European Stars and Stripes (Newspaper) - July 29, 1990, Darmstadt, Hesse Mary Mcgrory House gop House republicans showed George Bush How they feel about his awful betrayal on taxes a they took their Ball and their Bat and they went Home. So there in the most memorable formulation of their state of mind rep. Mickey Edwards r-okla., said a we Admire the president we support the president but we done to work for the translation a read our lips no new apparently this massive defection a the vote in the Republican conference on the anti tax Resolution of rep. Richard Armey a Texas was overwhelming a was accepted philosophically. An amendment was requested by White House chief of staff John Sununu Ever the provincial politician. The former new Hampshire governor wanted his old new England neighbor sen. George Mitchell a Maine to be fingered in print. Ready to oblige in the Small things the House republicans included a designation of Mitchell As a a consistent Roadblock to real spending cuts or growth that according to House it republicans who seemed to be beside themselves made their action a not a message to George Bush but a message to George alas this was not a catching idea however better it May have made Sununu feel at the time. Republicans Tell themselves they have Flung Down the Gauntlet to democrats either the democrats come up with some kind of taxes that Are satisfactory to them or the republicans can put the onus of passing tax legislation entirely on the democrats and themselves face the electorate with what to them Are clean hands. This is wonderfully defiant strategy somewhat on the order of the 9-year-ofd threatening to leave Home. The trouble is it could impede the budget settlement Bush must achieve. Anthony Lewis to out of it republicans realize that taxes per be might have been manageable As an alternative to drastic cuts in social programs. But the Issue has been poisoned by the Sal considerations. Congressmen say voters Are steaming Over the fraud and that is going to eat up the new taxes. L questions leap out of every audience. Talk to rep. Vin Weber a Minn. His District is Rural but the connection is made. Quot a Farmer will say to me a the agriculture department says one Corner of my Fields is wetlands and if i plough it ill get arrested. And those bums who stole millions of dollars Are walking around Republican rep. Lynn Martin of Illinois a Senate candidate walked in a fourth of july Parade in Rockford All along the line of March she was greeted by cries of a jail the the Sal problem is expected to dominate the fall election and until Neil Bush came along nobody knew where the wrecking Ball of blame would land. Young Bush eave a name and a face to the mess but be is a Mere speck. Republicans have taken some Little Comfort from the overreaction of democrats. House speaker Tom Foley thundered at de Rollins a Campaign operative whose Job it is to get his Goat. Other members violated a Cardinal Rule never attack a politician through his children. A better Way to go Forward was indicated by rep. Joseph Kennedy d-mass., who introduced a Bill calling for Tough prosecutions of Sal offenders. He Points out that of 21,000 complaints Only 839 cases have been brought. Democrats generally Are acting a Little Snake bitten a although they Are in better shape than they have been for years. Nobody is going to accuse them of being soft on communism or weak on defense. Things have slipped so far that sen. Sam Nunn a Gay a once the Demigod of defense has turned tree Hugger he wants the defense department to clean up the democrats still have not got the Knack of defining issues. Take the National endowment for the arts which republicans Are trying to turn into the Willie Horton of the 90s. Obviously patronage of the arts is a Tricky business Ana Nea Hasni to had the Luck of the Renaissance Popes who sponsored artists and it has funded some silly Quot performance arts gigs like a woman who dips herself with chocolate to show something about feminism. In an Era when there a not enough Money to go around taxpayers Are not amused. Republicans led by sen. Jesse Helms of South Carolina trumpet that its Public Money paying for obscenity. Democrats keep saying its a question of censorship. Actually its a matter of common sense. To Universal Syndicate court favourites give insight to Souter a thinking sen. Warren Rudman r-n.h., was asked the other Day whether judge David Souter especially admired any past members of the supreme court Rud Man said he thought the Souter favourites were justices Oliver Wendell Holmes or. And John Marshall Harlan the younger. If that is so a and As a close Friend Rudman should know a it is an extremely interesting answer. It does not Tell what everyone in Washington is panting to know How Souter would vote on this Issue or that As a member of the court. But it gives intriguing insight into How he May see the Job. Holmes who served from 1902 to 1932, generally believed in judicial deference to legislative choices. When the Couri tried to Stop economic reforms a for example when it held restrictions on child labor unconstitutional a he wrote eloquent dissents. He thought that democracy meant that majorities must usually have their Way a but not when it came to Freedom of speech. Quot if there is any principle of the Constitution that More imperatively Calls for attachment than any other Quot Holmes wrote in 1929, a it is the principle of free thought a not free thought for those who agree with us but Freedom for the thought that we he was dissenting there from a decision that denied american citizenship to a woman because she was a pacifist and said she would not Bear arms to defend the Constitution. A later court overruled the decision and came to Holmes View of free speech. Harlan served from 1955 to 1971. For Many of us who knew the court in that period he is a Model of what a supreme court Justice should be. That is not because he reached results that always pleased us a far from it a a but because of his craftsmanship and the Way he committed himself to deciding cases. He had no Agenda. He did not go into a Case with certainty about How it should come out he struggled to be disinterested. That did not mean unconcerned he cared deeply it meant that he tried genuinely to understand both sides of the argument. He was respectful of the past. He believed in stare dec Isis the principle that precedent should ordinarily be followed and he accepted rules once established from which he had earlier dissented. But his mind was open to fresh applications of the Constitution to meet new threats. When the supreme court first considered a Connecticut Law against the use of contraceptives in 1961, Harlan saw the Law As a violation of the Liberty guaranteed by the N.H.amendment. The state he said was intruding on a the most intimate details of the marital relation with the full Power of the criminal Harlan had been a Wall Street lawyer and he was a thorough gentleman. But he had the rare empathic ability to see issues from the viewpoint of others with different backgrounds and different premises. In 1971, during the Vietnam War the court considered the Case of a Young Man convicted of disturbing the peace when he wore a sweatshirt bearing an obscenity against the draft. Harlan would no doubt have been outraged personally at such behaviour. But he wrote the opinion reversing the conviction a the constitutional right of free expression is powerful Medicine in a society As diverse and populous As ours Quot he said. A it is designed and intended to remove governmental restraints from the Arena of Public discussion putting the decision As to what views shall be voiced largely into the hands of each of us in the Hope that use of such Freedom will ultimately produce a More capable citizenry and More perfect polity and in the belief that no other approach would comport with the premise of individual dignity and Choice upon which our political system rests Souter is described As a conservative. But indications Are that he comes to this great appointment with no ideological Agenda no list of Legal wrongs he is determined to right. In Washington both conservatives and liberals seem discontented with that. They want to make him Register his votes in Advance for a constitutional right to abortion or against for affirmative action or against. I think that is a terrible idea. Requiring a nominee to fill out a scorecard on particular issues would be contemptuous of the court and of the judicial process. It would Tell a judge that he must make up his mind before hearing the facts and arguments in a particular Case. It would reduce the supreme court to sheer politics and wound an institution on w hich All of us ultimately depend for our Freedom. Can flt Yolk time
