Up until today I was guessing, along with many others, that a substantial number of Democrats would vote to confirm John Roberts. This would have made the Democrats look less obstructionist and more reasonable. That, I supposed, would have positioned them better for the next fight. But it appears that this is not to be the strategy after all. The Senate's designated Daschle, Harry Reid, as announced that he will oppose Roberts. This announcement comes just before the Judiciary Committee issues its report. That's surely a breach of decorum. It amounts to a vote of no confidence on the committee. The Democrats would have some excuse if there were an attendant scandal of the sort that Clarence Thomas had to face. But considering that three liberal metropolitan papers-the Washington Post, the Boston Globe, and the Minneapolis Star Tribune, have endorsed Roberts, it suggests that most Democrats will oppose any nominee sent up by a Republican.
Democrats did not always behave like this. Consider the following confirmation votes:
Sandra Day O'Connor 99-0.
Antonin Scalia 98-0.
Anthony Kennedy 98-0.
David Souter 90-9.
We note that Senate Republicans showed the same decorum.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg 96-3.
Stephen Bryer 87-9.
These votes all make sense. The nominees were all well-qualified, modest in their behavior, and none were known to take radical positions on fundamental questions. Within those bounds it is reasonable to give the President the nominees he chooses. That is what keeps the process Democratic. Americans get the Court they want when they get the Presidents they want. Roberts is clearly one of the best nominees a President has ever sent up. If more than a small portion of Democrats vote against him it will suggest that they no longer respect the traditional constitutional processes. That is not a good thing for either party.
Recent Comments