fairly about these issues becasue they are overpoliticizing the process.