Hydrablog

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/28/washington/28bolton.html
July 28, 2006
Bolton in the Senate, Take 2, Picks Up Just Where It Ended
By THOM SHANKER [followup from yesterday’s govt] [I saw a couple of hours worth on C-SPAN I] [************]
WASHINGTON, July 27 — The second Senate confirmation hearing for John R. Bolton, who became ambassador to the United Nations under a recess appointment, played out Thursday like a summertime movie sequel.
The plot was familiar, although one major character switched sides. There was a little snappy dialogue, a fresh conflict to debate, but not that much action. And it ended, after three and a half hours, without any resolution of the central question: Will Mr. Bolton receive formal confirmation from the Senate this time? So the audience must return yet again to see how it all turns out.
Mr. Bolton came under attack from Democratic senators — led by Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut and Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin — who accused the ambassador of being ineffective at the United Nations, of having bullied an intelligence analyst and of abusing his authority by seeking names of Americans whose conversations were captured in eavesdropping operations.
And he was defended by Republican senators, this time including George V. Voinovich of Ohio, who has withdrawn his previous objection to the nomination. That switch creates a fresh political dynamic that could clear the way for a full Senate vote on Mr. Bolton, who became ambassador last year when President Bush used his powers of recess appointment to bypass Senate confirmation. The arrangement ends when this Congress does, in January.
The president’s move came after Senate Democrats blocked a formal floor vote on Mr. Bolton’s nomination last summer, when Republicans were six votes short of the number required to break a filibuster; at the time, Mr. Voinovich voted with the Democrats.
On Thursday, Mr. Voinovich said he was convinced that Mr. Bolton had shown the skills necessary to represent America’s interests at the United Nations, and countered reports citing unnamed foreign diplomats that Mr. Bolton was not skilled at working with allies. “I suggest they pick up the phone and talk with his colleagues at the U.N., as I have done,” Mr. Voinovich said.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing was at times a proxy debate for the range of the administration’s foreign policy, with even a Republican joining Democrats who said President Bush had not done enough to prevent the current explosion of violence in the Middle East.
That Republican senator, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, repeatedly pressed Mr. Bolton to describe the Bush administration’s road map to Middle East peace, as well as plans for alleviating the root causes of the conflict. He ended his round of questions with a statement of frustration over what he said was the lack of shape to administration thinking.
“It started with regime change in Iraq, and we’ve seen our challenges associated with that,” Mr. Chafee said. “And then the failure of the road map. And now the conflagration, as I said, in southern Lebanon. But it’s difficult to get an idea of what the administration has in mind.”
The Foreign Relations Committee has scheduled a business session next week and could consider the nomination then, although staff members for both Republican and Democratic members said they expected the committee vote to be pushed past the August recess. Mr. Bolton is expected to be approved by the committee along party lines.
Barring some emergency action, then, it is unlikely the full Senate will consider the nomination until September. By then, swirling events in Iraq, Lebanon, Iran and North Korea could further influence the climate in which senators vote, even as midterm elections approach.
Because of those variables, Democratic Party leaders would not say whether they would try to rally the numbers to block a floor vote on Mr. Bolton as they did last summer.
Mr. Bolton sought in his testimony to focus less on the Democratic senators’ specific complaints, and instead highlighted his efforts on a range of issues at the United Nations.
Of his relations with foreign envoys, Mr. Bolton said: “I treat them with respect. They treat me with respect. I think we get the job done.”
Such responses failed with Mr. Dodd, who said, “My objection isn’t that he’s a bully, but that he’s been an ineffective bully and can’t win the day when it really counts.”
When Mr. Dodd labeled as improper instances when Mr. Bolton sought the identities of Americans whose conversations had been captured by intelligence intercepts, the ambassador said he had made his request through approved, official channels, and was seeking the information only to better understand the reports.
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company