Specter's Role in Passage Of Detainee Bill Disputed

[cal04]

The news reached Democrats working on the military commissions bill in the Senate cloakroom the morning of Sept. 27. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), a sponsor of two amendments giving detainees a right to challenge their detention or treatment in federal court, had decided to bring the more extreme amendment to a vote.

Democrats had lined up behind Specter because the Judiciary Committee chairman told them he shared their antipathy to language in the bill stripping detainees of habeas corpus rights. But the amendment Specter put forward was defeated 51 to 48, allowing the bill to win congressional approval without change. It handed the White House an important pre-election victory.

The last-minute maneuvering before the Sept. 28 vote remains a hot topic of debate among lobbyists, lawmakers and staff members. They are wondering if Specter, as several Judiciary Committee staff members privately asserted at the time, was pressured into discarding a less extreme and more politically palatable amendment at the Bush administration's request, in favor of an alternative more likely to be defeated.

Specter says that he was not, and that he has no reason to believe the less extreme alternative he sponsored but withheld from a vote -- allowing detainees limited access to the courts -- might have won. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) backs Specter's account, but some other sources on Capitol Hill dispute it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/15/AR2006101501123.html

[Eugene]

1. He postured for what was right but didn't fight very hard for it.

In all too typical Republican fashion Specter
rolled over for BushCo when it really counted.
Moderate shmoderate. Repugs just cannot be
trusted for leadership.

[cal04]

2. reports circulated Frist and the White House pressured Specter

Around the time of the vote, several members of the Judiciary Committee staff circulated reports that Frist and the White House pressured Specter into doing the administration's bidding on the habeas corpus amendment. The staffers said Specter was told that no floor time would be available to debate the milder alternative, according to five legislative aides and lobbyists following the bill, who said in separate interviews that they heard this account directly from the staff.


(snip)
Those interviewed said they doubt a challenge to the new law -- once it is signed by Bush -- could be decided by the Supreme Court in less than a year. That leaves hundreds of suspects now incarcerated without legal recourse during that period, and potentially far beyond it.

page 2
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/15/AR2006101501123_2.html

[Lasher]

6. Vintage Specter. Talk big, then obey the masters.

What, we can't get a ruling on this by SCOTUS for a whole year? Why not? It sure didn't take much time to get Bush v. Gore on their agenda.

[DeepModem Mom]

3. Recommended.

[WCGreen]

4. CAtch 22..... I'm right behind you ... Until I have to be.....

Fuck him....

[Benhurst]

5. Recommended #5 Shine, perishing republic ... NT

[rodeodance]

7. Keith Olbermann said that Specter always caves in the end.--yup

[gratuitous]

8. Arlen talked tough and acted craven?

Say it ain't so! I knew when he was making his public posturing that if push came to shove he'd roll over faster than Benji for his repressive overlords.

[uberblonde]

9. Sounds just like Arlen...

I'd guess this is what really happened.

[napi21]

10. What's the deal with the "Senate cloakroom"?

I've heard aboutnegotiations going on in the cloakroom many times in the past. Is this a nickname for some other room, or is this really like a bunch of school kids hiding and whispering in the cloakroom, out of sight of the teacher????