Le’ts face it: It’s not possible for Democrats in the Senate – not even if they’re 100% united, which they aren’t – to block a right-wing, anti-Roe Bush nomination to the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n
My email and blog-reading lately has been stuffed full of calls to action – Call your senator! Donate! It’s time to get mobilized!<\/em> From the LA Times<\/a>:<\/p>\n Meanwhile, the liberal People for the American Way will “definitely be spending millions of dollars” if necessary to fight an objectionable nominee, vice president Elliot Mincberg said. The National Abortion Rights Action League transformed its website Friday so that visitors could donate time and money to a Supreme Court vacancy campaign.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I have to wonder – why? When it comes to who replaces O’Connor, we’ve already lost<\/em>. The Republicans have a strong voting majority, and if necessary, they’ll use the “nuclear option” to prevent the Democrats from staging a successful filibuster. And if every single liberal in the country writes their senators, you know what? The Republicans will still <\/em>have all the votes they need.<\/p>\n The Democrats have lost election after election after election, and when you lose that often you don’t get to choose Supreme Court justices. Nor do the Republicans have a politically realistic option of backing down; their base, so forgiving in so many ways, would never forgive a replacement for O’Connor whose opposition to Roe <\/em>is less than total. Ed Kilgore has an accurate take on the situation:<\/p>\n This appointment represents the giant balloon payment at the end of the mortgage the GOP signed with the Cultural Right at least 25 years ago. Social conservatives have agreed over and over again to missed payments, refinancings, and in their view, generous terms, but the balance is finally due, and if Bush doesn’t pay up, they’ll foreclose their entire alliance with the Republican Party.<\/p>\n Sure, they care about other issues, from gay marriage to taxes to Iraq, but abortion is the issue that makes most Cultural Right activists get up in the morning and stuff envelopes and staff phone banks for the GOP. And for decades now, Republicans have told them they can’t do anything much about it until they can change the Supreme Court. With a pro-choice Justice stepping down, the subject can no longer be avoided. And thanks to the Souter precedent (and indeed, the O’Connor and Kennedy precedents), there’s no way Bush can finesse an appointment that’s anything less than a guaranteed vote to overturn Roe<\/em>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Some people may respond that I don’t appreciate how essential this might be. Look, I agree – it’s unbelievably essential<\/a>. But just because it’s essential we win doesn’t mean we have the ability <\/em>to win.<\/p>\n Let’s not fool ourselves – O’Connor’s replacement will be a loyal conservative, anti-Roe <\/em>and predictably right-wing in all of her or his opinions. There is no way we can prevent this outcome. Knowing this, it’s hard for me to be enthusiastic about letter-writing or fund-raising based on trying to influence who replaces O’Connor. Wouldn’t it be better to reserve our energy for campaigns that aren’t completely, utterly hopeless?<\/p>\n P.S. Don’t take this as my saying that Roe <\/em>is lost. Even with O’Connor’s vote replaced by a pro-life vote, there remains a 5-4 majority in favor of Roe <\/em>(or, strictly speaking, in favor of Casey<\/em>). People thought Roe <\/em>was dead during Reagan, too – and that was about 20 years ago.<\/p>\n Links via Balloon Juice<\/a>, which has an interesting list of quotes from conservatives, and Pressthink<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Le’ts face it: It’s not possible for Democrats in the Senate – not even if they’re 100% united, which they aren’t – to block a right-wing, anti-Roe Bush nomination to the Supreme Court. My email and blog-reading lately has been … Continue reading