Tuesday, September 28, 2004
AP: Powell: Situation in Iraq 'Getting Worse' + AP: Next President Will Pick Scores of Judges
WASHINGTON - Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) sees the situation in Iraq (news - web sites) "getting worse" as planned elections approach, and the top U.S. military commander for Iraq says he expects more violence ahead.
Their comments Sunday followed a week in which President Bush (news - web sites) and Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi spoke optimistically about the situation despite the beheadings of two more Americans and the deaths of dozens of people in car bombings.
In its latest report, the military said four Marines died in separate incidents Friday, adding to a toll that has topped 1,000 since the U.S.-led invasion.
Powell said the insurgency is only becoming more violent as planned January elections near.
"It's getting worse," he said on ABC's "This Week." "They are determined to disrupt the election. They do not want the Iraqi people to vote for their own leaders in a free, democratic election."
Army Gen. John Abizaid, commander of U.S. troops in the Middle East, warned that voting may not be possible in parts of Iraq where the violence is too intense.
"I don't think we'll ever achieve perfection and when we look for perfection in a combat zone we're going to be sadly disappointed," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
Abizaid compared the situation in Iraq to the disputed U.S. presidential election in 2000 that put George W. Bush in the White House following a protracted Florida ballot fight that ended up in the Supreme Court.
"I don't think Iraq will have a perfect election. And if I recall, looking back at our own election four years ago, it wasn't perfect either," he said.
The goal in Iraq is to have successful voting in the "vast majority of the country," said Abizaid, who leads the U.S. Central Command.
"We're going to have to fight our way all the way through elections," he said, "and there'll be a lot of violence between now and then."
Abizaid spoke of a major offensive before the election, with U.S. and Iraqi forces doing "whatever's necessary to bring areas in Iraq under Iraqi control."
Powell offered a road map to the coming offensive. He said the military likely will tackle the Sunni Triangle cities of Ramadi and Samarra before attempting to restore order in nearby Fallujah, which he called "the tough one."
"We don't like the situation in Fallujah," Powell said on CNN's "Late Edition."
"The other ones, I think, are more manageable," he added. "Ramadi and Samarra, I think we'll get those back under control, and then we'll have to deal with Fallujah."
Powell said planning is under way for an Iraqi conference, possibly next month in Jordan or Egypt, of the world's leading industrialized nations and regional powers, including Iran and Syria.
"This was a way to reach out to Iraq's immediate neighbors and persuade them that this is the time to help Iraq, so that the region can become stable," he said.
Including the Group of Eight economic powers, Powell said, "adds a little bit more oomph to the conference" and brings in nations that could contribute "more in the way of resources."
U.S. officials have expressed conflicting opinions about whether security will enable all Iraqis to vote in January.
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage told Congress on Friday that the elections must be held throughout the country, including areas gripped by violence. But Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said that if insurgents prevent Iraqis from voting in some areas, a partial vote would be better than none at all.
Asked about Rumsfeld's comments, Powell repeated the State Department's assertion that all Iraqis must have the chance to vote if the election is to be credible.
"You know, there will be polling stations that are shot at," he said. "There will be insurgents who will still be out there who will try to keep people from voting."
"But I think what we have to keep shooting for and what is achievable is to give everybody the opportunity to vote in the upcoming election, to make the election fully credible, and something that will stand the test of the international community's examination."
By ANNE GEARAN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - The next president's most enduring legacy may be in an area little mentioned in the campaign so far: the federal courts, where rulings on such hot-button issues as abortion, gay marriage and the death penalty could have lasting impact.
With an aging Supreme Court, it's likely that over the next four years either President Bush (news - web sites) or Democrat John Kerry (news - web sites) will choose one or more new justices, along with scores or even hundreds of federal appeals court and trial judges.
Courts can have the crucial last word on important and contentious issues, as recent rulings on affirmative action and presidential war powers attest. But chances are most voters won't hear specifics about the kind of judges either candidate favors.
"As a campaign issue I think it's been almost invisible," said Supreme Court historian David Garrow.
That's a departure from the 2000 campaign, when both Bush and Democratic nominee Al Gore (news - web sites) pointed to particular Supreme Court justices they admired and partisans on both sides spoke with certainty about an expected Supreme Court retirement.
Four years later, not one Supreme Court justice has left the bench. That makes it even more likely there will be an opening sometime soon, law professors and activists said.
Next month the current court begins its 10th term without a vacancy. Only one justice, Clarence Thomas (news - web sites), is younger than 65. Speculation about retirements has focused on Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, who will turn 80 in October, and Justices John Paul Stevens (news - web sites), 84, and Sandra Day O'Connor (news - web sites), 74.
"It's not that people were crying wolf last time, it's just that it didn't play out the way we expected," said Duke University constitutional law professor Erwin Chemerinsky.
The candidates may be wary of predicting any vacancies this time, and other more immediate issues are crowding out larger discussion of the court and judges, scholars said.
Bush did mention the issue in his acceptance speech at the Republican convention, criticizing judges he contends have gone too far in rulings declaring gay marriage legal and a ban on certain abortions unconstitutional.
"I support the protection of marriage against activist judges," the president said, "and I will continue to appoint federal judges who know the difference between personal opinion and the strict interpretation of the law."
For his part, Kerry promises on his campaign Web site that as president he would try to "reverse damage done to civil rights laws by right-wing judges" and would "only appoint judges with a record of enforcing the nation's civil rights and anti-discrimination laws."
If Bush wins a second term, he could be on his way to naming more federal trial and appeals judges than either of the last two-term presidents. Bill Clinton (news - web sites) appointed 367 judges, including two Supreme Court justices, and Ronald Reagan (news - web sites) chose 357 judges, including three Supreme Court justices. Reagan also elevated Rehnquist from associate to chief justice.
With 201 judges appointed so far, Bush is already ahead of the 187 his father chose during his one-term presidency  though many of the current president's nominees have had to weather a rocky confirmation process in the highly partisan Senate.
Picking a Supreme Court justice would be a bigger prize.
Supreme Court justices, like other federal judges, can remain on the job decades after the president who chose them. They serve for life or until they choose to retire.
Rehnquist is the longest-serving member of the high court, chosen 32 years ago by Richard Nixon. Stevens is still there 29 years after he was Gerald Ford's lone Supreme Court pick.
The nine-member high court is divided basically into three camps  conservative, middle-of-the-road and moderately liberal  and frequently lines up 5-4 on the most difficult cases. Depending on who is counting, the court is one vote or two away from overturning Roe v. Wade (news - web sites), the 3-decade-old ruling that affirmed the legality of abortion.
In an AP-Ipsos poll taken last week, 56 percent of those surveyed said they wanted the president to nominate a Supreme Court justice with conservative political views if a vacancy occurs; 37 percent said they preferred a justice with liberal views.
Both sides in the presidential campaign have raised the ideological issue among their own strongest supporters. A recent Democratic fund-raising letter on behalf of Democrats, for example, warned of the dangers of re-electing Bush.
"Are you ready for Chief Justice Antonin Scalia (news - web sites)?" the letter said. Scalia and fellow conservative Thomas are the justices Bush cited in 2000 as models for future picks.
Voters should be aware of the importance of Supreme Court vacancies, said Elliot Mincberg, legal director of People for the American Way, a liberal group that has opposed several of Bush's lower-court picks.
"It's not the next four years that is the issue," Mincberg said. "It's the next 20, 30 or 40 and what people's rights and liberties are going to look like."
