The Federalist Phoenix

Frist's Logic on Stem Cells

So the one of the Senate's M.D.s has gone ahead and endorsed expanded funding of stem cell research.  Bill Frist, came out in favor of a limited expansion in a floor speech today.  I am not shocked.  I am also not all that bothered by the suggestion. 

We have seen the Bush Administration's policy in action for 4 years.  In 2001, the very notion of funding stem cell research was new (Clinton provided no money for such research).  Bush put federal money where none was before.  It has been successful, but it is not perfect, and scientist realize it may lead to an end to the very lines permitted for experimentation.

Thousands, if not millions, of embryonic cells are destroyed every year as couples undergoing fertility treatments become pregnant and choose to discard embryos that remain frozen or otherwise stored.  Frist's support is for the use of funding for research on those embryos where the parents consent to that use without compensation.  If for no other reason, I would support this because it does not actively seek to create and/or destroy embryos that would not otherwise be expended.  If a couple is going to discard embryos, why shouldn't there be an option to use those embryos for scientific purposes.

More (along with election '08 analysis) below the fold..........

Pataki Does the Right Thing

Governor Pataki has decided not to seek a fourth term in 2006.  As a long standing critic of the governor, of course I think this is the right move for him, but I want to elaborate for those that may think this is a gut reaction.

More below.............

Oregon House Speaker Flunks Out

After the Oregon State Senate passed a bill allowing same-sex civil unions, the Oregon House has gutted the bill.  However, that's not the point of this post.  This post is about the failure of House Speaker Karen Minnis (R-Wood Creek) to "play fair."  After the Senate's passage of the bill (with some Republican support) Minnis declared that she would not permit the Republican-controlled House to vote on it.  I wonder what Speaker Minnis was afraid of.  The only reason to exercise this kind of authority is for fear that the majority of members support the bill.  And if that's the case, why should a single individual be able to kill the bill?  The other possibility is that Minnis sought to protect her caucus from having to go on record against the bill.  But if members of the House are not willing to go on record with a no vote, then they have not earned their seats - and are not performing the public's business.

Karen Minnis should suck it up and let the members go on record concerning this bill so that their constituents can judge them at the next election.  Anything less is undemocratic.

Justice John Robert

The President has nominated D.C. Circuit Judge John Roberts to become Justice John Roberts, the 109th Justice of the Supreme Court.  I personally, as a conservative, am very happy with this from what I know of the Judge.  But I am going to go about rounding up his opinions of the last two years from the D.C. Circuit to see what's in them.  I will update as interesting tidbits appear and will post the opinions he has written.

Arlen Specter - Democrat Darling

Arlen Specter has apparently lost his mind.  Perhaps it's his illness, perhaps it's the stress of dealing with cancer and the job of United States Senator, or perhaps the Pennsylvania is just a moron.  But his latest suggestion that the most appropriate nominee be another Sandra Day O'Connor, with a preference for a politician rather than a judge, shows he is totally inappropriate and incapable of performing his duty as the Republican Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, in charge of conducting hearings for President Bush's Supreme Court nominee.

More below the fold...........

Thad Cochran - Budget Buster

Score another victory for the free-spenders.  Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Thad Cochran is playing games with the budget in order to evade the budget limits set by Congress and the cuts requested by the President.

Cochran has shifted about $8 billion from foreign aid and defense and another $3.3 billion from other sources in order to increase funding for domestic programs.  Cochran has all but expressed his plan to restore most of the shifted funding in an emergency appropriations (which are not counted against the budget caps) for defense and Iraq costs.  Of course, while Senators might vote against the domestic funding during budget negotiations or in a supplemental bill, no Senator who intends to seek office again will vote against a supplemental bill for military costs of the Iraq war.

The Republican Party seems incapable of using their power as the majority party to move the agenda and ensure their continued ability to exercise power.  However, they seem to have taken very well to the typical majority propensity to freely spend the taxpayer's money.  I would call on the President to threaten to veto all non-defense appropriations bills if the "bait and switch" tactic that Sen. Cochran has pulled is not reversed and the budget caps respected.

Alas, President Bush and his advisers suffer from the same weak knees that seem to infect the Republican congressional majorities and I doubt such an option will be on the table.  So yet another year will go by without any serious effort to control runaway federal spending.

