Chairman Richie stated the following in an e-mail:
Texas Republican Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn are playing politics with Sotomayor's nomination despite the fact that she is clearly more qualified to serve on the Court than many nominees they have supported in the past. They are pandering to the extreme right wing elements of their party and denying our voice in support of her historic nomination. Take action now to make your voice heard today!
If you don't have time to take action immediately, you can forward this e-mail to your friends, families, and neighbors, or contribute to the TDP so we can fight against Hutchison and Cornyn's partisan politics.
Tomorrow, we will send more information (and another slideshow) about Hutchison and Cornyn's opposition to Sotomayor. For now, though, join Texas Democrats across the state in standing in support of Judge Sonia Sotomayor.
Last week, Matt predicted that Senators Hutchison and Cornyn would need to concoct lines of reasoning against the Supreme Court nomination of Sonia Sotomayor, and that they would need to vote against her for political reasons. Well, this morning, John Cornyn officially put himself in that "I'm going to vote against this person purely for political reasons" column.
In the end, Cornyn said he believes "the stakes are too high" for him to support a nominee who might approach important constitutional issues like gun and property rights "from a liberal, activist perspective."
That's been one of the dumbest explanations against the qualifications of a judge for years, and it still is.
Update by KT: Statement from Houston Mayor Bill White, candidate for U.S. Senate:
Senator John Cornyn acknowledged that Sonia Sotomayor has an excellent background, the right temperament, and a record of mainstream decisions. Her life has been an inspiration. Texas' Senator should do what is right for our state and our mainstream values. Senator Cornyn's "no" vote on Sotomayor represents political posturing for one wing of one party, politics as usual. As our next Senator, I will do what's right for Texas.
Judge Sonia Sotomayor represents a political problem for our two Republican U.S. Senators. She is a highly qualified, highly respected, historic pick to the U.S. Supreme Court. It's hard to find something to vote against, but Junior Senator John Cornyn and Senior Senator (soon to be leaving?) Kay Bailey Hutchison, both have to find a reason to vote against her.
Both have to vote against her for two very different reasons. Hutchison because she is likely running for Governor needs to appeal to the extreme right wing of the Texas Republican Party. Cornyn because he is the Senate leader of his failing party and has to appeal to diminishing Republican donor base.
One thing both of them can't do, is agree with sound judgment of a popular Democratic President.
"Cornyn's going to have to repair fences with Hispanics; they are going to be scrutinizing him a lot harder after the way he questioned Sotomayor," said Lionel Sosa, a Texas-based marketing consulting who has created Latino outreach programs for GOP candidates, including George W. Bush.
"I would advise him to be more careful," Sosa added. "He has a fine line to walk between satisfying the conservative base and not alienating Hispanic voters."
Thanks to his opposition to Bush-era immigration reforms, Cornyn already has sub-40 percent approval ratings among Texas Hispanics, who make up about one-third of the voting-age population.
The Texas Democratic Party noticed Kay Bailey Hutchison's hypocrisy and her political problem today.
In an e-mail that went out, they note:
Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison said Monday that she still has questions about the qualifications of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. She said she wouldn't decide on whether to vote to confirm Sotomayor until her hearings are over. "I'm looking to the hearings to clarify some of the questions I have," Hutchison said (Dallas Morning News, July 14,2009).
However, in 1993 Sen. Hutchison told the Dallas Morning News she would support any judge - even someone who was pro-choice - if the nominee was qualified:
Ms. Hutchison said she will not apply any "litmus test" to a nominee, and she indicated in an April debate that she would vote to confirm an abortion-rights supporter if the person is qualified overall. "I would only vote against a Supreme Court nominee if there was a question of character, if the person was unfit for office or unqualified for office," Ms. Hutchison said (Dallas Morning News, May 20, 1993).
Democratic Party Chair Boyd Richie had this to say about KBH's cowardly political posturing.
"I'd like Sen. Kay Hutchison to clarify some questions I have," said Texas Democratic Party Chairman Boyd Richie. "Why is Sen. Hutchison abandoning her commitment to feign concern over Judge Sotomayor, a nominee of unquestionable character with more federal judicial experience than any Supreme Court nominee in 100 years?"
"Unfortunately, the only reason Sen. Hutchison is not 100% behind the most supremely qualified nominee in recent history is that she is just another pandering Republican politician who will abandon any commitment to compete with Rick Perry for the extreme elements that control the Republican Party," concluded Richie.
The Republican Party is showing how hard it is to be the party of no.
