The Religious Consultation
|
|
New York Times , August 26, 2005 Lone Woman on
Committee Feels Pull of Further Duty in Roberts
Hearings LOS ANGELES, Aug. 25 - It was the sight of Anita F. Hill being brusquely questioned by an all-male Senate Judiciary Committee about her sexual harassment charges against Clarence Thomas, then a United States Supreme Court nominee, that helped propel Dianne Feinstein into the Senate in 1992. In the years since, Mrs. Feinstein, a Democrat from California, has carved out an identity as a moderate who can work with both parties. She has backed some of President Bush's agenda while also remaining popular in her largely Democratic home state, where she typically earns the highest approval ratings of any elected official. But now Mrs. Feinstein, 72, is the only woman on the Judiciary Committee as it considers the first conservative nominee to the Supreme Court and the first to be challenged by abortion rights groups and other liberal groups since Justice Thomas was confirmed in 1991. That has placed Mrs. Feinstein at the center of a political maelstrom, with Democrats split over how aggressively to challenge the nominee, Judge John G. Roberts Jr., and some liberals saying they worry that Mrs. Feinstein is not the standard bearer they need to help turn the tide against him. "I think Dianne is more interested in protecting her centrist credentials than her feminist credentials," said Representative Maxine Waters, a fellow California Democrat, who said she "expects nothing" of Mrs. Feinstein in the hearings because the judge's confirmation "has already been decided" behind closed doors. "Her politics are centrist," Ms. Waters said, "or making sure she is not identified as being too strong a Democrat and making sure she has some Republican credentials. That's her political image and identification." Mrs. Feinstein says she is not unnerved by the political crosswinds. "I have resisted pressure points," she said after delivering a speech on Judge Roberts here this week. "I have rebuffed them from the beginning, and stay away," Mrs. Feinstein said of the various groups trying to influence her and the proceedings. "I'm not a newcomer to the committee. I have been through two Supreme Court hearings. I know what they are. I know what they should be. I know we have to do our due diligence." But the pressure is certainly there, particularly from groups that favor abortion rights. Ellen R. Malcolm, president of Emily's List, a fund-raising and advocacy group for Democratic women who support abortion rights, said she had had several conversations with Ms. Feinstein about the Roberts nomination. Emily's List was instrumental in raising money for Mrs. Feinstein and the three other women first elected to the Senate in 1992, the so-called Year of the Woman for Democrats. Ms. Malcolm said she was convinced that Mrs. Feinstein "will work very hard to understand what's at stake during this confirmation process." She offered no prediction of how Mrs. Feinstein would vote. "I think she wants to hear what Mr. Roberts has to say," Ms. Malcolm said, adding, "A lot of people understand that Senator Feinstein believes in Roe v. Wade and are counting on her to make sure it's not overturned." Colleagues and associates of Mrs. Feinstein say that she is poignantly aware of the expectations surrounding her unique position on the committee and that her mind is not made up on the Roberts nomination. Many of them also acknowledge that she has a strong independent streak and suggest that it would be foolhardy to regard her as a lapdog for any particular interest group or viewpoint. "Dianne is at a stage in her life where she doesn't need to prove anything to anyone," said Representative Zoe Lofgren, Democrat of California, who appeared with Mrs. Feinstein this week in Silicon Valley. "I think there is very little chance that she will posture in a calculated way for political purposes." Many of those concerned about Mrs. Feinstein have private rumblings that sound a similar theme: Though Mrs. Feinstein has always been a public champion of Roe v. Wade, she is not a sure vote on anything, including against a court nominee whose views on women's issues are anathema to many liberals. "As much as it might drive us absolutely bananas," one prominent abortion rights activist said, "if you can convince Dianne Feinstein, you have a much better chance of getting a moderate Republican to follow her lead." Some suggest Mrs. Feinstein has contributed to the anxiety by carefully parsing her words on Roe v. Wade, the case that made abortion legal in 1973 and that many abortion rights advocates fear Judge Roberts would undo. In speeches here and in San Jose this week, Mrs. Feinstein pronounced the paramount importance of determining Judge Roberts's views on the case, but did not pledge to vote against his nomination if he failed that test. "It would be very difficult for me to vote to confirm someone to the Supreme Court whom I knew would overturn Roe v. Wade and return our country to the days of the 1950's," Mrs. Feinstein told a luncheon meeting of the Los Angeles County Bar Association. When asked after the speech why she was not more unequivocal - perhaps saying impossible instead of "very difficult" - she refused to elaborate. "I am not going to go into that," she said. "I said what I meant." Katherine Spillar, executive vice president of Feminist Majority, a group that has announced its opposition to Judge Roberts, said too much was being made of the wiggle room Mrs. Feinstein might have left herself. "I think she is going to ask some very penetrating questions," Ms. Spillar said. "What we need to be concerned about is whether Judge Roberts will answer the questions honestly and fully." The liberal consternation surrounding Mrs. Feinstein began in the very first days following Judge Roberts's nomination in July. The judge paid a visit to Mrs. Feinstein on Capitol Hill, and after an hour or so, they emerged for the cameras, all smiles. Mrs. Feinstein told reporters at that time that she could not imagine Senate Democrats using a filibuster to block the nomination. In her speeches this week, Mrs. Feinstein sought to shore up her credentials on women's issues important to Democrats, while stopping short of saying how she will vote. Mrs. Feinstein insisted that the Senate would "not simply act as a rubber stamp" for the White House. "As the only woman on the committee, I have an additional role to play in representing the views and concerns of 145 million American women during this hearing process," Mrs. Feinstein said. She invoked the memory of the Thomas hearings and what she called the "demeaning treatment" Ms. Hill received. "Well, that day is gone," Mrs. Feinstein said to a thunderous ovation in Los Angeles. "It will not occur again." But the difficulty in professing to represent 145 million women was being illustrated even as Mrs. Feinstein made that promise. In Washington, groups supporting the Roberts nomination, including Women for Roberts, were calling on her to look beyond the base of her party. "For too long, far-leftist organizations consumed with only one agenda, the pro-abortion agenda, have claimed they represent all women in general," Connie Mackey, a vice president at the Family Research Council, said at a news conference. "Message No. 1: They do not." << New York Times -- 8/26/05 >>
|