Letter to Lindsey Graham

Dear Senator Graham:

I have received your letter of August 24, 2010, which was a reply to my letter of July 28, 2010. While I appreciate your response, I must tell you that I am appalled at what you are telling me because you are stating ‘facts’ that seem to be untrue or distorted from reality, in my opinion.

You quoted Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist Paper Number 76 in reference to confirmations of Presidential appointments by the Senate. While his thinking is very interesting as background, it is not part of the Constitution and thus is not binding upon you in any way. Also, did you overlook the third sentence in that quotation that “It would be an excellent check upon a spirit of favoritism in the president,…”? Then your next sentence to me was “Our great Constitution puts a requirement on me, as a senator, to not replace my judgment for the President’s”. Would you please respond immediately and tell me where in the Constitution that requirement is found. I suspect that you just made that up because I have been unable to locate it and I would really like to know where that appears. Also, I think that that sentence clearly illustrates a very significant lack of understanding, on your part, as to your role as a senator. The Constitution establishes the three branches of government; the Executive, the Legislative, and, the Judicial. None is superior to any other and they are to function in a system of ‘checks and balances’ to assure that each other’s actions reflect the will of the governed and are constitutional.

What I did find in the United States Constitution was Article II, Section 2, where the President “shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate” to do many things, which includes appointing Judges of the Supreme Court. That says to me that if the President ignores the “Advice” of the Senate as to what constitutes an acceptable Judge, then the Senate can withhold their “Consent” and the nomination will fail. Even though you say you had 100 reasons to disagree with her nomination, you didn’t vote ‘No‘. That tells me that you don’t vote your convictions because they apparently aren’t strong enough. Instead, you quote Strom Thurmond and Phil Gramm to me as justification for your action. Why would you think that is pertinent? Whatever anyone else thinks or says is not at issue here and your using that as a rationale for your vote simply tells me that you can’t take responsibility for your own actions. I go back to my first letter and one of the major points that I made there. Your ‘go along to get along in the Senate’ philosophy is not why you were sent to Washington. If the people of South Carolina disagree with any action the President takes, it is your duty to vote against it.

　I also found Amendment XVII where it clearly states “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, elected by the people thereof,…”. This is where your lack of understanding of your role as a senator comes in that I referred to in my second paragraph above. You are elected by the people of South Carolina to represent them and you are in Washington to vote as the majority of the people of South Carolina would vote. Where does “to not replace my judgment” come into this situation? The will of the majority of the people of South Carolina who elected you is paramount in every instance and “your judgment” has nothing to do with the question. You should be voting as the majority of South Carolinians would vote and you have not done this. In my opinion, you have been fatally infected with ‘Potomac Fever’ and so you place yourself, and your opinions, above the wishes of your electorate.

Shame on you!