Here's a great change -- the U.S. Senate is live-streaming the Sotomayor hearings, and making them available so you can host the video on your blog. Below, you will be able to watch the hearings. Though, today -- according to DailyKos -- you may not see that much in the form of questioning:
If it's Sotomayor you want to hear from, make sure you get lunch first. And maybe a nap. Because although the hearings are expected to be gaveled into session at 10 a.m., the first order of business is opening statements. From the Senators. Nineteen of them. For up to ten minutes apiece. Plus statements of introduction from home state Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirstin Gillibrand.
I got Senator John Cornyn's newsletter in my inbox today, and it contained this tidbit:
Last week I met with Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama’s nominee to the United States Supreme Court, in my Washington office. During our conversation, I assured her that the confirmation process will be fair and dignified, a courtesy that has not always been shown to past Republican nominees. I have significant questions with some of Judge Sotomayor’s court rulings and statements, and I intend to ask her about those thoroughly during her confirmation hearing, which is scheduled for the third week in July.
Part of me wonders if Senator Cornyn can actually control his Republican colleagues and supporters enough, but if he can than I will applaud him for his efforts. Future Supreme Court Justices, especially the most qualified ones, deserve fair and dignified hearings, one would think.
Just a note to Senator Cornyn: we'll be watching. And there will be some things that we watch for:
Accusations that the judge is a racist are not fair or dignified, because she is not a racist and the idea of racism is anything but dignified.
Suggesting that Judge Sotomayor is a racist would be wrong for similar reasons as "racism" accusations.
Because Ms. Sotomayor is an experienced judge, evaluating her primarily on comments made away from the bench is not fair. The most accurate form of evaluation will still be her past rulings.
Using her past experiences and her empathy to make decisions should not be seen by Republicans as a fault. Or did they wrongly support Justice Alito?
Senator Cornyn has the ability to be one of the more influential Republicans for judicial confirmations: he is on the Judiciary Committee, he is a former Texas Supreme Court Justice, and he is running the national senate campaigns. Whether or not he will be able to influence the hearing is not the question. Confirmation hearings void of unfair and undignified accusations from the right, however, would surprise me.
To the extent Judge Sotomayor is treated with fairness and dignity will reflect upon Senator Cornyn's true influence with conservatives as well as the authenticity of his statements thus far.
A couple weeks ago, Katherine wondered whether Senator Hutchison would vote to confirm Judge Sotomayor as the first Latina to the Supreme Court of the United States. Today, after our senior senator met with Ms. Sotomayor, it seems like Ms. Hutchison is wondering, too.
From today's article:
She has remained noncommittal about whether the judge will win her support this time. There could be political implications as Hutchison tries to topple Gov. Rick Perry in the GOP primary next March. Many conservatives oppose Sotomayor, but voting against her could anger Hispanic voters - a fast-growing segment of the Texas population that could be important in the general election. Hutchison said after today’s meeting that she hasn’t yet had a chance to fully review Sotomayor's rulings from her years on the federal bench, and she will "continue to listen and see if I can't get more of an idea on those issues."
So, is Hutchison really taking the time to look through Judge Sotomayor's rulings throughout her years on the bench, which would end with the obvious conclusion that Judge Sotomayor is extremely qualified for the job? Or, perhaps, as both Katherine and Marjorie Korn of the Dallas Morning News mentioned, is she looking at the political consequences?
Perhaps she's doing both, but it's odd she hasn't taken a stand yet, especially because she so easily voted against Sotomayor in 1998. She also is trying to become the next Texas Governor, a person that is supposed to lead, not a person that should pander while taking a long time to make what should be an easy decision.
A verdict on Hutchison is only becoming more clear; one that we already know at the Burnt Orange Report...
Last week I reported on Texas Republicans embrace of Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich (or at least their money) even as these far-right players made racial attacks on the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor. I made reference to Limbaugh's attendance at a fundraiser for Rep. Michael McCaul where he was made an honorary Texan by Gov. Rick Perry.
I know a number of local Democrats were interested in seeing video from that private event which McCaul was hiding the location of until the last minute. Well, Gov. Perry was so kind as to have his staff take video of the event and posted his speech and shoutout of "God Bless Rush Limbaugh" to his campaign's YouTube channel. And McCaul? He's standing by the entire time clapping and grinning at the whole scene. Watch it for yourself.
This isn't a case of guilt by association or proximity (though I can't imagine wanting to be in close proximity to Rush Limbaugh metaphorically or physically). McCaul has yet to repudiate or distance himself from the racially inflamed comments made by Limbaugh and Gingrich which even RNSC chair Sen. John Cornyn has distanced himself from calling them "terrible" and "not the kind of tone that any of us want to set".
