The Colorado Conundrum....

To Filibuster or Not To Filibuster, THAT is the question........for newly elected Ken Salazar. Whether tis nobler to cave in to the special interest leftists and the Senate Dem caucus, or suffer the slings and arrows of a constituency that promises were made to in order to get elected.....

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 3, 2005

THE COLORADO SENATOR’S CONUNDRUM:
To Filibuster or Not to Filibuster….

Keep his campaign promise to support a fair and simple up-or-down vote for judicial nominees
or cave in to the Washington DC obstructionists?

(Washington, DC) – The Coalition for a Fair Judiciary today called on newly elected United States Senator Ken Salazar to keep his campaign promises and support an up or down vote for the President’s judicial nominees. In a letter to President Bush yesterday, Senator Salazar demanded the withdrawal of the renominations of the judicial nominees filibustered by a minority of Senators.

“It didn’t take Ken Salazar very long to bow to the whims of extreme leftists and break the promise to his constituents to treat the President’s judicial nominees with fairness,” said Kay Daly, president of the Coalition for a Fair Judiciary. “I am quite certain that the voters of Colorado took him at his word when candidate Salazar stated his support for a fair and simple up-or-down vote for judicial nominees. Senator Salazar seems to be singing a different tune than candidate Salazar by demanding the President withdraw his nominees from consideration. Political expedience, thy name is Ken Salazar.”

In a November 8th, 2004 editorial, the Rocky Mountain News stated rather hopefully:

SALAZAR'S PLEDGE One of the most disgracefully partisan spectacles of President Bush's first term was the way Senate Democrats obstructed the appointment of his judicial nominees with filibusters.In a pre-election interview with the News editorial board, Sen.-elect Ken Salazar said he favored an up-or-down vote in the full Senate on judicial nominations. We hope he sticks with that position even if his Democratic colleagues-to-be lean on him, as they are almost certain to do.Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., likely chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has proposed that every nominee should have a committee hearing within 30 days, a committee vote no more than 30 days later, and a floor vote no more than 30 days after that. We urge Salazar to declare even before he takes office that he will support Specter's proposal.

And on MSNBC (http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6089481/) candidate Salazar said the following:
As non-partisan as Salazar might hope to be, what would he do as senator if the Democratic leadership asked him to join a filibuster against a Bush judicial nominee? “I would hope all nominees get up or down votes,” Salazar answered. “And the decision on an up-or-down vote should be based on whether or not the president’s nominee is qualified for the position.”
He said a mandatory up-or-down confirmation vote on any nominee within 120 days of the nomination being submitted (an idea that Bush himself has advocated) “is a thoughtful proposal and maybe one that should be pursued.”

In perhaps the most stunning about-face, Senator Salazar, who as Colorado’s Attorney General, signed a letter dated January 30, 2004, supporting William Myers in his nomination to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, has now asked the President to withdraw his nominations in his letter dated March 1, 2005.

“Candidate Ken Salazar embraced a reasonable approach to solving the obstruction nightmare that has plagued the judicial nominations process,” said Daly. “Senator Salazar abandoned his campaign promise in record time. It’s a shame that his new buddies in the Senate Democratic caucus and the extreme leftist groups are more important to him than the constituents who put him in his office or the Constitution he swore to protect and defend.”

###