Most Americans, polls and common sense tell us, hate the frenzied ideological warfare that many from the Right and the Left appear bent on waging over whoever is nominated by President Bush for confirmation as associate justice on the Supreme Court, replacing the retiring Sandra Day O'Connor.
I'm among their number. That's why I derive some hope from the President's recent nomination of Mike Barrett to a federal judgeship. Barrett's conservative Republican credentials are unquestioned. (He currently serves as chairman of the Hamilton County Republican Party.) But his nomination for a judgeship has also been applauded by Democrats in our area. (Check out this article from today's Cincinnati Enquirer about Barrett and local reaction to his nomination by the President.)
My hope is that Barrett's nomination will be a sort of prototype for what the President will soon do with his nomination of a replacement for Sandra Day O'Connor. Clearly, elections ought to count for something and Presidents have the right to nominate persons to the courts whose philosophies agree with their own. But members of the Senate are elected as well and have their constitutional responsibilities and perquisites, including those associated with scrutinizing nominees for the Court. It would just be nice to see the upcoming confirmation process umarred by the kinds of ugly, unnecessary, and couterproductive exercises in hollow partisan caricature that most Americans hate.
The President may calculate at this point that it would be best for the country, his presidency, and the prospects for future Republican success and influence to nominate someone like Barrett to O'Connor's old job. I'm sure that among those the President is considering appointing, there are people who Republicans can appreciate for philosophical reasons and Democrats can accept because of the candidate's qualifications, integrity, and temperament. Such a candidate would tamp down the fires of ideological warfare over who sits on the Court.
Some might not like that. But almost everybody else would.
(Personally, I'm pulling for the President to nominate Senator Mike DeWine for the Court. This isn't a partisan political judgment: I just think he's a good guy whose conservatism agrees with the President's and whose conduct has won the respect of his colleagues.)
BY THE WAY: Although I am from Ohio, I have never met Senator DeWine. I didn't want anyone to think I was one of those paid-off Bloggers. When asked about his possible interest in the Court recently, DeWine said that he was only interested in re-election to the Senate in 2006, which is about as close to being a done-deal as you'll find in electoral politics. Barring the growing State House scandal involving the Taft Administration splashing back on all Republicans, DeWine is a shoo-in.
No comments:
Post a Comment