And while Limbaugh is still set to headline Cornyn's fundraiser for the RNSC, McCaul is set to benefit from the House Republican committee's fundraiser with Newt Gingrich the same day, next Monday. The DCCC asks the prescient question.
"For five days, Representative Michael McCaul had a simple choice to make: He could strongly denounce Newt Gingrich's shameful rhetoric or stay silent and just take his money," said Ryan Rudominer, National Press Secretary for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "With five days to go until the fundraising dinner with Gingrich, will Representative Michael McCaul finally speak out against the radical right or continue to remain silent and take their campaign cash?"
"We don't have enough Republicans to filibuster even if we wanted to, which I don't think we do," said Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas and a member of the Judiciary Committee.
Let's break down this short sentence.
Cornyn understands he is a giant hypocrite and doesn't care. He believes Sotomayor should be filibustered but can't lead the Senate Republican caucus well enough to hold together to do it. Therefore, they are throwing the filibuster tactic aside and possibly giving Judge Sotomayor a fair hearing.
Talk about the shortest, most idle threat threat possible from the leader of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
Good to see the Republican Party won't try to hold up the U.S. Supreme Court seat like they holding up the Minnesota Senate seat. But Cornyn has shown how hypocritical he and his party are on this issue.
Big John Cornyn is all over the place when it comes to Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Last Friday Cornyn was forced to backpedal his criticism of Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich-- the real Republican party leadership.
Now the Junior Senator has to back peddle his hard-line stance on the use of the filibuster.
Rick Klein of ABC News has an interesting article on the GOP dilemma.
On ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" Sunday, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, refused to rule out the possibility of a filibuster.
"I think it's really premature to say that or to speculate," said Cornyn, a member of GOP leadership who serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
But Cornyn was one of the most outspoken voices in favor of the nuclear option -- in favor, that is, of banning judicial filibusters forever.
Cornyn's convictions seems to be based in partisanship instead of policy. He opposed the use of a filibuster for Alberto Gonzales and Condoleezza Rice He went so far as to characterize them as American success stories.
"From a strictly political standpoint, Democrats are hurting themselves by attacking American success stories like Condoleezza Rice and Alberto Gonzales," Cornyn told me when I was at The Boston Globe, in February 2005. "I had hoped that they had learned something from what happened on Nov. 2."
By supporting a possible filibuster against Juge Sotomayor seems to mean Cornyn doesn't believe she is an American success story. To that point, her bio seems to speak for itself.
Judge Sotomayor is of Puerto Rican descent, and was born in the Bronx. Her father died when she was nine, and she was raised by her mother. Sotomayor graduated with an A.B., summa cum laude, from Princeton University in 1976, and received her J.D. from Yale Law School in 1979, where she was an editor at the Yale Law Journal. She was an advocate for the hiring of Latino faculty at both schools. She worked as an Assistant District Attorney in New York for five years before entering private practice in 1984. She played an active role on the boards of directors for the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, the State of New York Mortgage Agency, and the New York City Campaign Finance Board. Sotomayor was nominated to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by President George H. W. Bush in 1991 and confirmed in 1992.
Cornyn's threat comes as an even bigger surprise based on what Cornyn said during the Bush administration.
Cornyn criticized Democrats for raising possibility of filibustering a Hispanic nominee. Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, said Democrats appeared to be trying to attack Bush through Gonzales, and to send a message that they would oppose Gonzales's elevation to the Supreme Court. He said that Democrats are opposing a Hispanic appointee for attorney general just a week after many spoke out against Bush's nomination of a Condoleezza Rice a black woman to become secretary of state. "From a strictly political standpoint, Democrats are hurting themselves by attacking American success stories like Condoleezza Rice and Alberto Gonzales," said Cornyn, who serves on the Judiciary Committee. "I had hoped that they had learned something from what happened on Nov. 2," he added, referring to the election, when Republicans picked up four Senate seats, including that of then-Minority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota. [Boston Globe, 2/5/05]
Cornyn spokesperson says Democrats are tone deaf for opposing a Hispanic nominee. Republicans say Democrats are "tone deaf" on the level of support for this nominee in the Hispanic community. Opposing the Gonzales nomination "is an exit strategy for the Democrats in '06," says Don Stewart, a spokesman for Sen. John Cornyn (R) of Texas. Despite opposition, Democrats say they are not planning to filibuster this nomination. [Christian Science Monitor, 2/1/05]
In the background of John Cornyn's threat to leave a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court vacant, Norm Coleman and the NRSC challenged to Al Franken's victory in Minnesota keeps the Senate one Senator shy of making Cornyn and his threat irrelevant. Perhaps that is why they are spending so much time and money to prevent the people of Minnesota from having two senators in Washington.
