The retirement of California Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald George reminded me of how difficult it is to be a centrist in government these days. George is a Republican who was appointed chief justice by a Republican governor. He is considered a centrist, however, and often was the swing vote on the court. To many people, usually those on the extreme right or extreme left, a centrist is wishy-washy and don't have convictions. In fact, a centrist do have convictions but he would look at each issue and judge its merit objectively. So sometimes a centrist would side with the liberals and sometimes he would side with conservatives. Of course the side he does not agree with may criticisize him. Add to that problem is the fact that 2 centrists may not agree on a particular issue. I consider myself a centrist and I disagree with George frequently. I do respect the fact that George looks at each issue carefully and rule according how he interprets the law. This is unlike conservatives and liberals whose decision on most issues are known to everybody before the argument begins.
Couple of examples of what a centrist may do. George was the deciding vote in California approving same-sex marriage in 2008. This infuriated conservatives. Subsequently propositon 8 overturned same-sex marriage and when the constitutionality of Prop. 8 came before the Supreme Court in 2009, George voted to uphold it. This infuriated the liberals even though 2 others who voted for same-sex marriage in 2008 also voted to upheld Prop. 8. He was the tie-breaking vote to overturn a state law requiring girls under 18 to obtain consent from a parent or a judge to have an abortion. This infuriated not only conservatives but also a centrist like me. While I think women have the right to abortion, I don't think a girl under 18 should make that decision herself. Right now a girl under 18 can't come to my office to get a pregnancy test without parent approval. I can't give her a shot without notifying a parent or guardian. So why would it be lawful for someone to give her an abortion without parental notification? This is surgery where there can be complications or even death of the girl. So I disagree with George on that. But I do respect George for his overall work and I would much rather have him deciding cases than someone like Clarence Thomas or Ruth Ginsburg because I know how they are going to vote before the case starts.
The world needs more centrists in office, but in today's politics, you have to be the extreme on one side or the other to get elected.
ReplyDeleteI have always thought that judges should run without political affiliation and that they should not be allowed to even belong to a political party.
I know that may sound naive and I do realize that a judge can easily show what his politcal/social biases are even without running as a member of a party.
Now as a contradiction, there were two supreme court judges here in Michigan that were in the same party that ran for re-election this past November.
The two of them ran joint TV ads but never mentioned what party they were affiliated with.
One of the judges was an African-American who wears a bow-tie. Maybe from the eye test, he would appeal to many African-Americans here in Michigan, but if you dig a little closer, this guy is a right winger, who is against Affirmative Action and his campaign was backed by the GOP.
In fact, the democrats that ran against these two lost handily. Which I guess disproves my point that you have to run as an extremist to win, but maybe people see judges differently. I don't know what makes people vote for the people they vote for.
I am against people voting just for change. You have to believe in something and not just in change itself.
I always try to look at both sides of an argument but I guess most people aren't like that.
-LBOAYM