I remember clearly the day that candidate Obama made the brilliant statement that I paraphrase in my title:
America wants a President who can Do More than One Thing At A Time.
He made that statement at the point of the September financial meltdown, in response to Senator McCain’s claim that the Presidential debate should be canceled so the candidates might focus on economics. As we all recall, McCain himself publicly rushed out of New York City for his emergency trip to Washington DC = and dissed David Letterman [but managed a McCain fundraiser and a Couric Interview before heading south]
Yes! I said to myself. America does want a President who can Do More than One Thing At A Time!
So why - weeks after his public humiliation by Republican minority on his existing nominations, are we still facing well over 100 unfilled judicial seats- including 31 "judicial emergencies"? - why are these vacancies still languishing without nominations from you, Mr President?
I have endured weeks of frustration with the lack of fire from my President - wondering at Mr Obama's non-response when
(a) the Republican Senate minority publicly humiliated Mr Obama by holding up his nominee to head Homeland Security over unionization issues – just before the Christmas Underwear bombing – and when
(b) the Republican Senate minority then backed one Alabama Senator's blanket hold on all [79?] nominees for the Executive and judiciary, with an Alabama earmark as ransom
I was prepared to see our President move into action - especially after telling Congress "not to run for the Hills" - I looked to see him not only push for some recess appointments of his existing nominees. I also expected to see him start publicly catching up with his dismal record on making nominations.
Weeks have passed. Apparently Mr Obama's new White House Counsel new White House counsel, Bob Bauer is supposed to oversee and coordinate judicial nominations and help get these back on pace. So where are the nominations?
I am still waiting.
If Mr Obama truly believes that Democrats should not "run for the hills" then it is long past time for our President to start setting examples.
Here is one:
Goodwin H. Liu, a UC Berkeley School of Law associate dean and constitutional scholar, is said to be Mr. Obama's pick for one of the two vacant seats on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Sounds good, huh? Here is a description from the Call Law Blog "Legal Pad"
According to one Northern District source who declined to be named, Liu has been vetted both by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the American Bar Association for a federal appellate appointment. A former O'Melveny & Myers appellate litigator in Washington, D.C., who earlier clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Liu joined the Berkeley faculty in 2003.
A Yale Law School graduate, Liu last year published "Keeping Faith with the Constitution" with Pamela S. Karlan of Stanford Law School and Christopher H. Schroeder of Duke University School of Law.
So what's wrong? After all, the legal blog says Mr Obama was "poised" to announce the above person as an nominee for the Ninth Circuit - perhaps that very day.
What's wrong is that the blog was written nearly one month ago, in mid-January. What’s going on, Mr. President?
It was also about a month ago that Jeffrey Toobin wrote in the New Yorker
ONE YEAR. WHERE ARE THE JUDGES?
[Capitals are by Mr Toobin]
So now, a month later, and even Slate has begun to excoriate the President to get moving already. Slate reminds the President that he still has not acted on the one single nomination of Dean Liu.
Slatedescribes this "former Rhodes scholar, Supreme Court clerk, and litigator, who now serves as associate dean at the University of California-Berkeley law school, Boalt Hall, and has yet to turn 40" as the perfect example of fitting the category of "the young, brilliant, hyper-qualified" possibilities who "share his views about the Constitution and the law and [could] be the cornerstone of his judicial legacy" - if only Mr Obama would move.
But that announcement never got made. Unfortunately, as Slate notes,
the President has for the most part "fail[ed]" to nominate and fight for [these] brilliant, highly qualified, younger nominees who share his views about the Constitution and the law and will be the cornerstone of his judicial legacy.
The failure to nominate this one single highly qualified candidate, who has been in limbo by the WH for nearly a month, is only one stunning example of a huge problem: a failures in timely nominations that Mr Obama has allowed to fester. The failure to act on Dean Liu is sadly only the tip of an iceberg of a problem of glaring needs in our judiciary.
Right now there are currently 102 vacancies on the federal bench. And as I noted in my intro above, info courtesy of Slate-
Of these [102 vacancies], 31 constitute "judicial emergencies"—vacancies that have severely threatened a court's ability to handle its workload. Before the end of the year, there will be dozens of additional openings on the lower courts (20 have already been announced)
So there are now 122 current or announced judicial vacancies - all awaiting action by the President.
This goes well beyond the possible two Supreme Court openings. Depth of the judicial bench is hugely important; and while Mr Obama ignores this problem, there are plenty of graduates from "Freedom Law School" or whatever the newest fundamentalist Christian law schools are spewing out.
History tells us that these deeply unqualified law school graduates need merely wait on the sidelines until the next Republican Presidnet moves as decisively as did Bush II.
Yes I know that the Senate's obstructionism has made the process harder; having only confirmed 12 of the 33 judicial nominations made by Mr Obama in his first year.
But (1) why only 33 nominations in one year? And now, after being publicly flogged by Senator Shelby and his consortium of of obstructionists, the President's continuing 'kid glove' approach to pushing existing nominations, making recess appointments is frankly staggering - let alone his embarrassing record in keeping on track with new nominations.
Apparently an article in the New Yorker Blog in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS by was not sufficient to light the fires under Mr Obama for new judicial nominations last month.
Now Slate points out the embarrassing truth: Republicans merely "capitalized" on our President’s "paucity of nominees" made during his first year - a "shaky first-year performance" on judicial nominees that has "made it hard to scream too loudly" about Republican obstructionism.
After Senator Shelby humiliated Mr Obama to get action on his earmarks, the Republicans then ‘allowed’ votes on 29 of his last 70 or so executive and judicial nominations.
But as Jeffrey Toobin points out, the President's delay does not make hus job easier:
[H]is influence on Capitol Hill is waning. An assertive Republican minority will probably only feel emboldened to engage in ever more obstructionist tactics. A thin slate of judicial nominees only makes the Republicans’ task easier.
Mr. President, we need leadership. It’s not only time for recess nominations of the remaining folks left in limbo – including those nominees whose 53 vote majority fails to reach the 60 vote cloture to overcome filibuster.
But it is also time for you to nominate those languishing 122 judicial nominations, along with the other nominations for your Executive branch.
Mr President I desperately want you to succeed. But a strong judiciary is one of the most important legacies of any presidency. we need a President who sees the big picture and who can concentrate on more than one issue at a time.