I can’t agree about Ginsberg, she was sharp as a tack until the end, the fact she refused to resign her position on some political schedule is a separate question
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
The thing is that the cost of the occasional person who has to retire earlier than they strictly need to from this sort of policy is dramatically outweighed by the benefits of not needing to deal with the uncertainty her death caused or the gerontocracy we have now
So a lot of people have responded to this, and this is my personal view. I’m sharing it because I think we’ve been having a good conversation not to be an ass:
I can respect that as a universal policy. My point is that as long as the position is a lifetime appointment, no one has a duty to plan around their death.
It’s not! Vacating office due to death is extremely disruptive, even if your replacement is a member of your own party. The point is not about mental acuity (Biden’s deterioration has been heavily exaggerated) but about not holding office where there’s an actuarial likelihood you’ll die in office.
My issue is that she needed to consider the needs of the project ahead of her petty ambitions. Now we’ve got Barrett in her seat to tear down literally everything she worked for, all because she couldn’t just let go of it.
Pelosi is still one of the most talented politicians in DC, I agree with the others but they weren’t in lifetime appointments, and Ginsberg never suffered any notable cognitive decline until the day she died.
...I can fault that everyone and their mother was extremely worried about this specific outcome and then it happened. It's not like it came out of the blue
When she was first diagnosed with extremely deadly cancer, should could have had major impact in choosing her successor, who would have been able to be appointed without issue through the Senate.
Once you hit 75 or so you can just suddenly die. Even if you're sharp and competent. One fall or bump on the head, one case of pneumonia, one stroke and you're out. I'm against term limits but I'm mostly on board with mandatory retirement.
I’m not opposed to mandatory retirement, even if I might bicker about the details. But without it, a person should have the absolute right to continue in their position as long as they choose and are competent.
These people aren’t cashiers at Walmart, them dropping dead has life changing implications for hundreds of millions of people. There are hundreds of dead women in Texas because RBG didn’t want Obama replace her.
They also have the right to retire before it's too late and let someone 30-40 years younger take the spot. One of the surest ways to wreck any organization is when leadership won't mentor, and yield to, the next generation.
That’s absolutely fair, but it’s also a choice. One of my biggest problems here is with people denying Ginsberg her own agency. (Not saying you are, but I’m in a bunch of threads about this now.)
Comments
https://bsky.app/profile/jefffreyspies.bsky.social/post/3ll6bhxvocc2b
I have a great deal of respect for Representative Wexton.
I have very little for RBG.
She put her ego ahead of her oath.