The next couple weeks will be filled with confirmation hearings as the U.S. Senate questions each of Donald Trump’s Cabinet nominees. At the moment, most seem to face relatively smooth sailing right into their nominated positions, since Republicans have a narrow majority in the Senate.
That said, it’s not too late to reach out to our senators and let them know if there are specific nominees that we, their constituents, don’t believe are fit for their posts.
I have ideological differences with all of Trump’s nominees, but there are several about whom I have major concerns regarding their fitness for the office — and I don’t think I am the only one. I imagine even congressional Republicans have reservations about the likes of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Pete Hegseth, but at a time in which every decision is a Trump loyalty test, most Republicans aren’t going to vote against what Trump wants. Unless, maybe, their constituents put considerable pressure on them.
To get the ball rolling, I’m going to share with you the letter I intend to send to West Virginia senators Shelley Moore Capito and Jim Justice. You can use this as a template for your own letters to your senators, adding or subtracting specific nominees or reasons you object to their confirmation.
Dear Sen. _____,
I am a West Virginia resident and American citizen. As your constituent, I ask that you vote against the confirmations of the following nominees for the included reasons.
- Russ Vought for Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Mr. Vought has advocated for eliminating protections for civil servants and has argued that a president is not obligated to release funds that Congress has appropriated. The civil service is what keeps our country running day-to-day, and the nonpartisan nature of our civil service has held as an important guardrail against the abuse of executive power. Mr. Vought seeks to eliminate the nonpartisan protections for civil servants, which would allow him and Mr. Trump to remove highly qualified employees and replace them with unqualified loyalists. This could easily return us to an era of cronyism and spoils systems. What Mr. Vought advocates would lead to the concentration of power in the hands of the executive branch — specifically in the hands of the president — which would disturb our longstanding system of checks and balances.
- Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense. Setting aside the allegations of his conduct both his personal and professional lives, Mr. Hegseth has demonstrated he is not fit to run a department as large and crucial as the Department of Defense. Whether he was removed from his leadership roles or voluntarily stepped down could be debated, but tax filings cannot. Under Hegseth’s leadership, Veterans for Freedom spent more money than it raised in 2008, and by 2010, its revenue was a tiny fraction of what it had been just two years earlier. When Hegseth moved from Veterans for Freedom to Concerned Veterans for America in 2011, something similar happened; in 2016, the organization — under his leadership — spent more money than it raised, putting it in debt. It is obvious that Mr. Hegseth does not have the financial sense to run an organization, let alone America’s largest department both in size and budget.
- Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for Secretary of Health and Human Resources. Mr. Kennedy’s staunch advocacy against standard medical practices, specifically vaccines, is alarming. Vaccines have been a proven and effective method for preventing the spread of diseases — especially among children. As a representative of West Virginia, you know our state’s strict vaccine requirements for school-aged children have made us a leader in preventing childhood diseases like polio and measles. Someone who cannot understand the relatively simple science behind one of our most effective medical treatments does not have the capacity to lead our nation’s health system. In addition, medical professionals and health experts across the country, including West Virginia, have spoken out against Mr. Kennedy’s nomination; we should trust their expertise and wisdom.
- Linda McMahon for Secretary of Education. Ms. McMahon has no background that qualifies her to lead our nation’s education system; rather, her nomination is an extension of Mr. Trump’s promise to shut down the Department of Education. We are entering an era that will be dominated and defined by advancements in technology and science. If we want to keep up with our rivals — let alone surpass them — education is more important than ever. We may disagree on what our education system should look like, but I hope we can agree that it should be led by someone who at least knows how the education system works.
- Pam Bondi for Attorney General. Ms. Bondi’s work as Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer creates a conflict of interest that disqualifies her to be Attorney General. We need someone who will represent the interests of the United States of America and its citizens — not someone whose focus is to serve Mr. Trump. Because of Ms. Bondi’s and Mr. Trump’s previous working relationship, it is not certain she would stand firm against any requests from Mr. Trump that are unconstitutional or do not serve Americans’ best interests.
- Kash Patel for Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. We may disagree over whether or not the Justice Department was “weaponized” under Mr. Biden’s administration. However, surely we can agree that someone who has promised that he will, intentionally, weaponize the FBI to pursue Mr. Trump’s perceived enemies and the press is unfit to lead the bureau. A free press is called for in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; Mr. Patel has promised to wield the FBI’s power against “mainstream media.” This threat to a constitutional pillar alone should be enough to disqualify Mr. Patel from being FBI director; his threats to use the FBI’s powers against anyone perceived to be Mr. Trump’s enemy, including civil servants who follow their oaths to the constitution, are all the more reason to vote against his confirmation.
- Tulsi Gabbard for Director of National Intelligence. Ms. Gabbard does not possess the experience to oversee America’s intelligence agencies at a time when America’s ability to gather and analyze intelligence is especially important. Ms. Gabbard has also been known to repeat foreign propaganda, which is problematic on its own but it is alarming when we consider she will be in charge of the very agencies that collect and confirm or debunk information coming from other countries.
- Elise Stefanik for Ambassador to the United Nations. Ms. Stefanik does not have the foreign-policy experience to effectively represent the U.S. on the international stage — nor does she have the temperament to represent America in its best light. The way she attacks her perceived enemies or rivals and her tendency to approach conflict with overt aggression will reflect poorly on the U.S.
I sincerely hope you will consider my concerns, as well as other constituents’ concerns, when voting to confirm or not confirm these cabinet nominees.
All the best,
_______
CBS News has put together a fairly comprehensive list of Trump’s nominees. For a straight list (no extra info) scroll all the way to the bottom.
For ways to contact your senator, visit https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm. Many senators require you to fill out a form on their website instead of sending them an email. If you don’t want to write a whole letter, you can also call your senator. While it’s doubtful you’ll be able to speak with them directly, you can leave a message that should get passed along to them.
Remember to keep your correspondence polite and professional. Attacking the recipient with name-calling or profanity won’t help you make your case. The goal here is to convince them to see the validity of our concerns, not to have them dismiss us out-of-hand as “snowflakes” or “libtards.” We catch more flies with honey than vinegar — and there are a lot of flies to catch in the next few weeks.
J. Nelson - Writer 