Activists Pressure Both Sides in Judge Debate

When word surfaced recently that Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) was working with a Democrat on a compromise to end the Senate’s standoff over confirmation of federal judges, the reaction from his traditional allies was swift and decisive.

Lott’s switchboard lighted up like a Christmas tree. And it stayed that way for days, jammed with calls from conservative activists -- from Washington, Mississippi, Texas and elsewhere -- who would brook no compromise on their goal of ending a powerful delaying tactic that Democrats have used to block approval of some of President Bush’s judicial nominees.

“We feel like there should be zero compromise, no deal,” said Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Assn., a Mississippi-based conservative group whose members were among those flooding Lott’s home-state offices with phone calls and e-mails in protest.

The episode illustrates the powerful political forces that have helped make the Senate controversy over federal judges so intractable.

That battle is expected to escalate today, when Republican Senate leaders take the first procedural steps expected to culminate next week in a vote on whether the filibuster can be used to block judicial nominees.

Even if some senators might be willing to compromise, outside activists crucial to each political party are putting heavy pressure on Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) and Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to not give ground to the other.

Conservative activists are unyielding in their insistence that there be an up-or-down vote on every judicial nominee, meaning 51 votes in the 100-seat Senate would be needed for confirmation.

These activists want Frist to push ahead -- as he is pledging -- to ban the filibusters that Democrats used to prevent votes on 10 of Bush’s appellate court nominees during his first term -- including seven who have been renominated this year. It takes 60 votes to end a filibuster.

Some liberal activists, meanwhile, have objected to proposals by Reid and other Democrats to allow votes on some disputed nominees if the GOP drops its assault on the filibuster. These activists oppose approval of any of the disputed nominees.

Such cross pressures contributed to the collapse of negotiations between Republican and Democratic leaders Monday, making plain that if there were to be a compromise, it would have to come from moderate backbenchers. And as of Tuesday night, it appeared their efforts would fall short.

“Both Reid and Frist are in a difficult spot,” Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) said. “Both are being driven to a large extent by forces in their party and, across the land, these are deeply held views.”

Ben Brandzel, advocacy director for MoveOn.org’s political action committee, said he did not believe Democratic leaders would compromise on preserving filibuster rights -- but that it would not be well-received by the online liberal group if they did.

“Our members are fired up about this,” said Brandzel, whose group is planning to distribute leaflets at openings of the “Star Wars” movie this week, carrying cellphones for people to use to call their senators while waiting in line.

Conservative groups have been perhaps even more intense in pressuring Frist to stand firm.

The groups have been lobbying for months for Frist to exercise what has become widely known as the “nuclear option” -- the parliamentary maneuver that would change Senate rules to prohibit filibusters of judicial nominees. Some have grown impatient that, in their view, Frist has taken so long to pull the trigger.

“Sen. Frist needs to bring up the nominees and move full-speed ahead -- no picking up hitchhiking compromises, no detours, no sightseeing,” said Jan LaRue, chief counsel of Concerned Women of America, a conservative advocacy group.

Meanwhile, conservatives have been monitoring and lobbying Republican senators who have not said how they would vote if Frist exercised the “nuclear option.”

LaRue’s group has identified about nine such senators. To maximize their effect, the group has been targeting three of those senators each day and telling members to focus their fire on them.

Last weekend, the Family Research Council and American Family Assn. swung into action when the Kansas City Star wrote that Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) was “expressing doubts” about plans to end the filibuster for judicial nominations.

E-mail alerts went around the country, and Monday morning Roberts’ office phones were “ringing off the hook,” said Sarah Little, Roberts’ press secretary. “There are groups out there that are very organized. They called. They faxed. They e-mailed our office.”

The problem was the article had misrepresented his position: Roberts is committed to supporting Frist in curbing the filibuster if it comes to a vote. The next day, Roberts issued a statement explaining his position, and the newspaper ran a correction.

Nebraska has been an important lobbying battleground for both sides of the debate because its senators -- Hagel and Democrat Ben Nelson -- are uncommitted. The airwaves have been packed with advertisements for and against the filibuster’s use on judicial nominees.

David DiMartino, a spokesman for Nelson, said the senator had not been criticized as much as he had expected from liberal activists in his party for his efforts to reach a compromise. But Nelson, who is up for reelection in 2006, has come under fire from conservative Republicans -- including James Dobson, head of Focus on the Family.

Responding to reports in Roll Call, a Capitol Hill newspaper, that Nelson and Lott were discussing a possible compromise that would allow some of the nominees to be approved in exchange for Republican promises to preserve the filibuster, Dobson criticized the idea.

“For Monopoly players, that is like offering to trade Park Place and Boardwalk for Baltic and Mediterranean,” Dobson said. “If Republicans consent to this disaster, they’ll not only be abandoning the men and women who put them in office, they’ll be demonstrating that they do not deserve the leadership entrusted to them.”

An e-mail “action alert” urging conservatives to call Lott’s office was sent by Rick Scarborough, a Baptist minister in Texas who is organizing support among ministers for the Republican assault on the filibuster. “Tell Lott we’re not impressed,” said Scarborough.

Lott has pulled back from the talks with Nelson -- but he said it was not because of the barrage of phone calls and conservatives’ complaints. He said he concluded the compromise effort was going nowhere.

Lott also said he was unmoved by all the lobbying in part because he believed most of the calls did not come from his constituents.

“That’s the nice thing about the Senate,” he said. “Things like that don’t bother you.”

Times staff writer Maura Reynolds contributed to this report.