Dick--

I happen to disagree with your prescription of a fixed 12-year term for Supreme Court Justices. That would ensure a huge political battle at the end of each 12-year term for each justice--in order to pick the next justice. I think there is much value in having the Supreme Court insulated from politics as much as possible--keeping in mind--was it Mr Dooley's?--adage that "Th' Supreme Court follows th' 'lection returns".

I suspect that much of the current discontent among Mudcatters for the current system has to do with the recent confirmation of Chief Justice Roberts--who was, what, 50?---when confirmed--and likely to be there for a long time therefore---and the perceived Rightward tilt that has followed. But don't forget, it works the other way too. I believe I've read that though Warren was picked under Eisenhower, Ike was not pleased with the way that worked out. Warren was there on a lifetime basis--and influenced the Court in a liberal direction.

But that was actually not the question anyway. Richard (and others, no doubt) feels that the process of first picking a Justice and installing him or her should be changed. My question to anybody who feels that way is: , since you do not like the current system exactly what process do you feel should be instituted in first picking a Justice and confirming that Justice?