On January 6, 2009 I posted a copy of a letter that I sent to Orrin Hatch regarding the appointment of Eric Holder as US Attorney General. The other day I received Senator Hatch’s response. I only post part because of the legal disclaimer at the end warning that dissemination of the material was prohibited (though it sited no statute, etc.).
I certainly understand your concern regarding this issue. However, please allow me to explain my position with regard to all nominations to positions within the Executive Branch. I believe the most important criteria for any nominee is there qualifications for the specific post. If a nominee is objectively qualified for the position, I believe the Senate should defer to the preferences of the President, particularly with regard to members of his Cabinet. In general, I do not believe that nominees for any position should be held up for purely political reasons. This is the approach I have taken regardless of whether a Democrat or a Republican is in the White House.
So now we get to look at questions of objectivity and subjectivity. Objectively, Eric Holder has been an attorney for a long time and objectively he was Assistant US AG during the Clinton era. However, objectively Eric Holder has been anti-the 2nd, which means that objectively he’s anti-civil rights that he subjectively doesn’t agree with.
I guess it was the same train of thought when Ruth Bader Ginsburg was given a free pass by Senator Hatch because, objectively, she was qualified. Though her history showed a very subjective and uber-liberal political view. But I guess her being a member of the ACLU’s Board and one of its General Counsel makes her objective in your thinking, right? Right.