White House considers bypassing Senate to keep Bolton at U.N. [View All]

November 10, 2006
Bolton's Chances of Confirmation Are 'Nil,' Official Says
By HELENE COOPER

WASHINGTON — President Bush has pledged to be a bipartisan, consensus builder now that Democrats are to control Congress, and since Wednesday he has made conciliatory gestures. The question now is whether Mr. Bush is ready to junk all of his make-nice pledges in order to keep John Bolton at the United Nations.

Officially, administration officials say they plan to make all the necessary calls to Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to try to talk them into confirming Mr. Bolton for a next term as ambassador. But with Senator Lincoln Chafee’s announcement Thursday that he would deny Republicans on the committee the last vote needed to send Mr. Bolton’s nomination to the full Senate, some administration officials privately acknowledge that Mr. Bolton’s chances of getting Senate confirmation are “nil,” one State Department official said. “We know it’s not going to happen.”...

But Mr. Bolton is keen to stay at the helm of the American team at the United Nations, administration officials say, and White House officials, including the legal adviser, Harriet Miers, have been looking into whether Mr. Bush can somehow bypass the Senate and save Mr. Bolton. Administration officials said that Vice President Dick Cheney is backing the exploration of such a move.

Mr. Bolton “could be named ‘acting permanent representative’ or ‘deputy U.N. ambassador’ or something else that doesn’t require confirmation,” one senior administration official said, acknowledging that it might not be worth angering Democrats with such a maneuver. When senators blocked Mr. Bolton’s confirmation last year, Mr. Bush gave him a recess appointment, which expires when this Congress adjourns. Mr. Bush could give Mr. Bolton a second recess appointment as United Nations ambassador, but under the law he could not be paid for his work. White House officials are looking into whether he could be paid by some other entity and still serve as ambassador, or whether a de-facto ambassador position could be created in which Mr. Bolton served ambassador for all intents and purposes but not in name...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/10/washington/11boltoncnd.html