Sometimes the optimal way to describe something is to describe what it is not.
The opposite for a person could be labeled “anti,” which is defined as a “person opposed to a particular policy, activity or idea.” To review the concept of “anti-senators,” we will begin reviewing “senators,” before discussing whether “anti-senators” exist in the Meta Universe — a virtual world that is parallel to the real world and that is always online — and/or the real world, and/or in the questioning mind of this writer.
Article I of the U.S. Constitution defines the qualifications for U.S. senators as being at least 30 years old, a citizen of the U.S. for at least nine years and an inhabitant of the state that elected them. There is no requirement that the candidate be a resident of that state.
Senators are required to swear (or affirm) “that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and I will faithfully discharge the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
Can Pennsylvanian Sen.-elect John Fetterman have no “mental reservations” since he alleges that his mental condition from a stroke caused his failure to understand the speech of others or to compose complete thoughts or sentences? Would these characteristics qualify as “mental reservations?” Are they temporary?
He refused to permit his physician from discussing whether these failures were temporary, or if not, to describe the possible long-term limitations of his stroke that kept him off the campaign trail until Aug. 13.
The facts are that his physicians inserting stent(s) indicates that his problems began with a blood clot in his heart that traveled to block some blood flow in his brain. Hence the stroke. Recoveries can be partial, or total, depending on the individual and the extent of the problems. Unfortunately, the slowness of Sen.-elect Fetterman’s recovery is not a good sign.
The Senate accomplishes its objectives by “meeting to discuss, write, support and vote on bills” that represent the people of their states. Examples are Sens. Joe Manchin, D-West Va., and Rick Scott, R-Fla..
The qualifications for an anti-senator would be the opposite of those listed above. Based on his history and campaign, the question arises: Is John Fetterman an example of an “anti-senator?”
Mr. Fetterman’s history of not “meeting, discussing, writing, supporting or voting” began when he was mayor of Braddock. Pa. (2006-2019).
Braddock is a town of 1,721 residents, where Mr. Fetterman missing so many meetings and only voting once caused the council to threaten to impeach him from a job that nobody wants that only pays $150/month.
Prior to his return to his own campaign on Aug. 13, out-of-staters spent $32 million flooding the voters with false allegations that his opponent, Dr. Mehmet Oz, was anti-abortions, when the truth was that Dr. Oz agreed with the U.S. Supreme Court and the Constitution that abortion polices must be handled by the state: U.S. senators have no vote in the policies.
When Mr. Fetterman returned to his own campaign, he ran a Biden-type campaign, meaning he rarely made public appearances, gave no interviews, had staffers issue a few releases and refused to debate until Oct. 25, after many voters had already cast their mail-in ballots. During the debate, he strained for words, bungled lines even though he had a screen that listed the words of his opponent.
Mr. Fetterman’s adviser, Rebecca Katz, tweeted that as a senator “lingering auditory problems” will prevent him from answering questions, so questions must be submitted in writing and “will be returned as soon as his wife has had time to answer.” Apparently he also cannot think or write.
The preamble to the Constitution outlines what must be “supported and defended” as establishing justice, ensuring domestic tranquility, providing for the common defense, promoting the general welfare, and securing the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” (emphasis added).
What does Mr. Fetterman’s record indicate about his record and willingness to defend “justice, defense, tranquility, and welfare?”
As a member of the Parole Board of Pennsylvania, he frequently was the only vote to parole convicts, and he said his goal was to release one-third of all criminals from Pennsylvania prisons.
Mr. Fetterman said he wants to “decriminalize across the board’ (2015) for all drug-related crimes as he sees them as “public health issues, not criminal ones.” Nice idea but how will this protect the public when last year 72,210 people were sent to federal prisons and 171,300 to state prisons, for “drug-related’ crimes, not simply drug use or possession.
He supports supervised drug injection facilities, which will harm the ability of the U.S. to defend itself since an estimated 77% of the age group of 18-23 do not qualify for the military based on their drug use and disabilities, both mental and physical.
How will his working with the Sierra Club to ban new oil and gas drilling on federals and waters while saying “I don’t support fracking and I never will” (2018) while 600,000 Pennsylvanians are employed in fracking that produces $261 billion for Pennsylvania help the general welfare of his state?
How did a Fetterman win?
Studies indicate that 56% of Pennsylvanians did not vote for Sen.-elect Fetterman based on his qualifications, but against Dr. Oz because of the false ads saying the doctor and TV celebrity favored abortions.
The founder and head of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, believes so strongly in the existence of the Meta Universe that he changed the name of his company from “Facebook” to “Meta Platforms.” This writer is unaware of whether “anti-senators” exist in the Meta Universe, but is aware that it does exist in his questioning mind and will watch to see if Rebecca Katz gave an example in the real world. Why don’t you also watch?
Brent E. Zepke is an attorney, arbitrator and author who lives in Santa Barbara. His website is OneheartTwoLivescom.wordpress.com. Formerly, he taught law and business at six universities and numerous professional conferences. He is the author of six books: “One Heart-Two Lives,” “Legal Guide to Human Resources,” “Business Statistics,” “Labor Law,” “Products and the Consumer” and “Law for Non-Lawyers.”