Details announced on NBC today show

Still no confirming articles--here is some White House propaganda she had on the White House Web Site last year-4 days before the election--- bet this won't be up much longer...............................................................
*****************************************************************
Welcome to "Ask the White House" -- an online interactive forum where you can submit questions to Administration officials and friends of the White House. Visit the "Ask the White House" archives to read other discussions with White House officials.



Harriet Miers

Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy
Biography

October 29, 2004

Harriet Miers


Hello, this is Harriet Miers. I am Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy at the White House, and I am delighted to be here to answer your questions this Friday afternoon. This is always a great weekend because we will all get an extra hour of sleep Saturday night. And given all that is going on, I have to say, we here at the White House are looking forward to that extra hour!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

James, from Mountain View, CA writes:
Are we better off now than we were four years ago?

Harriet Miers
Thanks, James, this is a very good question, and I am pleased to give you my views. What we did not know fully in January of 2001 turns out to be very important in answering your question. In January of 2001, there were problems facing the Nation that we did not fully perceive. First, as 2001 progressed we saw the stock market continue a decline that had begun in the middle of 2000 before the Bush Administration took office. We also witnessed an economy slipping further into a recession as 2001 unfolded. We also learned as time passed that corporate misbehavior in the nineties resulted in the eruption of scandals that shook the foundation of trust that we had in the strength and integrity of our economy.

And we all know that on September 11, 2001, we learned that there had been gathering dangers for the United States that would materialize in terrorist attacks that would kill innocent Americans as well as people from countries around the world and dramatically impact the economy, including tremendous loss of jobs and shock to our airlines industry.

In response to the economic problems, the President acted immediately to implement tax relief to get the economy going again. He signed into law corporate governance reforms to address the wrongdoing that had been occurring, and those reforms were the most far-reaching since President Franklin Roosevelt’ s time. The President’s optimism and faith in the American people and our economy helped inspire a remarkable recovery. Just today, we saw new statistics showing that our economy continues to grow solidly and compensation for our workers continues steady growth. Working families now keep more of their paychecks, and we are growing faster than any other among major industrialized nations.

The President responded swiftly to the attacks on September 11th. He has our country on the offensive against terrorism. American is waging a global war on terrorism with the help of many friends and allies from around the globe. The President believed it important to confront regimes that harbored or supported terrorists as well as the terrorists. And he is also confronting outlaw regimes that pursue weapons of mass destruction, and he is committed to ensuring that the terrorists do not obtain the world’s most dangerous weapons. At the same time, the President led in the creation of the Homeland Security Department and strengthening our defenses here at home. Although I am sure the President would be the first to say more needs to be done, we are a safer Nation today than we were four years ago.

Additionally, with victories in Afghanistan and in the toppling of Saddam Hussein in Iraq and other efforts around the world, we are promoting freedom and democracy in the greater Middle East as well as elsewhere. Sowing the seeds of freedom around the world brings the goal of peace for all nations ever closer. All these efforts require great resolve and sacrifice, but we are making our Nation safer and we will leave a better world for our children and grandchildren. The last four years have been in many ways difficult years, but we have accomplished a lot and as the President has said: "because we have made the hard journey, we can see the valley below. Now, because we have faced challenges with resolve, we have historic goals within our reach, and greatness in our future. We will build a safer world and a more hopeful America -- and nothing will hold us back."

So, James, as you can tell, I think we are much better off than we were four years ago. And that belief is without discussing many, many other areas where I believe great progress has been made also. For example, with the President’s effort in education and the implementation of No Child Left Behind we are seeing much needed improvement in our schools. The President and Mrs. Bush believe in the power of quality education. That is why immediately upon taking office, the President introduced a bill to improve our education system. I could go on and on, but it is time to take another question.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Billy, from Bethel, CT writes:
Hi, I would like to say that Bush is has the right idea about the "No Child Left Behind" program. Now clebrating its second year, for the first time children in the grades 3-8 will be tested with reading and math tests to figure out their abilities to work with such subjects. Great job and keep up the good work. Billy

Harriet Miers
Hi, Billy, and good next question! That is where I left off in the last answer. Many had given up on improving our public education system, but we should never think a problem is too big to solve. Our progress in education is a great example why.

Your comments about the No Child Left Behind Act mirror what we have seen around the Nation -- the President's education reforms are working. Last March, the Council of Great City Schools released a study and reported that the achievement gap in both math and reading between African Americans and whites, and Hispanics and whites, is narrowing.

Our reforms were designed to challenge what the President calls the "soft bigotry of low expectations," and the early results show that we're making incredible progress. For the first time, children in grades 3-8 will be tested every year on basic reading and math skills to measure their progress. And these annual test results are being published so parents can measure school performance and statewide progress, and evaluate the quality of their child’s school, the qualifications of teachers, and student progress in key subjects.

Parents and students now have options for improvement when their schools don’t measure up. These reforms are so important to the President because he knows that a good education has always been a fundamental part of achieving the American Dream and maintain excellence in innovation and our economy.

Thanks for your question, Billy.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Julie, from New Hampshire writes:
Hi, I know that you are probably going to be bombarded with questions, so I will try to keep it short...Do you think that it would be possible to cut off oil imports from the Middle East and replace it with ANWR? Also, do you think that it would be a good idea to use ethanol as an additive? Thank you for your time.

Harriet Miers
Julie, that's a great question. As you probably know, the US Geological Survey estimated that there is between 5.7 million and 16 billion barrels of oil available in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), which could be accessed from about 2,000 acres of the 19,000,000 acre refuge. At its peak, production from ANWR would account for more than 20% of total U.S. oil production.

Environmentally responsible development of the resources in ANWR is one part of the President's comprehensive energy plan, which calls for a responsible mix of increased domestic energy production (like ANWR and clean coal), alternative and renewable fuels (like ethanol and biodiesel), and conservation and efficiency to reduce the growth of American energy consumption. The President's plan is essential to increasing America's energy security.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alba, from Texas writes:
Are schools receiving the necessary funding needed to meet standards set by the No Child Left Behind Act?

Harriet Miers
Alba -- Hello to a fellow Texan! Thanks for your question about funding for No Child Left Behind. I am glad to be able to address this important question because there is a great deal of misinformation out there about the funding for NCLB. The simple answer to your question is “yes.”

First, needless to say and as I said earlier in answer to another question, educational accountability is the cornerstone of NCLB, and the early results show that the law is working: student achievement is going up. With respect to funding, the President has supported substantial increases in funding under NCLB, and for K-12 education generally.

In his 2005 budget proposal, President Bush asked for a 49% increase in K-12 funding ($12.2 billion), which includes both funding for No Child Left Behind and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Looking just at NCLB, funding has increased 42.5% or $7.4 billion. In his first three years alone, the President sought and obtained more money for Title I (the NCLB program that serves schools with economically disadvantaged children) than the prior Administration sought in eight years.

But aside from these historic increases, the money provided more than exceeds the additional costs associated with NCLB. In the past three years, states have received $1.16 billion for student assessments (testing) that do not even need to be in place under NCLB until the 2005-06 school year. In light of recent studies about the cost of the assessment requirements being less than $6 per child, this is an impressive sum. I hope you agree! And I hope I have answered your question. Thanks for writing!



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shane, from Michigan writes:
what is the presidents plan for bettering our economy and bringing us out of this deficit?

Harriet Miers
The President has a forward-looking plan to continue the strong growth of the economy. Just today, we have good news from the Commerce Department. They announced that growth in the third quarter of this year was 3.7%, above the average of the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. And the unemployment rate, at 5.4%, is lower than the average for those decades too. The homeownership rate is the highest ever, including ownership of homes by minorities.

However, the President knows more work is needed to ensure that every American who wants a job can get one.

To build on his record of success, the President has proposed making the tax relief he called for and that was passed permanent, simplifying the tax code, making health care more affordable and accessible, adopting a comprehensive energy policy, reducing the burden that frivolous lawsuits place on the economy, and opening new markets for American workers.

For a detailed summary of the President's program please go to http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/economy/index.html.

And to reduce the deficit, we have to foster economic growth and control government spending. The President's Budget for 2005 holds non-security spending to less than 1% growth. This is a restoration of fiscal discipline, especially when compared to the 15% growth in non-security Federal spending during the last year of the previous Administration. The President has pledged to cut the deficit in half in five years, and we are making progress toward that goal.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Steve, from College Station Texas writes:
Howdy I have owned a small service business in my area for the last one and a half years. I do great work and have no complaints. But the increase in workflow isn't what I had hoped for after this length of time. I have some equipment that needs work (cash outlay) and I could use some more equipment (cash outlay) to expand my small business. Also I need to do more (and more effective advertising - cash outlay).

So, as you can guess cashflow isn't up to specs. This business needs time and name recognition, as well as referrals.

My question is: Are there government grants for my small business that I can receive that will be the 'leg-up' to success that I need?

Harriet Miers
Hello, Steve.

It is nice to hear from someone from College Station, the home of the Presidential Library of our President’s Dad, former President Bush. Small businesses create 70% of the new jobs in the economy, so your work is a key part of the success of the American economy.

The Small Business Administration does offer a range of financing programs to help small businesses get off the ground. You can visit the SBA website (http://www.sba.gov/financing/index.html) or call them at 1-800-827-5722 to learn more about the help they offer. Also read the White House chat with SBA Administrator Barreto (http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask/20041027.html). You can also inquire about whether you might qualify for any grant programs.

The President's tax relief program is also helping small businesses like you keep more of the money you earn by reducing tax rates across the board and increasing the amount of investment in equipment that small businesses can expense on their taxes. Steve, your efforts and those of people just like you all around the United States are so important to the continued strength of our economy, so keep up the good work and we wish you great success.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Debra, from Ohio writes:
My mother is in a nursing home and I was told last night that the nursing home will not be able to receive flu vaccines from their supplier. The people who most need these shots can not receive them? Are the elderly expendable?

After they cared for us as children, do we turn our backs on them when they need our help now? How can we keep them safe?

Harriet Miers
Debra, I appreciate the depth of your concern. America's seniors deserve the respect and gratitude of all Americans. My hope is that everyone understands the President’s respect for and commitment to our seniors as demonstrated by his actions. The President is committed to protecting Social Security and the benefits of those in retirement or near retirement, and he strengthened Medicare by adding a prescription drug benefit for our seniors for the first time in the program's history.

As for the flu vaccine shortage, every effort is being made to ensure that those Americans with the greatest need (the elderly, young children, and the chronically ill) have access to the flu vaccine. Through the extraordinary efforts of the Department of Health and Human Services working with vaccine manufacturers around the world, at this point in time we expect to have about 66 million vaccine doses available this flu season. It's still early in the flu season, and thankfully the season has not gotten off to a fast start. In the coming weeks, millions more vaccine doses will be delivered and it will be targeted to people, like your mother, who are in the greatest need for flu vaccine. We have also made arrangements to have nearly 40 million doses of antiviral drugs available during this flu season to help individuals who didn't get the vaccine. You can contact your state health department (http://www.odh.state.oh.us/index.asp) to get more information on how you can get your mother a flu shot.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bob, from Mayo, MD writes:
Please express to all at VA MED DC my sincere appreciation for a job well done and their continued service and dedication to the veterans' community.

