Latest baseball scores, trades, talk, ideas, opinions, and standings

Archive for the ‘Senate Confirmation Hearings’ Category

>Let’s Return To The Civil War Oath of Office


Current Oath of Office Doesn’t Cut It

Vice President Richard Nixon administers the oath of office to Senator Gale McGee.
Vice President Richard Nixon administers the oath of office to Senator Gale McGee, 1959.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

At the start of each new Congress, in January of every odd-numbered year, the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate performs a solemn and festive constitutional rite that is as old as the Republic. While the oath-taking dates back to the First Congress in 1789, the current oath is a product of the 1860s, drafted by Civil War-era members of Congress intent on ensnaring traitors.

The Constitution contains an oath of office only for the president. For other officials, including members of Congress, that document specifies only that they “shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation to support this constitution.” In 1789, the First Congress reworked this requirement into a simple fourteen-word oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States.”

For nearly three-quarters of a century, that oath served nicely, although to the modern ear it sounds woefully incomplete. Missing are the soaring references to bearing “true faith and allegiance;” to taking “this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion;” and to “well and faithfully” discharging the duties of the office.

The outbreak of the Civil War quickly transformed the routine act of oath-taking into one of enormous significance. In April of 1861, a time of uncertain and shifting loyalties, President Abraham Lincoln ordered all federal civilian employees within the executive branch to take an expanded oath. When Congress convened for a brief emergency session in July, members echoed the president’s action by enacting legislation requiring employees to take the expanded oath in support of the Union. This oath is the earliest direct predecessor of the modern oath.

When Congress returned for its regular session in December 1861, members who believed that the Union had as much to fear from northern traitors as southern soldiers again revised the oath, adding a new first section known as the “Ironclad Test Oath.” The war-inspired Test Oath, signed into law on July 2, 1862, required “every person elected or appointed to any office … under the Government of the United States … excepting the President of the United States” to swear or affirm that they had never previously engaged in criminal or disloyal conduct. Those government employees who failed to take the 1862 Test Oath would not receive a salary; those who swore falsely would be prosecuted for perjury and forever denied federal employment.

The 1862 oath’s second section incorporated a more polished and graceful rendering of the hastily drafted 1861oath. Although Congress did not extend coverage of the Ironclad Test Oath to its own members, many took it voluntarily. Angered by those who refused this symbolic act during a wartime crisis, and determined to prevent the eventual return of prewar southern leaders to positions of power in the national government, congressional hard-liners eventually succeeded by 1864 in making the Test Oath mandatory for all members.

The Senate then revised its rules to require that members not only take the Test Oath orally, but also that they “subscribe” to it by signing a printed copy. This condition reflected a wartime practice in which military and civilian authorities required anyone wishing to do business with the federal government to sign a copy of the Test Oath. The current practice of newly sworn senators signing individual pages in an elegantly bound oath book dates from this period.

As tensions cooled during the decade following the Civil War, Congress enacted private legislation permitting particular former Confederates to take only the second section of the 1862 oath. An 1868 public law prescribed this alternative oath for “any person who has participated in the late rebellion, and from whom all legal disabilities arising therefrom have been removed by act of Congress.” Northerners immediately pointed to the new law’s unfair double standard that required loyal Unionists to take the Test Oath’s harsh first section while permitting ex-Confederates to ignore it. In 1884, a new generation of lawmakers quietly repealed the first section of the Test Oath, leaving intact today’s moving affirmation of constitutional allegiance.

The above is taken from the U.S. Senate web site.


>Sotomayor’s Tenure Is A Life Sentence For America

Oh, Baloney, Judge Sotomayor!

By Don White
In an AP story about a Senate Judiciary panel questioning the next female Judge of the Supreme Court, Judge Sonja Sotomayor denied bias in her ‘wise Latina’ remarks. To that I would like to say, it’s just more Puetro Rican and “Chicago Kaupunki,” or more mildly, it’s out and out “baloney!”

She has started off just as Barak Obama started off, lying to the public. What’s worse, it constitutes lying to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee entrusted in approving her for lifetime duty in the highest court of the land, the Supreme Court.

Even that statement is not correct. She may quit before she dies if she likes. And I would prefer she made her tenure short. She is a smart Latina judge who is bound to apply the weight of her votes to build up the Latin American community, not the entire citizenry of the United States. But she will swear to live according to the law, that is rule independently but by a strict adherence to the Constitution, but she won’t. But once she’s in, she won’t be impeached, even if she deserves to be — not by the current Democrat-dominate Senate.

America has been given a life sentence with this biased woman.

The AP said Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor firmly denied racial bias Tuesday at her Senate confirmation hearing and said an oft-criticized remark about her Hispanic heritage affecting judicial decisions was a rhetorical device gone awry.

“Gone awry?” Since when do the utterances of intelligent people, people with law dregrees and many years as judge behind her, “go awry?”

She said what she meant, and she meant what she said. It’s as simple as that. Yet the blind-as-bat senators on that panel can’t find fault in her? Are they afraid of offending their Latin constituents? I believe so. How about their being afraid of offending the major of Americans, the white and black contingency?

If Senators are afraid of the Latin vote and vote her in for that reason, they themselves should be impeached for failing to live up to their senate oath, that is to live up to the oath as it was during Lincoln’s tenure during the Civil War. I will print the entire article regarding this in a forthcoming or new blog.