Also: Politics and the Supreme Court
Political pundits, particularly those on the cable news networks, keep telling us ad nauseam that we are angry and we are not going to take it anymore when it comes to our federal government. Perhaps their harping on the subject has contributed to the violence which has permeated the presidential primary campaign, especially at the rallies for Republican Donald Trump.
I can’t say I am angry.
Frustrated and disappointed, yes. But for those who claim to be angry, just who are they angry at and why? First question to them is, “Did you vote in the past?” My philosophy has always been if you didn’t vote, don’t gripe. It appears that most of the anger centers around the office of the president – in this case, President Barack Obama. That’s nothing new among the Republican faithful.
But here’s the thing. The president can only do so much without the support and consent of the U.S. Congress. As we have seen, Congress writes the laws and has the power of the purse. They can even shut down the entire federal government. There is a toxic partisan atmosphere where compromise and doing what is best for the American people have become secondary to personal and party power.
So while many are excited about Trump’s politically incorrect approach to running for president on the Republican side, and while many are excited about Bernie Sanders’ outlandish ideas on the Democratic side, it must be realized that Congress is the burr under the saddle. None of the proposals of these two candidates will get to first base without the support of Congress. Those two candidates seem to be the favorites of the “angry voters.”
Maybe these so-called “angry voters” might want to take a step back and realize that real change can only come when they turn their attention to congressional races. If they voted in these elections in the past, apparently they keep sending the same politicians back to Capitol Hill. And, as we all know, the longer they are there, the more money they accept from lobbyists and special interests and the less influence we voting stiffs have. Both political parties are guilty as charged.
What’s interesting is that the approval rating of Congress as a whole is a dismal 14 percent. Yet, it is revealing that voters believe their own congressman is doing a good job, therefore, there is very little turnover in Congress each election cycle.
Having spent 27 years on Capitol Hill, I can tell you that the main goal once a representative or senator is elected is to get re-elected. It becomes a never-ending cycle of fundraisers to build a warchest that makes it difficult for anyone to challenge them. It has gotten much worse in recent years, especially with the ill-advised Citizens United verdict by the U.S. Supreme Court. The amount of money being raised by members of Congress and Super PACs is just obscene and wrong and is driving a stake through the heart of democracy.
No recent event demonstrates the polluted political partisanship in Congress more than the current debate surrounding the vacancy on the nation’s highest court, created by the unexpected death of Justice Antonin Scalia. The U.S. Constitution says that the president shall nominate a replacement and that the Senate shall consent or deny the appointment. But, here again, partisan politics is the rule of the day.
Republicans are refusing to even meet with, much less hold hearings, on Obama’s nominee, D.C. Federal Appeals Court Judge Merrick Garland, a distinguished jurist once approved by the Senate to serve on the secondmost important court in the land. They contend the appointment should be left to the next president. National polls reveal a majority of Americans believe the Senate should consider the nomination. There is no doubt that if the tables were turned, Democrats would likely be saying the same thing if a Republican president was in office. That’s how things work these days in a partisan, unproductive, often gridlocked Congress.
Republicans say “the people” should decide who should be the next Supreme Court Justice. Well, “the people” elected Obama twice, and he has a 52 percent approval rating. On the other hand, as I mentioned earlier, Congress has an approval rating from “the people” of 14 percent. In true congressional fashion, Republicans contend Garland is too liberal to replace the conservative Scalia. Some Democrats are disappointed with Obama’s choice, contending he is not liberal enough. Are we surprised?
I guess you can say it is a roll of the dice by Senate Republicans. There is no way to know who the next president will be. Most polls currently point to Democrat Hillary Clinton as the favorite. And polls also show the Democrats have a shot of retaking control of the Senate. But, as we have seen in this crazy, bizarre and contentious election season, nothing is cast in stone at this point. If Trump is elected, will Republicans confirm his nominee? So many questions and so few answers.
A final word for the “angry people.”
The media contends many of you are “new voters.” Be sure you vote, not only in this presidential election but in all future elections at the local and state levels. That way, you have a passport to gripe and be “angry.”
Lou Gehrig Burnett, an award-winning journalist, has been involved with politics for 44 years and was a congressional aide in Washington, D.C., for 27 years. He also served as executive assistant to former Shreveport Mayor Bo Williams. Burnett is the publisher of the weekly “FaxNet Update” and can be reached at 861-0552 or [email protected].