The VA MED DC has truly turned into a customer oriented facility from the "meat factory" it was in the mid 80's. Thanks gang. When will h.r. 4200 be signed by POTUS?

Harriet Miers
Bob, thanks for the kudos. The President's commitment to honoring our Nation's Veterans is unwavering. I'll also pass them along to Secretary Principi (http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/principi-bio.html) and his team at Veterans Affairs. The President has increased funding for veterans more in four years than the previous Administration did in eight, including a 40% increase for veterans’ health care.

As for H.R. 4200, the Ronald W. Reagan Defense Authorization Act, the President signed it yesterday (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/10/20041029-6.html).



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Andrea, from Long Island, NY writes:
Hi Ms. Miers. I heard from a friend that a new federal law was passed this week that will enable banks to process our checks more quickly. I can't find any information on this. Is this true? Happy Halloween

Harriet Miers
Hi Andrea.

Your friend was probably referring to the Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act (P.L. 108-100), also known as the Check 21 Act. The President signed the bill into law exactly one year and a day ago. The bill modernizes the check processing system including by allowing banks to use electronic copies of checks instead of the old system that required physical shipments of checks around the country. Many of the bill's provisions went into effect today.

And a Happy Halloween to you too. You should check out our Halloween page at http://www.whitehouse.gov/halloween/



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Barry, from Ottumwa, IA writes:
I have been reading the answers to the questions in this forum but have not seen anything on President Bush's plan for creating and keeping good paying jobs for Americans in America. What does he plan to do help my children and Grandchildren have a secure future?

Harriet Miers
Barry, the President shares your commitment to making sure that America continues to create good-paying jobs for today and tomorrow.

His Jobs for the 21st Century Initiative is building on the success of the No Child Left Behind education reforms so that American workers have the skills they need to compete with anyone in the world. The President's tax relief has created incentives for firms to grow and expand. The future of the American economy depends on making America the best place in the world to do business by making the President's tax cuts permanent, lowering the costs of health care, reducing the burden of frivolous lawsuits and unnecessary regulation, opening new markets for American goods and services, and adopting a comprehensive energy policy.

He is also dedicated to improving job training available in our country, and he is taking steps to make our training programs cost effective and responsive to the needs of our workers. President Bush believes strongly in the value of our community colleges both for education and job training, and he has a number of programs to support and improve them. And, of course, for the sake of our children and grandchildren, President Bush works hard every day to make sure our Nation is safe.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sam, from Miami Beach writes:
Did NBC use the real Camp David to film THE WEST WING? They have shown Camp David for the past two episodes. GO BUSH GO We are all routing for you in Miami Beach

Harriet Miers
Sam -- Thanks for your strong support in Miami Beach!

I hope this doesn't disappoint you too much, but I understand that the real Camp David was not used to film episodes of the West Wing. Camp David is a beautiful, serene place. It provides a perfect backdrop for the President to meet with and entertain foreign and other visitors. It is a real asset for the United States Government.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eric, from Mississippi writes:
I want to thank the President for his actions of securing our nation. What are his future plans for better securing our borders?

Harriet Miers
Eric -- You ask a timely question about our borders because the President recently signed an appropriations bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security, which includes more money to protect our borders. Since taking office, the President has tripled funding for homeland security.

With respect to securing our borders, it's important to take a step back and see how far we've come since September 11. Three years ago, there were inspectors from three different Federal agencies at our ports of entry. Today, the Department of Homeland Security's Customs and Border Protection (CBP) consolidates all port inspection activities into a single workforce to create "one face at the border." The Border Patrol is also part of CBP. More than 18,000 CBP Officers, 1,400 CBP Agriculture Specialists, and 11,000 Border Patrol Agents now guard our Nation's borders.

Another initiative that is doing a great job to protect our borders is the US- VISIT program. The US-VISIT entry-exit system uses biometric technology to help ensure that our borders remain open to legitimate travelers but closed to terrorists. US-VISIT was launched at 116 airports and 16 seaports across the country, and the program is expanding to land ports of entry. This program has been very successful, processing more than 8.5 million travelers since January.

You can learn more about these initiatives on our Website at this link: http://www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeff, from Groton, NY writes:
Good afternoon Harriot. Thank you for taking my question. Why is it hard for your administration to get the word out that the economy is not bad at all. The current numbers look fantasitic. Why are people ignoring the fact that this President is doing a tremendous job with the economy?

Harriet Miers
Thank you for your question. The current numbers do look great, and we are encouraged the economy will continue to get better and better. As you probably know, though, we are not going to be satisfied until every American who wants a job can get one. We have seen signs recently that people across the Nation are learning more and more that the economy is strong and getting stronger. That is encouraging also. Thanks for helping us get the word out by sending your great question. For more, www.whitehouse.gov/economy.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nick, from Maryland writes:
Has the President signed the NDAA FY05 bill yet?

Harriet Miers
Hi, Nick. Yes, the President has signed it. You can see my earlier answer that provides the link. Thanks for writing.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth, from Covina, CA writes:
Dear Mr President: First of all thank you for all your hard work.

