Filibuster
The filibuster, of course, is not mentioned in the Constitution, but that is a shaky argument for getting rid of it. Slavery was mentioned in the Constitution, direct election of senators wasn't. The Constitution is the main source of our rules for governing, but it is not the only one. The traditions that have grown up over the centuries in American governance ought not to be discarded so loosely.
The filibuster is one such tradition. For two centuries it as been a tool of the minority to stop action in the senate as a last resort. Thus the filibuster is, in a sense, undemocratic. However, that does not necessarily mean it is bad. Indeed, the Founders intended to limit the democracy of American government. The chose a representative democracy instead of a direct democracy and created the senate, with its equal representation, to limit democracy and prevent "the tyranny of the majority". The filibuster is simply a 200 year old tradition that extends that principle.
The Republicans claim that they only wish to get rid of the filibuster of judicial nominees, an "unprecedented" practice. First of all, the practice is not "unprecedented". It was used as recently as... the Clinton administration when the Republicans filibustered some of Clinton's nominees!!! And of course, what are the chances that they will only get rid of the filibuster of judicial nominees?
No, the Republicans have no right to get rid of the filibuster, especially when they lack a supermajority in the senate. They certainly enjoyed the filibuster a lot in the 50s and 60s when they were blocking civil rights legislation, but now they wish to get rid of it to get 7 eXtreme judicial nominees appointed to the federal judiciary. Democrats have already approved 95% of Bush's nominees, and are even willing to approve 5 of the 7 remaining, but Republicans want every last one. Having control of the Supreme Court, the Congress, and the Presidency apparently isn't enough for them.
Save the filibuster!
The filibuster is one such tradition. For two centuries it as been a tool of the minority to stop action in the senate as a last resort. Thus the filibuster is, in a sense, undemocratic. However, that does not necessarily mean it is bad. Indeed, the Founders intended to limit the democracy of American government. The chose a representative democracy instead of a direct democracy and created the senate, with its equal representation, to limit democracy and prevent "the tyranny of the majority". The filibuster is simply a 200 year old tradition that extends that principle.
The Republicans claim that they only wish to get rid of the filibuster of judicial nominees, an "unprecedented" practice. First of all, the practice is not "unprecedented". It was used as recently as... the Clinton administration when the Republicans filibustered some of Clinton's nominees!!! And of course, what are the chances that they will only get rid of the filibuster of judicial nominees?
No, the Republicans have no right to get rid of the filibuster, especially when they lack a supermajority in the senate. They certainly enjoyed the filibuster a lot in the 50s and 60s when they were blocking civil rights legislation, but now they wish to get rid of it to get 7 eXtreme judicial nominees appointed to the federal judiciary. Democrats have already approved 95% of Bush's nominees, and are even willing to approve 5 of the 7 remaining, but Republicans want every last one. Having control of the Supreme Court, the Congress, and the Presidency apparently isn't enough for them.
Save the filibuster!
posted by Placeholder at 8:10 PM
1 Comments:
I think they're getting rid of it because they're lazy. They just don't want to try this "politics" thing any more.
Post a Comment
<< Home