TW: Completely agree with Klein here. The tradition of folks holding on far too long especially in the Senate and often on the Supreme Court is unfortunate (same could be said of some college football coaches). This dynamic demonstrates the power of incumbency which creates a self-fulfilling inertia. We have retirement ages for many professions for a reason. Why the Senate (or House etc.) should be different is not clear to me.
From Ezra Klein:
"Robert Byrd Jr...the 91-year-old West Virginian is officially the longest-serving member of Congress, having cast more than 18,000 votes and served for more than 20,000 days. Congratulations?
This will reveal me as something of a skunk, but these records are bad things, not good ones. Byrd has spent the past year too sick to reliably carry out his day-to-day duties. It's routinely mentioned that Democrats can't count on 60 votes because they don't know whether Byrd will be able to cast his vote. Similarly long-serving public figures such as Strom Thurmond and Thurgood Marshall spent their final years virtually incapacitated, totally reliant on staff.
There's a tendency in Washington to celebrate extremely long careers despite the fact that the extra length often extends the career beyond the point of useful service. People are honored for sticking around, when the courageous and hard thing would be to cede their seat or position. The celebration and historical permanence given to these sorts of records is part of why they do it. Byrd has accomplished much in his career, and there's plenty in his service worth honoring (his eloquent opposition to the Iraq war, for instance, but this isn't a record I'm eager to see others emulate."
No comments:
Post a Comment