Secondly I want to share the following: Yesterday I attended a memorial service of a young man from my community that was killed in Iraq, I believe Oct. 16, 2004. As you know first hand it is a heartbreaking situation.

Although I personally did not know this soldier I attended in order to pay my respects and to somehow relay to the parents that I acknowledge what this young man died for, a service to his country and us his fellow Americans meaning me. I don't know if I conveyed this in any way to the parents, and I left feeling so helpless. I went home to my family, and life when on as if no loss of live had taken place.

I kept wondering why more people were not there thanking this family for their son's sacrafice. I wanted the whole community to of been there. I have a boy in Iraq, and I know how sad it makes me feel when I think his service there is taken for granted.

I wanted to share this story with you. You probably have hundreds.

May God continue to bless you.

Harriet Miers
Elizabeth, your note shows the greatness of the spirit of the American people. Yes, our Nation is grateful for the sacrifices of our servicemen and women and their families. As the President has said, he has been told by the loved ones of those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice that we should honor their loved ones by completing their mission. The President is committed to doing just that.

Thank you for your wonderfully inspiring words. May God bless you and yours, may he protect our servicemen and women, and may God continue to bless this great country of ours.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eileen, from Orlando, FL writes:
Not really a question just a note of encouragement for President Bush and

his family. I wanted you to know that my family prays for you everyday, for you safety , for your wisdom, and most of all that you will remain our Leader. Thank you President Bush.

P.S. I am a registered democrat, divorced mom, with two little ones at home and one in the navy. I've had lots of conversation with other mothers and its amazing how much they don't know about you and what you have done for the american people. Once they allow me to talk I can see they have some thinking to do , I just hope your message gets out without bias. Thank you again.

Eileen, Navy Mom

Harriet Miers
Dear Eileen, I appreciate your note. I know the President and Mrs. Bush greatly value the support of Americans like yourself. You and your family are sacrificing to help make the United States safer, and your contribution and the service of your son is helping advance the cause of freedom around the world. Your fellow Americans salute him and his mom! All the best.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Harriet Miers
I appreciate all of those who wrote in today and you for being with us also. Hearing from Americans across the country is inspiring and interesting. I hope everyone has a great weekend.....and don't forget to reset your clocks Saturday night. Harriet


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask/20041029.html

abc and nbc announced it already
this is from CNN

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/10/03/scotus.preview/index.html
Bush expected to nominate Harriet Miers to Supreme Court
Miers currently works as White House counsel
By Bill Mears
CNN Washington Bureau



Monday, October 3, 2005; Posted: 7:21 a.m. EDT (11:21 GMT)


Harriet Miers is expected to be nominated as Supreme Court justice Monday morning.WATCH Browse/Search

Who will be Bush's next court nominee? (5:43)

Senate votes on Roberts nomination (3:08)
RELATED
Gallery: Scenes from the swearing-in

• Gallery: Roberts profile
• New chief justice goes to work
• Interactive: Chief justice duties
SPECIAL REPORT

• Legacy: William H. Rehnquist
• Scenarios: Choosing a nominee
• Gallery: Confirmation explainer
• Special ReportYOUR E-MAIL ALERTS

Supreme Court
John Roberts
or Create Your Own
Manage Alerts | What Is This? WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush is expected Monday to name White House counsel Harriet Miers as his choice to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Bush will announce his nominee at an Oval Office event at 8 a.m. ET.

If confirmed, Miers, 60, would join Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the second sitting female justice on the bench.

The announcement will come shortly before justices begin a new term with a new chief justice.

The term is expected to include rulings on several controversial cases, said Edward Lazarus, a Supreme Court legal analyst. (Case list)

"This is a situation where, from the very moment the justices start back up in October, they're going to be very divided," said Lazarus, who also authored "Closed Chambers," a book on the justices. "It's going to be a lot of friction inside the building."

Chief Justice John Roberts was sworn in Thursday, less than four hours after the Senate voted 78-22 to confirm him. He got to work quickly, putting in a full day at the court on Friday. (Related story)

The new chief has a lot of catching up to do, and fast: the court formally begins its work Monday, when oral arguments will be heard for the new term. (Related story)

Youngest justice
The 50-year-old Roberts will lead a bench on which seven of the current nine members are over 65. Only Clarence Thomas, at 57, approaches him in age.

When a new justice arrives there is "a certain amount of delicate politicking" among the justices, Lazarus said.

"Both sides are going to be feeling out Chief Justice Roberts to see what kinds of arguments appeal to him," he said. "What kind of person is he? Is he going to be someone who is going to be harder-edged, like a [Antonin] Scalia or a Thomas, or he is going to be the kind of very collegial person he's reputed to be?"

One thing that will help Roberts in the transition is that he clerked for then-Associate Justice William Rehnquist in 1980-81, and colleagues say the young lawyer learned valuable lessons in law and leadership from his mentor.

Rehnquist died September 3 after battling thyroid cancer for months. Two days later, Roberts was nominated to replace him.

Years ago, when preparing for cases, the two men would walk together on the court grounds or Capitol Hill and discuss the issues.

"It was apparent from the first day we were there that [Roberts] was an extraordinary intellect with a great work ethic, and he was going to do special things. And he has," said Dean Colson, who clerked for Rehnquist with Roberts.

Increasing caseload?
In confirmation hearings Roberts hinted at increasing the court's docket of cases, which had dropped by nearly half since Rehnquist took over in 1986.

The justices now hear about 80 appeals, and there have been complaints that the court ignores too many important issues.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced her pending retirement last July. Roberts initially was picked for her seat, but Rehnquist's death changed the dynamic and prolonged the confirmation process.

