The Election Rule.

       I've given it some thought and I'm tending to agree with the Republicans in the Senate. No Supreme Court nominee should be considered in a presidential election year. But I'd go farther than that. I'd include mid-term elections as well. After all if the point is to allow American voters to make the choice, then the mid-term election is as valid for that purpose as the presidential election year, because as many Senators are elected in the mid-terms as in the Presidential elections.
       This means that no Supreme Court nominee should be considered every other year. Hmm, putting it that way makes it sound a bit more harsh. Well, fair is fair. But if appointing a replacement to the Supreme Court can so easily be delayed, then what's to stop either party from claiming that every year is a campaign year, especially in the fund raising sense of elections, and after all corporations are persons too. And why not withhold elections until all nominees are confirmed?
       This means that no nominee should be confirmed in any year unless the President and a super-majority party in the Senate are of the same party. Now I wonder how often that happens? My guess is that in the year 2066 the lone member of the Supreme Court will have entered a personal care home.
       All future cases before the Court will be heard in the Sun Room of the personal care home. I've noticed lately in cases before the court, the questions from the bench tend to be; "Huh? Speak up young man" or "what was that he said" or my favorite "when's lunch?" But then what can you expect from a 109 year old Justice. It's good to see citizens finally proposing that any vacancy of the Court must receive a nominee from the President within 30 days and be confirmed or denied within 45 days, with no more than three nominees and that the third nominee must be confirmed with or without the Senate. That'll speed things up.