Tuesday, April 04, 2017

SCOTUS Nomination and Integrity

Just a few thoughts on the political climate in DC as it relates to the filling of the Supreme Court and the US Senate.

Although it may be an unpopular stance among Democrats, I do not think that the Democratic Senators should withhold a vote for Judge Neil Gorsuch.
If you believe that it was wrong for the Republicans to withhold the hearing and vote for Merrick Garland, than it has to be wrong to do the same for Gorsuch. Though it may be fair and you believe "what goes around, comes around," it still doesn't make it right.

Show a little integrity and do the right thing.
Most of the Dems already had a positive view of Judge Gorsuch when they voted for him for his appointment as a federal judge. When we let the bad behavior of others dictate how we behave, we become the people we despise.
In every case, I believe that doing the right thing is always an easier thing to defend than the schoolyard claim of, "Oh yeah? They did it first!"

On the other hand, getting rid of the 60 vote threshold isn't necessarily a bad thing, The 60 vote cloture rule has a different place than was intended in today's political climate. I've always thought it to be an interesting rule that it takes 60 members to bring an item to a vote that only needs 51 votes to pass.
The Senate claims that waiving the 60 vote threshold on the SCOTUS will be limited to that only, but I see it as a beginning that will change how the Senate works. I see both good and bad that could come from this. In the end, I don't think either side wants to do this, but I think the GOP is going to call the bluff and everyone will regret it.

Just my thoughts.

John <><

1 comment:

Bilbo said...

For what it's worth, John, I have to agree with you. The level of hypocrisy demonstrated by the GOP in sandbagging the Garland nomination while insisting on full support for Gorsuch is staggering, but withholding the vote is not right. Although it gives the GOP an undeserved victory, it positions the Democrats as a party willing to put aside partisan rancor, however painful it may be. As for getting rid of the 60-vote threshold, I'm not sure that's a good idea. Its purpose, as I understand it, was to provide a convincing demonstration of bipartisan support for a nominee, avoiding potential approval of candidates on straight party-line votes. I think we should keep it as a forcing function to make people act like adults.