O'Connor has said she will stay on until a replacement is named, making her role in the upcoming term unclear. Under court rules, a justice's vote does not count until a ruling is issued, a process than can take weeks or months. Officials have not said whether O'Connor will be on the bench Monday.

Many legal scholars question whether O'Connor would want to continue hearing cases if her replacement takes over before rulings are issued, thereby negating her vote.

The choice to replace O'Connor could be pivotal. She has been a key swing vote in the past and has, for example, voted to strike down abortion laws that failed to contain health exceptions. (Full story)

Most-watched case
Abortion tops the court's current docket. The most-watched case deals with a New Hampshire law requiring minors to get parental permission before undergoing the procedure unless a woman's life is in danger.

A federal appeals court ruled that exception was not broad enough, since it did not include a woman's health.

"This law does seem to be crafted to demand some kind of Supreme Court review," Lazarus said. "Because it really goes to this question of how much you have to protect the life versus the health of the mother. ... And it actually could be one of those cases that could turn on John Roberts' vote."

That case is to be heard in late November.

The court also will hear a longstanding dispute over legal protection for reproductive clinics against anti-abortion protesters. Next spring, the justices could confront another simmering issue: whether to continue to permit use of a late-term procedure critics call "partial-birth" abortion.

The justices in 2000 blocked states from enforcing a ban on such abortions, since those laws also did not provide for the health of the woman.

Assisted suicide case
On the second day, the court will hear arguments over whether an Oregon law allowing physician-assisted suicide is constitutional. The voter-approved referendum allows physicians to prescribe lethal doses of medicine to terminally ill patients who express a strong, clear desire to end their lives.

The Bush administration, normally a champion of states' rights, has said Oregon's law conflicts with the federal government's power over how drugs are prescribed and administered.

Doctors could be jailed or have their licenses revoked if the federal government prevails.

"The issue of physician-assisted suicide is tied into what President Bush calls 'the culture of life.' So this is a real emotional issue for them [conservatives]," Lazarus said. "And it's likely to be a very close ruling at the court, with Roberts again, perhaps, a key vote."

Other cases under consideration:


A church-state battle concerning religious services that use a hallucinogenic tea, containing a banned drug.


A free-speech dispute over whether universities opposed to the Pentagon's policy on homosexuals in uniform may ban military recruiters from campus.


When and whether new DNA evidence can be used to help grant death row inmates new legal hearings to prove their innocence.


Whether police can search homes for drugs when occupants disagree over consent.

Of equal importance will be cases that may be added to the docket in the next few months. In addition to the "partial-birth" case, the justices could consider:


Whether anti-racketeering laws can be used against tobacco companies accused of misleading Americans about the health dangers of smoking.


Whether public school children can continue being led in the Pledge of Allegiance.


Various terrorism-related cases dealing with whether Americans held by the military in the United States as "enemy combatants" deserve a chance to appeal in civilian courts; and the use of military tribunals to try suspected foreign terrorist suspects.


The Supreme Court term begins the first Monday in October and effectively ends in late June or early July.

Well, that one will certainly drive Katrina, Delay, Rove, Libby, Frith, etal off the front pages.

Rovian 'genius' at work again !

He makes Machiavelli look like a piker

She was in charge of finding the Supreme court nominies.

If they are correct about his nominee, it is a disappointment.
Failed policies= Nominate the Deputy Chief of staff for Policy ?????????
Sound familiar ?

Good find on the post from the Ask the Gov't site, Graham.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/SupremeCourt/story?id=1170572

Who is Harriet Miers

Oct. 3, 2005 — Harriet Ellan Miers is White House counsel and was formerly President Bush's personal lawyer in Texas. She first served in the White House as staff secretary and was deputy chief of staff before she was named counsel upon Alberto Gonzales' transition to attorney general.

When he was the governor of Texas, Bush once publicly introduced Miers as a "pit bull in size 6 shoes."



Full Coverage: Supreme Court
The U.S. Supreme Court


Bush Chooses Miers for Supreme Court
Bush Chooses Miers for Supreme Court
The Note: Down Time, Break Time, Summertime
Born and raised in Dallas, Miers earned her undergraduate degree in mathematics and her law degree from Southern Methodist University. In addition to her legal career, she served one term on the Dallas City Council.

Miers, 60, broke barriers for women throughout her career. She reportedly was the first woman hired by the prestigious Dallas law firm Locke Purnell Boren Laney & Neely, where she became a successful commercial litigator. She also became the first female president of the Dallas Bar Association in 1985 and was the first woman elected president of the Texas Bar Association in 1992.

Miers met Bush in the 1980s, according to published reports, and she was counsel for his 1994 campaign for governor. He appointed her chair of the Texas Lottery Commission in 1995.

Miers then was president of Locke, Purnell, Rain & Harrell and co-managing partner of Locke Liddell & Sapp before she joined the White House in 2001.

In addition, Miers was named one of the Top 50 Most Influential Lawyers by the National Law Journal in 1998, and she received numerous other awards from groups including the Dallas Women Lawyers Association, the Anti-Defamation League and the Dallas Association of Young Lawyers.

washingtonpost.com
Bush Names Harriet Miers to Supreme Court, White House Counsel Would Replace O'Connor

By Fred Barbash, Peter Baker and Michael Fletcher
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, October 3, 2005; 8:09 AM



President Bush has chosen White House Counsel Harriet Miers as associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Miers, who was Bush's personal attorney in Texas, was the first woman elected president of the Texas Bar Association and was a parner at the Texas law firm of Locke Liddell & Sapp before coming to Washington.