Regardless, as Klein points out, all of Cornyn's posturing is mostly irrelevant.
Still, should some Republicans choose to filibuster Sotomayor, it will almost certainly fail. Democrats are one court ruling away from getting a 60th Senate seat -- the threshold needed to overcome any filibuster in the Senate.
The only tactic left to make the NRSC or the national Republican Party relevant is hypocrisy and hate.
National Republican Senate Committee Chairman John Cornyn isn't all to popular these days (and we're not talking about with Democrats). As the chair of the fundraising arms for his Senate colleagues, he's charged with trying to help them claw back to relevance in the upper chamber. So while money and message are very much in his court, he's running into some problems. Namely- his donor base is becoming increasingly conservative making him beholden to the very people that are turning off the voters he needs to win.
So what happens when you mix a NRSC chair who is a Texas Senator and member of the Senate Judiciary Committee with a Latina Supreme Court nominee, a NRSC fundraiser with Rush Limbaugh, and commentary from Newt Gingrich? An epic fail of GOP entertainment.
"Imagine a judicial nominee said 'my experience as a white man makes me better than a latina woman.' Wouldn't they have to withdraw? New racism is no better than old racism. A white man racist nominee would be forced to withdraw. Latina woman racist should also withdraw."
"Here you have a racist - you might want to soften that, and you might want to say a reverse racist," Limbaugh said of Sotomayor on his show.
...
"When the rubber hits the road, such as in this nomination, where are these moderate Republican groups on the nomination? Where are the moderate senators? Where is Colin Powell? Where is Tom Ridge?" Limbaugh asked.
"I'm the one doing the heavy lifting. Colin Powell panders to moderate Republicans," he said. "If the moderates in the Republican Party offer no way to address this danger, then they are useless."
Important to note, Rush Limbaugh is headlining a fundraiser for the NRSC and NRCC on June 8th expected to raise millions for the committees.
John Cornyn's reply? From the Hill...
Q: We've heard Rush Limbaugh and the former House Speaker Newt Gingrich calling Sonia Sotomayor a racist, saying she should withdraw. What do you make of the rhetoric that's tumbling out these days?
A: I think it's terrible. This is not the kind of tone that any of us want to set when it comes to performing our constitutional responsibilities of advice and consent.
Q: Do you worry that language like that harms the discussion? Harms your party's image- especially among Hispanics, where the Republican Party's been losing ground lately?
A: Neither one of these men are elected Republican officials. I just don't think it's appropriate. I certainly don't endorse it. I think it's wrong.
Oh snap. Double snap with his added commentary in talking with KXXV TV (Waco/Killeen) today.
Cornyn took issue with Rush Limbaugh's recent comments about Sotomayor, saying it was a "rush to judgment." Limbaugh had previously called Sotomayor a "bigot" and "reverse racist" among other things. On Friday, Cornyn said "the comments I've seen are comments that I disagree with...It should not make any difference, the ethnicity or a sex of a judge any more than it should make a difference about the ethnicity or race of an umpire in a baseball game. Their job is to call balls and strikes, it's not to somehow impose their perspective because of their ethnicity."
When asked if Limbaugh was wrong to call Sotomayor a "bigot," Cornyn said that questions should be brought up about Sotomayor but "to do so in a civil and dignified proceeding. Name-calling is not the way to get started on the right foot." He also wishes "people would calm down a lot" about discussing Sotomayor's qualifications.
If Cornyn disagrees so much with the leading message and tone coming from Republican Party leaders talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh then he can show it by making sure Limbaugh's invitation to headline the RNSC's June 8th multi-million dollar fundraiser gets lost in the mail.
Just like Texas Rep. Mike McCaul uninvited Rush Limbaugh from his campaign fundraiser in Houston this week. Photographic evidence of that included below via the Austin American-Statesman.
So, is Hutchison really taking the time to look through Judge Sotomayor's rulings throughout her years on the bench, which would end with the obvious conclusion that Judge Sotomayor is extremely qualified for the job? Or, perhaps, as both Katherine and Marjorie Korn of the Dallas Morning News mentioned, is she looking at the political consequences?