Pataki to Iowa

New York Governor George Pataki plans to "test the waters" in Iowa for a possible presidential run in 2008.  He has also indicated that a decision on his part to run for president would preclude a re-election bid in 2006.

What is fascinating to me is that Pataki still has a belief that he has a viable political career.  The latest approval numbers in New York from Survey USA show his approval rating improving but still in the red on the net level.

In fact, Pataki has precious few specks of good news in the latest numbers.  One is that his approval rating is at 50% with 18-34 year olds.  Another is that the less educated (some college education) give him a 51% rating.  The best news is his 59% approval in the NYC suburbs.  Of course conservatives and Republicans approve of the Governor.  But even there are signs of weakness.

Among Republicans Pataki's disapproval rating is up to 33%.  Conservatives disapprove at a rate 36%.  And disapproval ratings among moderates and Independents are both above 50%.  In the abortion area, neither pro-lifers or pro-choice adherents are wowed by the governor (pro-lifers approve 50-44, pro-choice disapprove 41-53 - worse news is that pro-choice voters make up 70% of respondents).

So where in all of this is Pataki's thought that the good people of Iowa will be drawn to his banner?  At the rate the 3-term governor is going he couldn't win another election in his own state (in fact, most polls seem to show him getting trounced by Attorney General Elliot Spitzer), let only on a national stage that is significantly more conservative than he is.  Right now the Governor is fighting for his political life.  Unfortunately, he's not doing much to defend himself with this pie-in-the-sky vision of his potential.

The 12 Sane Vermonters

Looks like not everybody in Vermont has gone off the liberal deep end.  Yesterday, a 12-member jury sitting on a federal trial, recommended the death penalty for a convicted kidnapper who accosted a 58-year-old grocery worker, took her over the border to New York and then bludgeoned her to death.

Vermont has no state death penalty, making this the first capital case in Vermont in almost 40 years.  Former Attorney General John Ashcroft refused to accept a plea from the defendant in 2001 and insisted on seeking the death penalty.  The trial judge is now required to impose the death penalty, as recommended, under federal law.

So maybe not everyone in Vermont has been corrupted by liberalism.

Oregon to Join Connecticut?

The Oregon State Senate has passed a bill to recognize civil unions in that state.  The vote was 19-11, with 17 of 18 Democrats joined by 2 of 12 Republicans in favor.  The bill moves to the House, in which the Republicans have a 33-27 majority.  Governor Kulongoski favors the bill and would likely sign it.  Oregon would be the second state to voluntarily pass civil unions (Connecticut Governor Jodi Rell signed a civil unions law earlier this year).

Oregon voters passed, by initiative, a state constitutional amendment that defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman and limited marriage recognition to such marriages.  That measure passed with 57% of the vote.  Proponents of that amendment claim that civil unions are simply marriage by another name.  I would suspect that should a civil unions bill pass the House and be signed you can count on lawsuits challenging the law under the Marriage Amendment.

Gonzales Off the Short List?

Fred Barnes reports in the Weekly Standard that President Bush is unlikely to nominate Alberto Gonzales to fill the current vacancy on the Supreme Court, nor to fill Rehnquist's seat, should he retire.

All I can say is, thank God.  Gonzales is certainly no Scalia or Thomas, the type of judge the President promised his supporters in both 2000 and 2004.  Gonzales shows all the signs of being mushy, the kind of individual that abandons the Constitution as he pleases.  I've written about some weaknesses in Gonzales previously.  Another that has been pointed out, and which could be critical, is his lack of judicial experience in criminal law issues. 

Texas separates the last resort appeal in criminal and civil cases.  The Texas Supreme Court, on which Gonzales served (for a mere 2 years), hears only final appeals in civil matters.  Criminal matters, and therefore cases on searches and seizures, trial procedure, and other matters such as 4th, 5th, 6th and 8th Amendment violations, are heard by the Court of Criminal Appeals.  While Gonzales has law enforcement experience in his position as AG, it is not all that significant, and therefore, it is hard to tell how Gonzales would rule in criminal cases.  The liberalized Court now existing has been more than happy to find any number of rights for defendants, prisoners, and criminals that have hamstrung law enforcement and regularly seem to allow guilty felons to go free due to technical nit failures.  How would Gonzales rule in these cases?  Hard t o even predict.  In that respect he is much like Justice Souter, who did not seem to have much of a history before his nomination.  And look how well that turned out.