Case Proves Politically Touchy

After Congress’ high-profile entry into the Terri Schiavo case, most lawmakers responded in a low-key manner to Thursday’s Supreme Court decision not to intervene in the dispute, underscoring the delicate political nature of the controversy.

The measured reactions came as polls showed public disapproval of Washington’s actions in the matter.

The terse statements from Capitol Hill on the Supreme Court’s decision contrasted with the spate of news conferences a week ago, when several lawmakers began pushing legislation to allow federal courts to review the Schiavo case.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), who spearheaded that drive, issued a statement with House Judiciary Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) expressing “profound sadness and disappointment” over the court decision. But they suggested there was nothing else that Congress could do in the Schiavo case.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), a physician who provoked controversy with his medical comments about Schiavo’s condition, issued a two-sentence statement on the court decision, calling it a sad day for the woman’s family and “for their innocent and voiceless daughter.”

His office later issued a longer statement saying that Frist’s comments about Schiavo on the Senate floor last week did not represent a diagnosis. His remarks questioning the conclusion that Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative state had been widely interpreted as a diagnosis, and sparked criticism of Frist within the medical community.

Thursday’s statement said that Frist, a possible 2008 presidential candidate, had sought to call attention to disagreement among doctors about her condition.

One of the stronger comments on the Supreme Court decision came from House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), who said he was “outraged” by what he called a “dereliction of duty” by the justices.

Democratic leaders did not comment on the court decision, perhaps a reflection of how the issue had divided their rank and file.

“This has got to be one of the most emotional, gut-wrenching issues that Congress has debated for many years,” said a Democratic senator’s aide, who asked not to be named.

The muted response from Capitol Hill to the court decision came as a CBS News poll released Wednesday showed that 82% -- including a majority of evangelicals -- disapproved of Congress’ intervention in the case. Nearly three-fourths of those surveyed expressed “widespread cynicism” about lawmakers’ motives.

Polls earlier in the week also found majorities disapproving of the congressional action.

Given the polls, members of both parties said it would be difficult for politicians to highlight the Schiavo case in next year’s House and Senate campaigns without appearing to try to exploit a family’s tragedy for political gain.

“I think it’s tough for anybody to use as an election issue,” said Carl Forti, spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee. “For a lot of these members, it’s personal.”

But the case has emerged as an issue in at least one possible matchup in 2006.

Ron Klein, a Democratic state senator from Florida, assailed Rep. E. Clay Shaw Jr. (R-Fla.) for missing the House vote on the Schiavo bill, which occurred Monday morning, just past midnight. Klein, who plans to run for Shaw’s seat, said, “19 of his colleagues from the Florida delegation were able to make it back to Washington for this emergency session.”

Shaw was in rural Alabama when the vote was called -- more than 100 miles away from the nearest airport, said Gail Gitcho, his press secretary. Had he been able to make the vote, he would have supported the bill, she said.

Gitcho added, “It’s unfortunate that anyone would try to score political points at the expense of a family that is going through such an extremely difficult time.”

The Schiavo case is expected to fuel criticism of the federal judiciary by some conservative groups, even though the Supreme Court is dominated by justices appointed by GOP presidents, and a federal appeals court generally viewed as conservative declined to intervene in the case.

“It reinforces the notion that when it comes to matters of social policy, it is literally a matter of life and death in terms of who these judges are,” said a Republican strategist, who asked not to be named.

Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council, a conservative lobbying group based in Washington, said the Schiavo case would help focus public attention on the argument that the judicial system was out of step with traditional moral values.

“People would be hard-pressed not to come away with the idea that maybe we do have a problem in the judiciary,” Perkins said. “It adds to the overall discussion and awareness of the problem.”

Erwin Chemerinsky, a law professor at Duke University, expressed skepticism that either party could use the Schiavo case for political gain.

“It is just too tragic a situation,” he said. “My sense, therefore, is it won’t matter much politically. Republicans gained with their base [of social conservatives], but that’s about it.”