The News Gazette asked Professors Richard Kaplan and Jason Mazzone what they would ask the presidential nominees if given the opportunity. Here are their questions and explanations.
Richard Kaplan (tax law and elder law expert):
Q: Millions of Baby Boomers are moving into Medicare every year while the range of medical responses to life's maladies is becoming more extensive and more expensive. How would you address the looming financial crisis that these developments pose?
Why that? "Medicare is scheduled to consume an ever-greater portion of the federal budget. The Affordable Act doubles down on Medicare's outdated fee-for-service model by cutting funds for Medicare managed care plans. At the same time, older Americans are especially at risk for costly chronic conditions such as diabetes, heart disease, cancer and Alzheimer's disease."
Jason Mazzone (Constitutional law expert):
Q: During your campaign, you have promised that if elected you will be a unifying president. Here is a way you can demonstrate that.
As you know, there is currently a vacancy on the Supreme Court as a result of the death of Justice (Antonin) Scalia. President Obama has nominated Merrick Garland to the position but the Senate has not taken any action on the nomination, which has now been pending for more than 200 days. I propose that you and your opponent agree, prior to the election, on a nominee to fill the vacancy. The nominee can be anybody you choose — including Garland — but you both must agree on the choice. The name of the nominee will be locked away until after the election.
If you are elected president, you will nominate the individual selected. If you do not win, you will support the choice and urge the Senate to quickly begin its confirmation process. Will you do that for the Republic?
Why that? "Politicization of the Supreme Court appointment process gives the impression — wrong in my view — that the Court itself is just another political institution with its members deciding cases based on their own political beliefs. My proposal, which would produce a Justice named by both a Democrat and Republican, would help depoliticize the process; avoid consuming the first months of the next president's agenda with securing an appointment; and quickly return the Court to its normal membership of nine.
"The proposal will not make appointing justices irrelevant to the election: given the age of the senior members of the Court — even justices don't live forever — the next president will likely have additional appointments to make. But it will take the politics out of the current vacancy. That can only be good for Court and country."
Full article at the News Gazette