What a difference a Congressional hearing packed with outraged Democrats and Republicans can make.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, under fire for by what all accounts seems like the political firings and replacements of U.S. attorneys throughout the country, has now effectively reversed himself, the Washington Post reports:
Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales agreed yesterday to change the way U.S. attorneys can be replaced, a reversal in administration policy that came after he was browbeaten by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee still angry over the controversial firings of eight federal prosecutors.
Gonzales told Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) and other senior members of the committee that the administration will no longer oppose legislation limiting the attorney general’s power to appoint interim prosecutors. Gonzales also agreed to allow the committee to interview five top-level Justice Department officials as part of an ongoing Democratic-led probe into the firings, senators said after a tense, hour-long meeting in Leahy’s office suite.
The reason: once again Gonzales has been smack in the middle of a controversy involving allegations that the executive branch is running roughshod over the conventional wisdom — and, critics say, peppering the stew with heavy dashes of partisanship. MORE:
The concessions represent a turnaround by the White House and the Justice Department, which have argued for three months that Gonzales must have unfettered power to appoint interim federal prosecutors and have resisted disclosing details about the firings.
But the administration has been battered by mounting allegations that several of the fired prosecutors — six of whom testified before Congress on Tuesday — had been the subject of intimidation, including improper telephone calls from GOP lawmakers or their aides, and alleged threats of retaliation by Justice Department officials. One prosecutor told lawmakers this week that he felt “leaned on” by a senior Republican senator, and Senate Democrats have readied subpoenas for five key members of Gonzales’ inner circle of advisers.
And, the Post notes, Gonzale’s sudden seeing the light came not too long after a key Senator suggested that the time might be drawing near when the AG should start sending out his resume:
The capitulation came just hours after several leading Senate Republicans sharply criticized Gonzales for his handling of the issue. Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.), the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, seemed to suggest that Gonzales’s tenure may not last through the remainder of President Bush’s term.
“One day there will be a new attorney general, maybe sooner rather than later,” Specter said sharply. In an interview with Reuters after the meeting with Gonzales, Specter said his comments did not imply he thought the attorney general should be replaced.
And “pre-owned” cars are not “used cars.”
Why does this controversy matter?
Because it’s part and parcel of a pattern with the Bush administration — not just in policies, but in how they are received. Once again a large number of Democrats were joined by some key Republicans who clearly were upset by the firings. But this is 2007 where the Democrats hold more power in Congress and where some GOPers aren’t willing to put their careers on the line — or jettison past principles — for the White House. There is a split in GOP ranks between more independent-minded Republicans and those who can be counted on to back the White House’s action and echo its arguments.
But in the end — as in the several other controversial cases — the Democrats and Republicans who oppose the administration sparked at least a partial shift in executive branch policy.
Joe Conason writes in Slate:
Under any circumstances, the Bush administration’s sudden, explicitly political dismissal and replacement of United States attorneys in judicial districts across the country would be very troubling — both as a violation of American law enforcement traditions and as a triumph of patronage over competence.
But as the story behind these strange decisions unfolds, a familiar theme is emerging. Again, the White House and the Justice Department have been exposed in a secretive attempt to expand executive power for partisan purposes. And again, their scheming is tainted with a nasty whiff of authoritarianism.
There is much more at stake here than a handful of federal jobs.
Leading senators of both parties are disturbed by these incidents because U.S. attorneys — the powerful officials appointed by the president to prosecute federal crimes and defend federal interests in each of the nation’s judicial districts — are supposed to be as nonpartisan as possible. Democrats mostly appoint Democrats and Republicans mostly appoint Republicans, but the U.S. attorneys are usually chosen with the advice and consent of the senators from their home states, and then confirmed by the full Senate, with a decent respect for skill and experience as well as political connections.
Conason details the history of the latest controversy involving Gonzales, executive power, and mega-politicization of the executive branch. And then he adds this:
Any such self-serving statements emanating from Alberto Gonzales should always be greeted with appropriate skepticism. So should the claim that he sought to seize control of interim U.S. attorney appointments because of his concern over the “separation of powers” issues supposedly inherent in judges’ appointing prosecutors. As the McClatchy Newspapers reported on Jan. 26, Gonzales has named at least nine “conservative loyalists from the Bush administration’s inner circle” to positions vacated by professional prosecutors.
On Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to restore the old nonpartisan system for replacing U.S. attorneys and to require Senate confirmation of all new appointees. The full Senate and the House of Representatives should do likewise, despite Republican opposition, but that is not enough. The Senate Democrats should continue to probe the attorney general’s little coup d’état and all of the resulting appointments. That is the best way to discourage future usurpations — and to frustrate whatever skulduggery was afoot this time.
Yes, there are still coalitions in American politics — but, in this case, the coalition has been between Democrats and the more independent-minded Senate Republicans.
A key lesson in this: divided government can be effective in extracting accountability and shaping policy.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.