If confirmed, she would be a rare appointee with no experience as a judge at any level.

In 1989, she was elected to a two-year term as an at-large candidate on the Dallas City Council. She chose not to run for re-election when her term expired.

Miers also served as general counsel for the transition team of Governor-elect George W. Bush in 1994, according to a White House biography of Miers released this morning.

Miers has served as Counsel to the President since February, 2005.

"She is single and very close to her family: two brothers and her mother live in Dallas and a third brother lives in Houston," said the White House biography.

Miers's low-key but high-precision style has been particularly valued in a White House where discipline in publicly articulating policy and loyalty to the president are highly valued.

Miers came with him to the White House in 2001 as staff secretary, the person who screens all the documents that cross the president's desk. She was promoted to deputy chief of staff before Bush named her counsel after his reelection in November. She replaced Alberto R. Gonzales, another longtime Bush confidant, who was elevated to attorney general.

"Harriet Miers is a trusted adviser on whom I have long relied for straightforward advice," Bush said at the time. "Harriet has the keen judgment and discerning intellect necessary to be an outstanding counsel."

When he was governor of Texas, Bush once called her "a pit bull in size 6 shoes" for her cool but dogged determination.

Working with her staff of 13 lawyers, and in cooperation with the Justice Department, Miers's office provides guidance on issues from the legal parameters for the war on terrorism to presidential speeches. Her office also takes the lead in vetting and recommending candidates for the federal judiciary, all the way up to the Supreme Court.

The office also has played a pivotal role in recommending federal appeals court candidates to Bush. Senate Democrats blocked 10 of the president's 34 appeals court nominees during his first term, saying they were too extreme in their conservatism. That prompted Senate Republicans to threaten to change the rules to disallow filibusters of judicial candidates.

Born and raised in Dallas, Miers, 59, is a graduate of Southern Methodist University, where she majored in mathematics. She went on to law school at SMU, earning her law degree in 1970 and going on to clerk for a federal judge in Dallas. In an era when there were few female lawyers, Miers set out for the top.

According to published reports, she was the first woman hired by Locke Purnell Boren Laney & Neely, a Dallas firm whose history extends to the 1890s. She went on to become a top commercial litigator whose clients included Microsoft and the Walt Disney Co.

Miers, who is not married and does not have children, was active in professional organizations and eventually was elected head of the Dallas and Texas bar associations, where she was known for encouraging members to do pro bono work.

Miers met Bush in the 1980s, and was drafted to work as counsel for his 1994 gubernatorial campaign. In 1995, he appointed her to the Texas Lottery Commission. After working as a lawyer in Bush's presidential campaign, she came to Washington with him in 2001.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...5100300252.html

One thing to think of-
As Bush's personal lawyer, he would have wanted someone who could do the best in a situation a person would need.
(i.e.-not someone who is making a point, someone who gets Bush the result a private person would want).
Which means, as Bush is a hypocrite, wouldn't he want someone who would believe in the same thing as Bill Clinton's lawyer or anyone else's private lawyer? (in case he has the same problems in all walks?)

if you get what I mean here.
It depends how tied up their relationship is. Is she independent of him,
or just a mouthpiece?

Old Red Joe, get some chap stick! its time for you to really kiss republican but! i want you Red Joe to go on Faux news and declare that she is the best person in the universe and that you would give your liver so that she could live one more day! oh and make sure you give a really good speach! go on red joe go on.
the reason i'm so ticked are.
1) who is this woman?
2) how the heck is she qualified?
3) our democratic leaders will comfirm her!

thanks!

NBC Pete Williams was saying normally when something like this happens he is inundated by fax' and emails from both sides about a candidate.

He said NOTHING was in his box from either side, which is how unknoown she is on issues that are important.

When you think of how important this job is, how there are only 9, shouldn't there be some level of competence required?
(d'uh, it is George Bush's administration of course)...

How do you spell consiglierie?

According to an article at Yahoo, Sen. Minority Leader Harry Reid had urged Bush to consider her.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051003/ap_on_..._wh/bush_scotus

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/10/03/D8D0I4N00.html

Bush Chooses Miers for Supreme Court
Oct 03 8:21 AM US/Eastern


By DEB RIECHMANN
Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON


President Bush on Monday nominated White House counsel Harriet Miers to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court, reaching into his loyal inner circle for a pick that could reshape the nation's judiciary for years to come.

"She has devoted her life to the rule of law and the cause of justice," Bush said, announcing his choice from the Oval Office with Miers at his side. "She will be an outstanding addition to the Supreme Court of the United States."

If confirmed by the Republican-controlled Senate, Miers, 60, would join Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the second woman on the nation's highest court and the third to serve there. Miers, who has never been a judge, was the first woman to serve as president of the Texas State Bar and the Dallas Bar Association.

Miers, who Bush called a trailblazer for women in the legal profession, said she was humbled by the nod.

"If confirmed, I recognize I will have a tremendous responsibility to keep our judicial system strong and to help insure the court meets their obligations to strictly apply the laws and Constitution," she said.

Democratic and Republican special interests groups were braced for a political brawl over the pick, Bush's second. But the lack of a judicial record may make it difficult for Democrats to find ground upon which to fight her nomination.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., had urged the administration to consider Miers, two congressional officials said. There was a long list of staunchly conservative judges that Democrats were poised to fight, Miers not among them.

Bush, his approval rating falling in recent months, had been under intense pressure to nominate a woman or a minority.

