What do you do if you're Senate Majority Leader and the Senate Intelligence Committee plans to hold hearings which might harm your President's standing (and, not incidentally, your party's)?
You threaten to change the rules.
In response to a letter sent to him by Senator Reid demanding that Sen. Roberts allow a vote on Rockefeller's motion to hold NSA hearings and threatening to bring the matter to the full Senate if Roberts again blocks an up-or-down vote on the motion, Frist writes:
I am increasingly concerned that the Senate Intelligence Committee is unable to carry out its critically important oversight and threat assessment responsibilities due to stifling partisanship that is exhibited by repeated calls by Democrats on the Committee to conduct politically-motivated investigations. . . .I would propose that we meet with Senators Roberts and Rockefeller as soon as possible. The Committee was established and structured to reflect the Senate’s desire for bipartisanship, and to the maximum extent possible, nonpartisan oversight of our nation’s intelligence activities. If attempts to use the committee’s charter for political purposes exist, we may have to simply acknowledge that nonpartisan oversight, while a worthy aspiration, is simply not possible. If we are unable to reach agreement, I believe we must consider other options to improve the Committee’s oversight capabilities, to include restructuring the Committee so that it is organized and operated like most Senate Committees.
What that last sentence means is "instead of the longstanding bipartisan structure which gives neither party majority standing in the Intelligence Committee, I'm gonna restructure it so there are more Republicans than Democrats on it and we can then block hearings."
The man is so subservient to Bush he's lapping the soles of the man's boots. Go read Glenn's analysis at that link.
Posted by Linkmeister at March 4, 2006 09:43 AM | TrackBack