It Is Broken--So Let's Fix It!

There's an old saying, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."  Well, actually, it's not that old.  While it's origins are a bit murky, it appears to have entered into common usage in 1977, when Jimmy Carter's Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Bert Lance, was quoted in an article that appeared in Nation's Business, May, 1977.  "Bert Lance," the author wrote, "believes he can save Uncle Sam billions if he can get government to adopt a simple motto: 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

I don't know about budgetary matters, but clearly, as the last two or three weeks have demonstrated, something is broken in Washington, and does need to be fixed.  There are those who would argue that a whole lot of things are broken in Washington, but for the moment I just want to focus on one thing in particular, the number of votes required for the confirmation of a Supreme Court Justice.

How is it that a position as impactful as that of a Supreme Court Justice can be confirmed by so few votes?  In a nation and in a senate as badly divided as ours, that guarantees--literally guarantees--the kind of performance we watched over the past weeks.  Not that its new.  Partisan politics has increasingly come into play in such matters over the years.  Neither political party is innocent in all of this.  Something that should be truly non-partisan, has become a political power struggle.  And, as a result a woman who bravely bared her soul has been left twisting in the wind.  And questions about a man's reputation left unresolved.

Every human being has opinions.  And potential Supreme Court Justices are no exception.  And such things will always be taken into account when candidates are nominated.  It's only human!  But judicial appointments, especially at the highest level, should first and foremost consider other factors.  Knowledge of the law, approach to the application of law, depth of experience, temperament.  Whether or not a candidate is honest and ethical.  These are the things that should be given the most weight.  This is, after all, a lifetime appointment--it deserves our best.  

So here's my suggestion.  Amend the Constitution in such a way that a two-thirds majority must be secured to confirm the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice.  Two-thirds.  I realize that could lead to even more political wrangling, but in the end, it should lead to appointments that rise above mere politics.  

No question: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.  But when it is broken, it's time to get out the tools and go to work.