Supreme disconnect

The "in" thing would be to post the standard talking points about hoping Bush will try to unite not divide, to reach bipartisan consensus, to fill Sandra Day O'Connor's seat with a similar moderate, or at least a pathbreaking woman or minority. Blah, blah, blah, blog.

There is no question this will be the defining political battle for the next few months, and that the Supreme Court touches people's lives in a myriad of ways. The importance of the debate is driven by the long-lasting impact of a Supreme Court appointment. However, as evidenced by O'Connor, Souter, Kennedy -- heck, even Blackmun -- it will take years for the true impact of Bush's appointment to be fully realized or understood. The nature of case law jurisprudence and shifting 5-vote coalitions make rapid changes from the Court unlikely. By the same token, however, the forthcoming political strum und drang will have very little near-term impact on most people's daily lives.

In reading the interest group rhetoric (which has been polished for years in anticipation of this moment), the Duke already feels a disconnect. My hope and aspiration is that at least a few of our leaders will rise to the challenge and make a direct connection between the legal issues that will be debated and the stories of everyday folks. Otherwise, the polarization of Washington will look just like politics as usual to those of us in the heartland, and it will be even more difficult to build the public confindence and consensus necessary to tackle real-world problems like war and peace; jobs, health care, and education; and the challenges of raising a family.