Anne Hruska
AP U.S. Gov
Ms. Gordon
February 19, 2016
NBC News article response
1. The supreme court vacancy is currently such a widely addressed issue because of the timing that seems to dictate it all. With the primary elections right around the corner, the decision as to who assumes the position of Scalia is greatly debated. Because Scalia was a Republican, the republicans that hold senate seats will attempt to stop all efforts that would allow Obama to nominate a judge, until a republican gets into office. However, on Obama’s end, there is a 17-day gap that could occur that would allow for a nomination still to be made on the democratic behalf. Any move will require a consensus made between both parties. Politically speaking, a consensus means that the republicans in the senate, the democrats in the senate, and lastly, the democratic president will need to negotiate and come to an agreement. If the republicans try to block whatever nomination Obama makes then he may try to put forward someone who is even more liberal than himself, which would, in turn, harm the republican’s presidential candidates. In conclusion, if no consensus is reached it will lead to a stand-still in the process and would end up hurting one of the two parties.
2. Obama is the president, therefore, he is granted the power not nominated anyone who he deems fit to take the position of justice. However, our founding fathers built the United States off of the ideology that no one man should hold final power above all others, therefore, the system of checks and balances was put into play in order to allow one branch of government to oversee the power of the other. This comes into play in the Judicial nominating process. Though the President may nominate a person they must be confirmed by the senate in order to pass on to the supreme court. The senate is almost always the hardest part of the nomination process for presidents as it’s typically the president’s aim to appoint a judge who reflects his own ideologies, and for obvious reasons, the opposing party residing in the senate would try to block him, so the appointment process is usually altered by the senate.
3. In politics, the idea of a lame duck president refers to a president who is in the last few months or even last year of their elected office. A lame duck president is essentially the opposite of the honeymoon period: the first year of a president’s elected office where presidents typically pass the majority of their bills and get the most support from the media, public, and senate. A lame duck president usually lacks the support from congress and the public which in turn makes him less likely to get bills passed. I personally believe that every president becomes a lame duck, however, some sooner than others. Obama is an extremely charismatic president, however, there is no doubt that he has become a lame duck. At this point in time, Obama is strictly relying on his support from the public, and the democratic portion of congress. This leaves the rest of congress waiting for Obama to leave office instead of trying to negotiate with him, like they would in the honeymoon period, in their eyes he is on his way out and they won't have to deal with him much longer. Yes, Obama is a “lame duck” president, but it’s inevitable, at this point the presidency is coming to the end of an 8-year run and congress is preparing for a new candidate.