Friday, April 30, 2010

Still no Texas US Attorneys

A year and a quarter into the Obama administration, Texas still has no nominees for US Attorney. We had a nominee in the Eastern District who withdrew his name from consideration after months of delay, and now there's no telling when we may see these appointments, if they ever come at all. Morgan Smith at the Texas Tribune this morning sums up where we're at:

So what are the chances of the state getting a new nominee any time soon? The next best chance is the Western District’s Michael McCrum. According to a Senate staffer familiar with the process, his nomination is “forthcoming.” Along with Stevens, McCrum (who was also recommended by the Democratic House delegation) was on the list of nominees the Senators sent to the White House in early October. And, along with Stevens, he was the only candidate on the list who was also approved by the Democrats.

Once he secures the nomination, McCrum will have to endure the Senate confirmation process, which could last several months and could still result in his losing the nomination. The Senators and the House delegation have been unable to reach consensus on candidates in either the Northern and Southern districts, and now, with Steven’s withdrawal, the Eastern, meaning both factions may have to go back to the drawing board.

As time goes by, however, a U.S. attorney post becomes less attractive to possible candidates. "The deeper you go into an administration, the harder it is to get people to disrupt their lives, shut down their practices for maybe a year or two as U.S. attorneys, and say the Dems don't win” the next presidential election, says Coggins. “Then the person who has accepted the job for a year or two is back out on the streets — but they've got a one-year ban on lobbying their office and a lifetime ban on handling anything that was in the office, so it's a disruption to the practice for people to take the position."

After the hoopla in the Bush Administration over politicized US Attorney appointments, I've been surprised (bordering on appalled) at the delays. To me these are questions that should have been decided by Obama's transition team before he ever took office. Of course, it doesn't help that Texas' congressional delegation can't agree on any of the contenders, but partisan bickering is no excuse. The delay at this point begins to bespeak either incompetence or disregard.

8 comments:

  1. Did you vote for change? :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. With the black eye we get here, regarding our courts and justice all the way round, I can't fault the federal admin from passing over some here. Get the system in teh state cleaned up, and then they'll start looking back our way.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Is there any reason why the US Attorney job should go to a Texan? Seems a bit hypocritical when I keep hearing how most Texans dispise national governance and would secceed at the first opportunity.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sunray, US Attorney is a regional prosecutor's job. Texas has four federal judicial districts, and there is a different US Attorney (theoretically) appointed in each of them.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It does seem like incompetence, yet look at the riff-raff in office!! When Clinton(s) became president, all U.S. Atty's were fired, assuming to impede any further investigations into Mena AK drug-running for Bush' Iran/Contra swap or who knows. Many DoJ offices were never filled.
    You'd think Obamarx would try and put in lefty pals to hammer in TX. Is there any reason not having US Attys would impede investigations into Obamarx' birth certificate? I thought by now it was an accepted (colluded) point that we won't talk about that, ever again.
    As Obamarx' clan (much more than the average Democrat) understands the need for communitarian committee rule via appointments (Obamarx is a bud of Etzioni), I'm especially surprised he's not loading the region, which would be good at least while he remains in apparent office.
    Wow! You can't make this stuff up---truth stranger than fiction!!

    ReplyDelete
  6. John,

    Do you really believe the BS you just put out there, or you just trolling...

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sorry, hate to confuse you with facts. We can't ever know the real motives or who the "men behind the scenes about whom we dare not speak above whisper" are (as Wilson said), but we can see where those in power evolve expedient policies outside their authority, farewell to jurisprudence. If you're in the club and get rich, does that make it the right thing to do? Who's holding the magnet to the moral compass, if not We The People?

    ReplyDelete