Miers' pick came shortly before Chief Justice John Roberts was set to take his seat on the court for the first time Monday after breezing to nomination. Miers helped push his nomination through the Senate.

"She will strictly interpret our Constitution and laws. She will not legislate from the bench," Bush said. Conservatives apparently agreed.

"There's every indication that she's very similar to Judge Roberts _ judicial restraint, limited role of the court, basically a judicial conservative," said Republican consultant Greg Mueller, who works for several conservative advocacy leaders.

The president offered the job to Miers Sunday night over dinner in the residence. He met with Miers on four occasions during the past couple weeks, officials said.

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0300122_pf.html

Bush Chooses Miers for Supreme Court

By DEB RIECHMANN
The Associated Press
Monday, October 3, 2005; 8:21 AM



WASHINGTON -- President Bush on Monday nominated White House counsel Harriet Miers to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court, reaching into his loyal inner circle for a pick that could reshape the nation's judiciary for years to come.

"She has devoted her life to the rule of law and the cause of justice," Bush said, announcing his choice from the Oval Office with Miers at his side. "She will be an outstanding addition to the Supreme Court of the United States."

If confirmed by the Republican-controlled Senate, Miers, 60, would join Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the second woman on the nation's highest court and the third to serve there. Miers, who has never been a judge, was the first woman to serve as president of the Texas State Bar and the Dallas Bar Association.

Miers, who Bush called a trailblazer for women in the legal profession, said she was humbled by the nod.

"If confirmed, I recognize I will have a tremendous responsibility to keep our judicial system strong and to help insure the court meets their obligations to strictly apply the laws and Constitution," she said.

Democratic and Republican special interests groups were braced for a political brawl over the pick, Bush's second. But the lack of a judicial record may make it difficult for Democrats to find ground upon which to fight her nomination.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., had urged the administration to consider Miers, two congressional officials said. There was a long list of staunchly conservative judges that Democrats were poised to fight, Miers not among them.

Bush, his approval rating falling in recent months, had been under intense pressure to nominate a woman or a minority.

Miers' pick came shortly before Chief Justice John Roberts was set to take his seat on the court for the first time Monday after breezing to nomination. Miers helped push his nomination through the Senate.

"She will strictly interpret our Constitution and laws. She will not legislate from the bench," Bush said. Conservatives apparently agreed.

"There's every indication that she's very similar to Judge Roberts _ judicial restraint, limited role of the court, basically a judicial conservative," said Republican consultant Greg Mueller, who works for several conservative advocacy leaders.

The president offered the job to Miers Sunday night over dinner in the residence. He met with Miers on four occasions during the past couple weeks, officials said.

© 2005 The Associated Press

(of course, maybe Reid said, "Hey Bush, you picked Cheney, why don't you do the same thing here" heh heh heh

maybe she will be a liberal and Reid pulled one over on Bush with planting the idea
(as Reid is much smarter than Bush is)...
of course not very likely...

But if you notice, I put a thread up last week or two ago, asking Who is Harriet Miers, and nobody came up with any more since then, than is here today...

MODS if these are too big or not considered pertinent please delete

I thought there might be a couple of interesting items here










http://www.newsmeat.com/washington_politic...rriet_Miers.php

She's an unkown that's for sure.

Well usually i would have some thing insulting or witty to say but....well I’m plum out of things to say? one the commander in chip looks extra ape like, and he has that look on his face as if to say” what me worry, and where is the bong" as for the woman behind him. Well you see credentials like evidence are so over blown!

but i have to give it to them,
Rove, Frist, Delay and Old Uncle Dick will not be gracing our news papers any more. there are somke screens and there are smoke screens! and man these guys know alot about smoke!

She is the same as Roberts. And she will save BushCo.s' bacon when they face indictments by changing the definition of true and false, up and down, black and white, night and day. Welcome to "Mourning in America"! The legacy of Traitors!

There are probably no tangible disqualifying factors except that the cronyism has gone too far. I would oppose her on that basis.

That is interesting that she gave 1000.00 to Al Gore in 1988...
primary season...very interesting...wonder what it means

And of course Lloyd Bentsen in 1987 (who was later Dukakis' VP who destroyed Dan Quayle in the debate)

Also one there to the DNC.. so she must have been a Democrat at one time ?

Don't see any to Delay

It appears she used to be a Dem. but is now a loyal George Bush cronie. This is the only qualifacation needed in this administration.

I tell you, its not like any of the other choices were any good, so who knows?

If the conservatives don't like her, this could lead to a 3rd party run in 08 by an
ultra conservative, thereby assuring us of winning the election...stranger things have happened.

I am sure they are digging into her background on all sides...
Wonder if they waited to this morning now because they had not finished checking something or other out last week

Did they decide to do in on a Monday morning to give the rightwingers time to get used to it before the next weekend shows?

The Republicans will probably use the fact she has contributed to Dems in the past to claim Dems are obstructionists if they vote against her.

I found it interesting that there was nothing to Delay.

I'm not familiar with a lot of the GOP Texans ... are the ones she has supported other than Bush of course, RR or CC ?

Maybe it means she votes her conscience...which would be a good thing. She could just be a Republican who will cross party lines for the better candidate...rather than that "my party right or wrong" approach that many of them seem to have
{edited for spelling error}

I agree.

There is probably very little to disqualify her, but also very little to recommend her to the high post to which she has been nominated.

She is a bright woman.

There is no doubt about that.

However, her background and ability pale in comparison to other conservative women who are out there.

