We Still Have Jobs To Do

The sudden passing of the long-serving, conservative Justice Antonin Scalia brings a brand new dynamic to current primary election politics, as well as national-level politics. At the risk of being dubbed Captain Obvious, the balance of both the White House and Supreme Court look to shift in the coming months, as the 'political balance' of the Supreme Court now sits at 4-4.

Going back to 1990, each President has successfully nominated two Justices to the Supreme Court and have largely kept the 5-4 partisan spread to one party or the other during that time. The Court had been in a 5-4 conservative lean, but the death of Justice Scalia means that the sitting Democratic President could effectively re-balance the Court. This typically would not cause such a stir as it is now, if it weren't for a very partisan, GOP-led Congress that has already stated firm opposition to approving any of President Obama's nominations.

The political charge doesn't ease in an election year either.

All over the campaign trail in South Carolina, GOP candidates are speaking out against the President nominating anyone to the Court due to 'precedent' of Presidents not doing so in the final year of their term. The is, of course, the appointment of Justice Kennedy in 1988 (Reagan's final year in Office), but there was also a political reality at that point in time. There was hardly any thought given to the fact that the GOP would lose the White House, and that proved to be true when George H.W. Bush destroyed Michael Dukakis in the general election in '88.

Fast forward to current time, and it is abundantly easy to see that the argument being made is certainly a political argument and does not touch on true legal precedent or any precedent of another kind. This is going to be a close and contested election, but the Republicans appear to be certain of a victory if they are insisting on pushing the nomination of a justice for another year.

As an independent observer, this seems entirely irresponsible that there is insistence that the President and Senate doesn't even attempt to go through the motions to replace Justice Scalia. But isn't this just more of the same?

As a country, we have grown weary of the partisan politics that both sides of the aisle are equally responsible for. This is another chapter in the long saga of the continual let-down that the two sides will not simply come together and have some sort of civil discourse to find a way forward. Surely there is a federal judge or legal scholar somewhere that both sides can, at least, halfway agree upon? Well, maybe not.

Per Oliver Knox, Yahoo News Chief Political Correspondent,

Obama’s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama’s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

There are a few names on there that would meet with very aggressive disagreement from the Republicans. You know what, though? That's fine. I would much prefer that our government does its job, the job we elected them to do, than to roadblock each other from even trying.

Ultimately, they all still have jobs to do. If they don't yield results, that's another thing to deal with, but that is so much better than never trying at all for the people that they work for. But what if this process causes some true negotiation? What if the most unthinkable, inconceivable thing happens in this entire process? What if the two parties work together???

I digress though. There are potentially many more opportunities for the President and Senate to work together in the coming term(s) with the possibility of the next President nominating up to three new Justices (one previously nominated by Reagan and two by Clinton). But, we will get to that when those situations arise in a couple years.

The current situation still remains unresolved, but to President Obama's credit, he plans on going through the motions to uphold what the Constitution outlines as his responsibility in a situation such as this. Though these motions may not be truly in good faith, the fact remains that these elected officials still have jobs to do, and we implore them to try to do them. It's a sad state of affairs that these kind of pleading even needs to take place, but this is the current reality.

My final thought is that the remainder of this Presidential term and a key focus of the next President must not be solely on issues that the core of their party holds dear, but to keep the common interest in mind and prioritize institutional and cultural healing. Otherwise, we will continue to find ourselves in a ceaseless, vicious cycle.

On a Positive Note

Dating back to the Ronald Reagan's first term, the winning candidate has touted the positive messages. Though the campaigns might be run in a negative fashion, the core messages are still ones that are intended to inspire and cause people to believe in their country. Going backwards in time:

• Barack Obama 2012: Forward
• Barack Obama 2008: Change We Can Believe In
• George W. Bush 2004: Yes, America Can
• George W. Bush 2000: Compassionate Conservatism
• Bill Clinton 1996: Building a Bridge to the 21st Century
• Bill Clinton 1992: Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow
• George H.W. Bush 1988: Kinder, Gentler Nation
• Ronald Reagan 1984: It's Morning Again in America

Ronald Reagan's campaign slogan for 1980 stopped the trend, which was 'Are you better off than you
were four years ago?'. The question itself is an inherent attack vice a genuinely positive message, though the tone of the country and the political establishment was much different at that time. Fast forward to today, we're looking at a potentially different tone.

Over the last 32 years, the most positive message has typically won out, even as the nature of campaigns have been drowned in relentless negativity. Even as many campaigns have been run negatively, often through advertising and personal attacks, the candidate that most energetically pushed positive tones came away with the election victory. Former Presidents Reagan, Clinton, George W. Bush, and Current President Barack Obama were all noted as not only having significant energy, but they applied it to an overall positive message.

Let's take a look at the current front runners as of the Iowa Caucus polling:

• Bernie Sanders: A Future to Believe In
• Hillary Clinton: Fighting For Us
• Donald Trump: Making America Great Again
• Ted Cruz: Reigniting the Promise of America
• Marco Rubio: A New American Century

While there are certainly other candidates that are promoting a positive tone, these five candidates are arguably the five most energetic candidates pushing this message to the electorate. That means something to many people. With as much disdain as the American people commonly have for the government and for whatever administration is in the Oval Office, a rejuvenating positive message is refreshing for many and provides hope for something new, more, and better going forward.

The nature of campaigns, specifically for some of these candidates, often take a very negative overture. Ultimately, as we know in American society, branding matters. The way these candidates brand themselves as the choice candidate for elevating the American people and moving us forward to a new level is what ultimately resonate. We choose to accept the good that people often times over the bad that they do. As such, we come to accept the people who exclaim their positive overtures.

It really should be no shock that these five candidates are at the top of their party going into the Iowa Caucus and will continue to sit at the top of their party's respective polls throughout most of the rest of the race. When this all raps up in November, I still believe that, regardless of the anomalous season so far, the most positive message and messenger will again prove victorious and will be sworn in one year from now.