DEMOCRATS SHOULD LET GOP KILL THE FILIBUSTER.Byline: Paul Kujawsky Local View FILIBUSTER filibuster, term used to designate obstructionist tactics in legislative assemblies. It has particular reference to the U.S. Senate, where the tradition of unlimited debate is very strong. It was not until 1917 that the Senate provided for cloture (i.e. . Funny-sounding word. It comes into English from a Dutch word meaning ``freebooter'' - in short, a pirate. How appropriate. A Senate filibuster is a way to hijack debate. Through ceaseless talking, a minority can prevent a vote on any subject. Senate Democrats plan to use the filibuster to block the confirmation of several of President George W. Bush's more conservative judicial nominees. In turn, the Republicans are considering the ``nuclear'' or ``constitutional'' option - i.e., getting rid of the filibuster, at least in connection with judicial confirmations. Senate Democrats are furious and threaten to shut down the Senate. Apparently one's views on the filibuster depend on whose ox is gored. Today, when Democrats are the minority party, the filibuster is for ``protecting the rights of the minority and promoting compromise.'' But when Dixiecrats filibustered civil-rights legislation in the 1940s, the liberal weekly The New Republic raged, ``Southern Democrats Southern Democrats are members of the U.S. Democratic Party who reside in the U.S. South. In the Early 1800's they were the definitive pro-slavery wing of the party, opposed to both the anti-slavery, left-wing early Republicans and the more liberal Northern Democrats. are again making it difficult for decent Americans to maintain the proper respect for their lawmakers. The long-threatened filibuster against a permanent Fair Employment Practice Commission is a disgusting exhibition of the worst that is in us as a nation. In the face of it, no countermove coun·ter·move n. A move made in opposition or retaliation to another. intr.v. coun·ter·moved, coun·ter·mov·ing, coun·ter·moves To make a move in retaliation or opposition. to demolish de·mol·ish tr.v. de·mol·ished, de·mol·ish·ing, de·mol·ish·es 1. To tear down completely; raze. 2. To do away with completely; put an end to. 3. it seems strong enough or quick enough.'' So put aside the fact that liberals like the filibuster when they're in the minority, and conservatives like it when they're in the minority. Instead, examine the principle: Can a device that enables a minority to frustrate the majority be justified in a democracy? By requiring a supermajority Supermajority A corporate amendment in a company's charter requiring a large majority (anywhere from 67%-90%) of shareholders to approve important changes, such as a merger. of 60 senators to cut off debate, the filibuster is anti-majoritarian and thus, by definition, undemocratic. The U.S. Constitution requires supermajorities in certain circumstances - for example, it takes a two-thirds Senate vote to ratify ratify v. to confirm and adopt the act of another even though it was not approved beforehand. Example: An employee for Holsinger's Hardware orders carpentry equipment from Phillips Screws and Nails although the employee was not authorized to buy anything. a treaty. But constitutionally, supermajorities have nothing to do with debating judicial nominations. Proponents argue that the filibuster is needed to fight ``the tyranny of the majority The phrase tyranny of the majority, used in discussing systems of democracy and majority rule, is a criticism of the scenario in which decisions made by a majority under that system would place that majority's interests so far above a minority's interest as to be comparable in .'' It's an odd point of view, since these proponents are complaining about a majority that resulted from democratic elections. If the political minority doesn't care for the ``tyranny of the majority,'' it ought to start winning more elections. Filibuster fans also do a verbal sleight-of-hand by equating e·quate v. e·quat·ed, e·quat·ing, e·quates v.tr. 1. To make equal or equivalent. 2. To reduce to a standard or an average; equalize. 3. ``filibuster'' with ``full debate.'' Please. Forcing Senate consideration of judicial nominations to grind to a halt is not ``debate'' as normally understood. Every organization that actually wants to get its work done imposes reasonable limits on debate. The filibuster deserves to die. While I might prefer it to expire while Democrats control the Senate, ultimately the rule change will be politically neutral. After all, some day the Republicans will be in the minority again. So kill it now. Full debate is essential. Unlimited debate is impractical im·prac·ti·cal adj. 1. Unwise to implement or maintain in practice: Refloating the sunken ship proved impractical because of the great expense. 2. . Endless debate wielded as a weapon is unjustifiable. |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion