By Andrew Christensen '08
Associate News Editor

Last Monday, U.Va. Law welcomed two prominent members of the D.C. law office of King & Spalding to present their unique Washington-insider views on the current state of national politics, with special attention to the recent nomination and confirmation process of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito. The event in Caplin Pavilion, jointly sponsored by the Atlanta-based firm and the Journal of Law and Politics, paired former Indiana Republican Senator Daniel Coats, now a senior counsel at King & Spalding, with George Crawford, former Chief of Staff for House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi and current senior government relations advisor for the firm.

Both men are distinguished veterans of Washington’s high-stakes political battlefield, and have been privy to the behind-the-scenes partisan machinations sparked by a Supreme Court vacancy. Crawford opened his segment with an overview of how he has witnessed the culture of the House of Representatives, in particular, evolve over the past two decades.

“Starting in the mid-1980s, we saw the House being used in a new way by the Republicans. . . . They started aggressively driving their agenda, and began to use tactics intended to cause embarrassment not only to specific rivals, but to the Democrats as a whole. [This] marked the beginning of what became, essentially, open campaigning on the floor.”

Crawford, at the time on the staff of a Florida Democrat, recalled the reaction of the Democratic majority. “[W]e retaliated by eliminating the Republicans’ opportunities to pass legislation, by significantly reducing their ability to participate in governing.”

He explained the modern disdain for meeting in the middle by suggesting that “[t]he bell curve has become a barbell — the factions at both extremes of the political spectrum have grown, and the center has effectively been eroded away.”

Senator Coats began his discussion by recalling how he was first brought into the Supreme Court nomination process.

“I’m on the road for the firm in early October when Karl Rove calls, asking if I could take a couple days off from my new job [with King & Spalding] to help out with the Miers [nomination] situation. Obviously, I agreed. But obviously, it also took more than just a couple of days,” he recounted to audience laughter.

Coats’ expertise was again requested when President Bush next nominated Judge Alito. Comparing the introverted Third Circuit jurist to the previously confirmed Chief Justice, Coats remarked that while Roberts “has a superstar, charismatic quality” that would allow him to run successfully for just about any office in the land, “Alito is about a 180-degree opposite. They’re both very bright men, but [Alito] has a humble, understated, rather pedestrian charm.”

Charged with prepping the unassuming nominee for the taxing Senate confirmation process, Coats advised Alito of the “onslaught” that lay ahead.

“I told him that it was going to be rough — that his every activity, opinion, and speech on record was going to be exposed . . . ‘nothing personal, but they’re going to take you apart!’”

Coats went on to describe his accounts of the Senate floor proceedings. He recounted how he sat a single seat away from Martha Alito during the notorious, tear-inducing Concerned Alumni of Princeton grilling and how he sat through the countless hours of ideological questioning. Having seen the negative effects of this type of confirmation process, Coats wrapped the session on a note of sage concern.

“When I was in the Senate [1988-99], there was not nearly as much pressure for Republicans to vote down Ginsburg or Breyer. . . . We simply regarded their temperament, character, qualifications; it was not the intense ideology exam we have today,” he lamented. “The standard for judicial appointments needs to be different than that of elections. It should never get to be so politicized.”