Four years ago McConnell, aided by Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, refused to even hold a confirmation hearing for President Obama's Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland. His suspect rationale at the time was that we were close to an election (9 months) and that "the people" should have a voice in the selection by letting the next president fill the vacancy. Then, after Donald Trump was elected, McConnell eliminated the filibuster in the case of Supreme Court confirmations, which effectively required 60 votes to confirm, a Senate rule that ensured that nominees would need some bipartisan support. (During Obama's presidency, before losing control of the Senate, the Democrats eliminated the filibuster for federal judgeships, since the minority Republicans were using the filibuster to prevent Obama from filling court vacancies.) Now, even though we are even closer to the election (less than 50 days), the rationale is that it's different this time. In 2016, according to McConnell, the voters in the 2014 midterms gave Republicans the Senate majority in order to check a "lame duck" president, while in 2020, the voters supposedly wanted the Senate to support the Republican president so they increased the Republican Senate majority. (Conveniently ignoring that more people voted for Democratic candidates than Republicans, and only because our system gives voters in smaller states disproportionally greater influence did the Senate remain in Republican hands.)
The unprecedented denial of presidential prerogative wasn't unique. While McConnell was still the Senate minority leader his stated goal was to deny Obama a second term. He ramped up the obstruction when he became majority leader, frustrating Obama's attempts to fill judicial vacancies or to accomplish anything legislatively. This allowed Trump to fill hundreds of federal court judgeships (not sure if it's a record, but it's on pace to hit 300 by the end of the year) in addition to the seat on the Supreme Court that should have been Merrick Garland's.
[What-if Tangent: Before Justice Scalia died the Liberal-Conservative balance was 4-4 with Justice Kennedy a "swing vote. Garland would have made it 5-3 + one swing vote. Assuming that Kennedy would have still resigned under this scenario, a Trump justice would have made the balance 5-4 with no swing (unless you count Roberts). With Trump replacing Ginsberg, it would have been 4-5. But imagine if Clinton had won. Merrick Garland, or some other liberal or centrist would have made the balance 5-3 + 1 swing. If Kennedy still resigned it would be 6-3. Replacing Ginsberg it would have been 7-2. What a difference, for decades to come, one presidential election made]
McConnell has made it plain that his first, if not his only, priority is to convert the federal judiciary to a more conservative ideology. He realizes that, with lifetime appointments, conservatives in the courts are much more important that presidential and legislative elections in the long run. Since the House of Representatives majority was won by the Democrats in 2018 he has virtually shut down Senate business except for confirming judicial nominations. McConnell has made it plain that he will do whatever it takes to implement his agenda. He will shut down legislative action in the Senate, he will obstruct sitting presidents, he will abet a completely incompetent and criminal president, as long as he can continue to stuff the federal bench with right-wing ideologues. He cannot be shamed with contradictory quotes from four years ago, he doesn't care if everyone in the nation is calling him a liar and a hypocrite, as long as he gets his way.
This win and hold power by any means and at any cost mindset by Republicans is not unique to Trump and McConnell. It has become the de facto Republican strategy. Throughout the country Republican governors and legislatures are doing whatever they can to hamstring Democrats. Two states' Republican legislatures, after the voters elected a Democrat as governor, voted to restrict the governor's authority. A Republican-majority legislature waited until their Democratic colleagues were attending a 9-11 memorial to override the Democratic governor's veto of the budget, knowing that they could not a achieve a 2/3 majority if the Democrats were present. They did this after assuring the Democrats that no legislative business would be conducted while they were at the memorial service. Several Republican legislatures took actions that negated the effects of voter-approved measures. One example is the law re-enfranchising felons after they served their terms. The legislature and governor effectively neutered the law by requiring that all fines and other financial liabilities be paid before they could vote. In our own state of Nebraska the governor slow-walked voter-approved Medicaid expansion and instructed the state Department of Health and Human Services agency to institute roadblocks and hoops to jump through, taking over two years to implement. Republican-sponsored lawsuits removed a medical marijuana petition from the ballot. In many states voters are purged from registration rolls, voting sites are closed in areas likely to vote Democratic and ID requirements are skewed against low-income voters who are likely to vote Democratic. Trump has been ranting about how the election will have been rigged against him if he loses and has been undermining efforts to expand mail-in and early voting.
The Democratic Party is far from perfect and in a perfect world would be more progressive, but the Republican Party has, without exaggerating, become a party dedicated to one-party rule and dictatorship. There is no negotiating with the Republicans, no "reaching across the aisle", not for a long time to come. They have taken advantage of many Democrats' tendency to want to do just that, the naïve belief that consensus and compromise can be reached for the good of the country.
It's not going to happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment