I am disappointed with the U.S. Senate leadership’s position concerning the Supreme Court vacancy. Refusing to consider any nominee to fill this position is another example of why Congress has such a low public approval rating.

I am a moderate, non-party affiliated voter. The candidates I would support must be willing to do their job, act in the nation’s best interest and compromise for the greater good.

It is the constitutional duty of the president to nominate a candidate. The Constitution does not put any time-left-in-office limit on him.

The Senate has the duty to consider and vote on this proposed nominee in a fair, timely manner. When senators do this and either accept or reject the nominee, they should give the American public the succinct, non-political and non-ideological reasons for their choice.

I do not know who President Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, is or what his viewpoints are. He may be more moderate than the late Justice Antonin Scalia. But a moderate may be what is needed. Extremes are never good. Congress is dysfunctional because of the polarization that exists.

Sen. Mitch McConnell’s statements and not allowing the hearing and vote are divisive and typical of what the American public hears every day. If Sen. McConnell really wants the American public to have a voice in this process, then the process has to change to remove the Senate from the decision and give the people a direct vote.

I do not think this would be the best solution, but if the Senate can only obstruct, it may be the result. Hold the hearings on Judge Garland and allow the public to listen and then make our choice. A year and a half is too long to leave this court seat vacant.

Walter Libby

Freeport

Copy the Story Link