Finally, grown-ups in the Democratic Party are cautioning Democrats to stop having temper tantrums over the appointment of a new Supreme Court justice to fill the seat vacated by the passing of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Ironically, the “get a grip” admonition came from President Obama’s former chief of staff and Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel, who barked, “The idea of talking about impeachment as somehow retribution, that is what is corrosive to our political system … That somehow we have to one-up them.”
His comments were made following days of Democratic angst and foot stomping.
Within hours of Ginsburg’s death, crowds gathered outside Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s home to warn him about moving forward procedurally.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested she had arrows in her quiver and could endlessly impeach the president. Former United States Attorney General Eric Holder joined Rep. Joe Kennedy III, D-Massachusetts, in threatening to “pack” the courts if Republicans confirmed a successor.
Added to the threats were abolition of the Electoral College and granting statehood to territories as a ploy to gain more Democratic senators. Not to be outdone, social media was ablaze with threats to take to the streets and burn the country down if a Trump nominee is confirmed.
I understand the Democratic angst taking place. But the meltdown we are witnessing and “solutions” being advocated are actions reminiscent of sulking bullies. It’s hardly a good look for a political party that was shamefully late in condemning looting and violence that had already erupted in major Democratic-run cities across the country.
Quite simply, the president has the power to nominate a successor and the Senate then has the power to confirm. There is no prohibition against filling a seat during a presidential election year. Even Ginsburg observed in 2016, “There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being the president in his last year.”
Indeed, there are several examples of justices being nominated and confirmed during a presidential election year. One of my favorite examples is John Adams’ loss in 1800 to Thomas Jefferson at a time when partisan fighting and name-calling was virulent.
“Twenty-nine times in American history there has been an open Supreme Court vacancy in a presidential election year, or in a lame-duck session before the next presidential inauguration,” notes Dan McLaughlin in National Review.
“Claims of conscience” that Democrats are now invoking to stop the appointment are shallow, such as her reported wish for the next president to select her replacement. Ginsburg’s wishes aren’t law, and as we’ve learned in other races, seats belong to the people — not a person or family legacy. And if we care about her, Ginsburg herself was opposed to court packing, observing that the court would only get bigger and bigger with every passing administration. Also, what can be packed can be unpacked. If the court is to be expanded at any time, it should be done using a rational argument — not as a political arrow from a quiver.
Let’s face it: this presidential election’s “October surprise” came early with Ginsburg’s death.
While hailing Ginsburg as an iconic champion for women’s rights, particularly, her refusal to retire when President Obama still had an opportunity to shape the court was a strategic mistake, leaving Democrats in their predicament today.
Ginsburg believed, like so many other Democrats, that the Clinton machine would prevail and the first woman president would then, in a Showtime moment, go on to name her replacement. How’d that turn out? In politics, timing is everything and when you have the votes you call the roll. If the fortunes were reversed, Democrats would similarly be hailing the Constitution and historical precedent.
With Ginsburg’s passing, as we’ve seen with the last two Supreme Court appointments, we again see abortion elevated as the central issue in high court appointments.
Fundamentally, Democrats have made a glaring mistake in advocating for a single issue in looking for a Supreme Court justice. What once was a big tent on abortion has now become a litmus test, forsaking other issues of concern to especially poor and minority voters, such as school choice and opportunity scholarships.
While I strongly support a woman’s right to choose, abortion was once to have been a “safe and rare” procedure. Today, candidates are stripped from Democratic Party endorsements over their views on abortion. Support for partial birth abortion and abortion even up to delivery are the new mandates.
Many pro-choice Democrats were horrified to hear the Democratic governor of Virginia declaring that even a baby delivered alive in a botched abortion could still be “…kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”
It’s ridiculous how far my fellow Democrats have taken the pro-choice position. Not surprisingly, the public’s general support for abortion has declined. Yet that’s what Democrats are elevating as a core issue, while they leave much more important and popular issues on the backburner.
Back in the day when he had a working pen and phone, President Obama admonished that elections have consequences. Seemingly, the Democrats are out of arrows no matter how large their real or imagined quiver.
A new Supreme Court justice will be nominated and probably confirmed. Rather than descending into how much more damage we can do to our system of government, Democrats need to soul-search to understand what our party even stands for.I, for one, am having a hard time remembering a time when it stood for “the little guy.”
Continuously running candidates to appease the party establishment will keep delivering the same results. It’s the definition of insanity, remember?
Failure to once again stand up for the interests of everyday Americans will only lead to further “D-exits” from a stagnating party increasingly out of touch with the American working class.
Gloria Romero previously served as Democratic majority leader in the California Senate. You can follow her on Twitter: @GloriaJRomero.
Democrats shouldn’t be so hysterical about the Supreme Court: Gloria Romero posted first on https://anaheimsignsorangecounty.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment