Tuesday April 24, 2018

Always Forward with Education & Reason

FacebookTwitterYoutube
Newsletter
Feeds:
National and World News
Johnson Ruled by Party on SCOTUS Nominee PDF Print E-mail
News
Written by Democratic Party of Wisconsin, Brandon Weathersby   
Friday, 25 March 2016 09:12

ron-johnsonAs other GOP Senators begin to falter, Wisconsin's Ron Johnson is clearly taking orders from the extreme, obstructionist fringe of the Republican Party.


MADISON - A third Republican senator announced his intention to actually do his job and consider Judge Garland’s nomination. Unfortunately for the people of Wisconsin that senator was not Ron Johnson.

Johnson continues to march in lockstep with Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell who continue to put partisan politics over fulfilling basic constitutional responsibilities.

Johnson’s not even pretending anymore –again and again he flatly tells reporters that he’s acting solely out of partisan interest rather than what’s good for the people of Wisconsin.

While some of Johnson’s Republican colleagues seem to actually listen to their constituents, Johnson is clearly taking orders from the extreme, obstructionist fringe.

Washington Post: Jerry Moran is third Republican senator to favor Supreme Court hearings

By Mike DeBonis
March 24, 2016

A third Republican senator broke with party leadership this week to say that Supreme Court nominee Merrick B. Garland ought to be granted hearings, according to a news report.

The Garden City Telegram reported that Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) told a small group gathered in a Cimarron, Kan., courthouse on Monday that GOP senators “should interview Garland and have a hearing on his nomination,” in the paper’s words.

“I can’t imagine the president has or will nominate somebody that meets my criteria, but I have my job to do,” Moran said, according to the report. “I think the process ought to go forward.”

Moran joins Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) in favoring hearings. Kirk has also called for an up-or-down vote on Garland.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has shut the door on any consideration of a Supreme Court nominee this year, arguing that the next president — not President Obama — ought to have the right to name a replacement for the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

Democrats are hoping to pressure GOP senators into acting on Garland’s nomination amid a national campaign. But they have been targeting embattled incumbents such as Kirk, who are facing tough reelection campaigns. Moran is up for reelection this year, but he has not appeared on lists of vulnerable incumbents, and no prominent Democrat has emerged to challenge him.

But Moran may, uncharacteristically, be trying to put some space between himself and Republican Party leaders.

“I would rather have you [constituents] complaining to me that I voted wrong on nominating somebody than saying I’m not doing my job,” Moran told the Cimarron crowd, according to the paper.

Last Updated on Friday, 25 March 2016 10:25
 
Fact Checkers Find Paul Ryan Wrong on SCOTUS Nomination PDF Print E-mail
News
Written by Democratic Party of Wisconsin, Brandon Weathersby   
Tuesday, 08 March 2016 09:34

antonin-scaliaFact checkers dig into history behind Speaker Paul Ryan’s statement that there is precedent for not nominating a justice in a presidential campaign. History shows Presidents have always been able to nominate someone.


MADISON – Last week, fact checkers dug into the history behind Speaker Paul Ryan’s statement that there is a precedent for the President not to nominate someone to the Supreme Court during an election year. They found this statement to be completely false and history shows Presidents have always been able to nominate someone. Paul Ryan and his Republican colleagues like Ron Johnson are playing partisan politics and virtually leaving the Supreme Court locked 4-4.

paul_ryanPaul Ryan and Ron Johnson are playing partisan politics and leaving the Supreme Court deadlocked on critical issues like women’s health care, voting access, and the rights of workers to organize.

Read exerts of the article below

Ten days after the death of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, House Speaker Paul Ryan entered the debate on whether Scalia’s successor should be chosen before or after Barack Obama leaves the Oval Office.

The Democratic president has the right to submit a nominee before he departs in January 2017, said the Wisconsin Republicanappearing Feb. 23, 2016 on CNBC’s "Squawk Box."

But the GOP-controlled Senate, Ryan added, has the right not to move the nomination forward and instead await a nomination from the next president.
Then co-host Andrew Ross Sorkin asked: "Should you look at whoever gets nominated on the merits of who they are, or simply on the politics of the moment?"

"We are in the politics of the moment, which is we are in the middle of a presidential election," Ryan said, referring to the early 2016 primaries and caucuses. "We’ve already had South Carolina, New Hampshire and Iowa. We’re knee-deep in a presidential election.

"There’s a reason for having this tradition of not nominating somebody in the middle of a presidential election, because it gets so political. I agree with that precedent, and there is a precedent for that."

[…]

Our rating

Ryan said: "There is a precedent" for not nominating someone to the U.S. Supreme Court "in the middle of a presidential election.’

It’s rare for a Supreme Court vacancy to occur during a presidential election year -- the last time was in 1940, although there were also two election-year nominations in 1968.

But we could find no instances in which a president faced with a Supreme Court vacancy during a presidential election year did not make a nomination. It occurred five times between 1912 and 1940, and each time the nominee was confirmed.

We rate Ryan’s statement False.

 
Sen. Ron Johnson Should Break Ranks on Court Nominee PDF Print E-mail
News
Written by Russ for Wisconsin   
Friday, 26 February 2016 11:19

antonin-scaliaThe hubris of Johnson, McConnell and the others is stunning. The political game they are playing is cynical. Their refusal to even consider a nominee shows the party fears the very public it claims to serve. It is a new brand of cynicism that shows little respect for the office of president or the Supreme Court. And little faith in the Constitution.


MADISON - As Senate Republicans stand in an unbroken line of opposition to even the thought of considering a nominee to replace Justice Antonin Scalia on the U.S. Supreme Court, Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin is standing right there with them.

The senator and his colleagues, led by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, have vowed to obstruct President Barack Obama's wishes no matter what.

ron-johnsonEarlier this week, Republican Senate leaders confirmed that they will not hold confirmation hearings, will not vote, will not even meet with Obama's nominee. Johnson confirmed Wednesday that he's going to hold that line as well.

The hubris of Johnson and his colleagues is stunning. The political game they are playing is cynical. Their strategy is to take their chances after the new administration takes office, fearing that any Obama nominee will tip the balance of the 5-4 conservative majority on the high court the other way.

We acknowledge their concerns. But they should still hold hearings and give Obama's nominee a fair shake.

Their refusal to do even the bare minimum shows the party fears the very public it claims to serve. If Obama nominates a well-qualified moderate jurist, Republicans know they will look bad in the eyes of many voters — particularly independents — if they don't confirm the nominee after hearings.

So there can be no hearings. And no vote.

For Johnson and McConnell and the others, this is a new brand of cynicism in a city wallowing in it. It shows little respect for the office of president or the Supreme Court.

And little faith in the Constitution.

A president is elected to a four-year term, not a three-year term. That president is not a "lame duck," by all normal definitions, until after the November election in his last year in office. The Constitution prescribes a process: The president nominates. The Senate offers advice and consent.

Republicans continue to say: Let the voters decide, but the voters already have decided. They twice elected Obama to the presidency. To not even consider a nominee is dereliction of duty.

In the early stages of his re-election bid, Johnson is trailing badly behind former Sen. Russ Feingold. The latest Marquette University Law School Poll, released Thursday afternoon, showed 49% favoring Feingold and 37% favoring Johnson.

Overall, 57% said they would be willing to see their senator vote for a well-qualified nominee rather than "vote against any nominee you disagree with." About 63% of independents felt that way, the poll found.

As might be expected, there were stark differences between the views of Republicans and Democrats.

The Johnson-Feingold race is in its early stages, and much will happen between now and November. But Johnson might improve his chances with independents by showing that he's his own man. He should break ranks with the other obstructionists in the GOP-controlled Senate and come out in favor of Senate hearings and a vote.

This also has the advantage of being the right thing to do.

Last Updated on Friday, 26 February 2016 11:40
 
<< Start < Prev 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next > End >>

Page 24 of 27
Copyright © 2018. Green Bay Progressive. Designed by Shape5.com