Moulitsas: A losing play by Grassley

Iowa icon Sen. Chuck Grassley should’ve been headed toward an easy reelection. 

First elected to the Senate in 1980, when he ousted the incumbent Democrat by 8 points, Grassley has coasted ever since. 2010 was his closest reelection campaign, and he won that race by 21 points, demonstrating incredible political dominance in a purple state that hasn’t been shy about electing Democrats. 

So there was no reason for the Republican senator to worry about the 2016 cycle. In July 2015, Quinnipiac University found Grassley’s approval rating at an astronomical 68 percent, with 21 percent disapproval. Fifty-four percent of respondents said he deserved to be reelected, compared with 33 percent who thought otherwise. More recently, in January, Public Policy Polling pegged Grassley’s rating at 50 percent approval and 34 percent disapproval, and showed him with 25-point leads over potential Democratic challengers. 

{mosads}And yet here we are, a few months later, looking at a potentially competitive race. 

The reason? Grassley has become the point man in the Senate GOP’s bizarre decision to refuse to even consider President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Merrick Garland. 

It’s obvious that Republicans fear losing control of the nation’s high court. They have depended on its conservative justices to curtail voting rights, to permit an unlimited flow of unaccountable corporate money into the political process and to allow the drawing of undemocratic congressional gerrymanders. Furthermore, the court has systematically undermined key Democratic institutions like organized labor, all with an eye toward gaining conservative electoral advantages.

So why not pretend to vet Garland, meet with him, hold hearings, and then sadly shake their heads and vote him down by claiming — however dishonestly — that he’s just too liberal? 

Instead, Senate Republicans are willfully refusing to discharge their constitutional responsibilities to deal with the nomination, hoping to run out the clock for — what, a President Donald Trump? Not even Senate Republicans are stupid enough to think that’s a serious possibility, yet they seem bent on spiking the Garland nomination no matter the political costs.

By leading the GOP intransigence in this matter, Grassley is losing the reasonable, non-
ideological veneer that has served him so well for so long. 

Iowa newspapers have been brutal. The Des Moines Register sadly opined, “This was an opportunity for our senior senator to be less of a politician and more of a statesman. It was a chance for him to be principled rather than partisan … but he chose instead to disregard his constitutional duty.” The Gazette in Cedar Rapids wrote, “It’s hard to conclude this is anything but political maneuvering meant to meet partisan objectives at the expense of the Supreme Court, our constitutional process and the common good.” The Sioux City Journal charged that Grassley’s “refusal even to take up an Obama nomination disrespects the Constitution.” The Quad-City Times said the Senate “is just another cesspool of ridiculous stonewalling. And Grassley, a longtime leader, is now just another bricklayer.”

When PPP returned to Iowa in March, the firm saw Grassley’s rating fall to 47 percent approval and 44 percent disapproval. Democrats had abandoned him, and his 53-24 rating among independents in January had plummeted to 43-42. 

Meanwhile, 56 percent of Iowans said they want the Supreme Court seat to be filled this year, and 45 percent of respondents said they’d be less likely to vote for Grassley given his rank partisanship. 

Grassley is boxed in, unable or unwilling to back down and give Garland his due. Now, what should’ve been a safe seat will be contested, all because Republicans refused to just do their jobs. 

Moulitsas is the founder and publisher of Daily Kos.