She is certainly no Sandra Day O'Connor.

If this is the best George W. Bush can do our nation truly is at a crossroads in terms of competence and leadership.

I would submit that Alberto Gonzales would have been a much better choice than this one, but his tenure has been too short as Attorney General and the Christian right would not support him.

One thing this choice does show I believe, is that Bush, by nominating a bright, but not strong female intellectual, has ceded many issues to the men on the court. A strong female conservative intellectual could hold her own. Perhaps she will be a surprise.

The other thing I believe is that Bush has demonstrated with this nomination a total disregard for the Christian rights interests.

Conservatives are again applauding Meirs as they did Roberts when on the push button issues like abortion they have no idea how she will rule. They are accepting on faith that Bush holds their interests at heart.

We do not know how she will rule.

She has never been a judge and I would like to know how these conservative groups who have endorsed her and Roberts feel in about 10 years.

I believe on social issues that they will be sorely disappointed.

Neither were 36 previous Supreme Court justices!

If you look at the character of her client you will see the character of the lawyer.

Yep

Not an issue

Dems have wanted other non-judges in recent times too.

Trou I tend to agree, except for the fact that if we accept that as true we are condemning every defense attorney in the blanket condemnation.

The reason I am ambivalent is that she has tied herself to Bush on an exclusive basis for quite some time now.

Spoken like a true Ideologue, TRoU...

I wonder who she will bond with

If she bonds with the other female it could be intersting, in the opposite way
that Thomas bonded with Scalia

I always think in the back of my mind that if Roe v. Wade is overturned, the
religious right basically has lost their #1 whining issue, which will mean people
won't necessarily donate more.

If Reid did send her name in, I would think its gonna be hard for Dems. to vote no

As I myself have said that not being a judge or a lawyer is not a reason not to nominate someone (and I had suggested a Pres. Kerry nominate Al Gore)...I can't hold her not being a judge as reason not to. However, qualified? That is another story
Basically, any citizen who has an open mind can be a justice.
They pay pages to find the paper work needed in other cases.

So, who she would bond with is important.

Think about this statement.
Respectfully, I have to disagree. Everyone is entitled to a lawyer.

Whenever someone puts down the ACLU, I tell them they take the cases of any
body on any side who's rights are violated.
Johnny Cochran is a great lawyer.Right?
While I would not pick him now to be a SC Justist (only because he is dead)...

She has never pleaded a case before the Supreme Court, but has better than 30 years as a lawyer. We've had governors come directly to the court. Judicial qualification doesn't seem to be the problem.

I sound like an ideologue because I am TOTALLY opposed to Bush or anything he does by this point in time! This lawyer didn't just take a case or "client" assigned by a judge. As C.O. mentioned she has tied herself to this particular client by choice.

I agree my first statement implies a blanket condemnation of all lawyers, so I should have nuanced it as she suggested. But with that qualifier, I repeat; "Look at the character of her long term chosen client, and you will see the character of the lawyer!"

NOW, we are in complete agreement Trou!

I don't think she is qualified. Period. I will be curious to see how the ABA rates her.

A lawyer John Gotti would have would not necessarily be a member of the group Italians hate us to name, would they? Was Bruce Cutler?

Would David Kendall not get a job, because the right said the same thing about Clinton? Same with David Boies, who I remember reading people considered the #1 at what he did in America.

I don't like blanket looks at anyone or any profession
(respectfully saying this of course).

Ok, here's a scary line from ABC's article:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/SupremeCourt/story?id=1170572

Are you blinded to the point that you can't reason rationally? Isn't it worth waiting a few days to see what the leadership has to say, and some of the research comes to light?
William Crystal said today that the Conservative base would not be happy with this appointment. He feels that Bush has capitulated.

Why? What is your expertise in this area?

Look Graham, I agreed my statement was too broad brush. Lawyers are advocates for hire. I am not bashing lawyers, but agree my first statement sure sounded like it.

Even the "Great" RestofUs can mispeak (rarely)!

I would not use the term blinded (though my Brother would agree with you). I would say I am CONVINCED, that Bush is a Liar, that he is deeply corrupt, supports traitors, and is incompetent. Therefore I will not wait to see what he is doing now, as I am sure it is bad. So yes, you can use that term "blinded", but it is not "irrational" given the above.

no biggie.

It sounds though like she is a step above Clarence Thomas...
(I am not saying either that I support her, I don't know anymore than you...just
theorizing a bit...)

Like I said, all the choices were worse to worst...
when Alberto Gonzales is the best choice, we knew there were problems.

Just in general, I don't like Alberto's torture views...but if I were him, based on his loyalty, I would be spittin' mad this morning, wouldn't you.
He might be someone who at the end of the day (if hopefully Bush don't get a 3rd. pick), might be someone with an enormous grudge on his shoulders he will look to relieve (esp. if he needs a deal)...Keep that on file for the future.

Maybe we have, but we shouldn't. I think all supreme court nominees should have judicial experience. It only makes sense.

But I am more suspicious about the close connection between Bush and Miers. If Clinton appointed his personal lawyer to the court, what do you think the republicans would say?

In today's environment...most likely the same thing. But remember...The GOP gave Ginsberg a pass.

Damn!...Hit the 5000 post number, and didn't even realize it...

ginsberg wasn't the most controversial choice he could have made.
Nor his first choices either.
He wanted to go with Mario Cuomo and Bruce Babbitt, but Cuomo (for his own something in the closet reasons), said no, and Clinton was told Babbitt would be a hard fight.

So he backed off both.