i remember when migueless strada, that brilliant hispanic lawyer that president bush appointed and was defeated after seven attempts of a filibuster in the senate couldn't do so. he said he didn't like the word strict constructionist. he preferred the term fair constructionist. the question is, is this a fair construction of the voting rights act that this would overturn these long established laws when no such thing was considered during the debate on the legislation? that historic law which limits felons voting are to be just wiped out? , even allowing felons still in jail to vote? i don't think so, and neither did most of the judges who have heard these cases. with regard to the new haven firefighters' case, i will just say, madam president, that we will be looking to enter that case in some length. stuart taylor did a very fine analysis of it. in his writing at national journal he recognized that no one ever found that the examinations these firefighters took was invalid or unfair. as he has explained, if the belated, weak and speculative criticisms obviously tailered no test will