As a daily political watcher and editor of this blog, occasionally I get great joy in predicting something that is dead-on accurate. Of course, this predicting is usually to myself and in silence. One of those predictions was that once health care was settled, or jammed-through, depending on how you look at it, the left would begin a soft campaign to discredit the filibuster.
Harkin: End the filibuster, as long as Democrats are in control.
That campaign has begun in earnest. Today, the New York Times ran an editorial by Thomas Geoghegan slamming the use of the filibuster by the Republican party. Mr. Geoghegan had no such problem when the Democrats used the filibuster on many occasions between 2001 and 2006.
The attack line Mr. Geoghegan is taking is one most on the left will use over and over again. Listen for the year 1975 to be bandied about as the progressive chorus of Chavista-like rule changing efforts reaches a crescendo. It was in 1975 that the modern 60 vote rule was adopted, as Senate Rule 22 was amended to make a filibuster easier, but lowered the number of Senators required to cut off debate from 66 to 60. Before then, filibusters could literally be an all-night affair. Evoking the year 1975 will be used by the Democrats to remind everyone how recent the 60 vote rule is. It is the centerpiece of their strategy. The Democrats hope you find yourself thinking “Hmm, only since 1975.”
Mr. Geoghagen also uses the Federalist Papers and Aaron Burr in his examples of why we should end the filibuster. Tyranny of the minority is all the rage, now that the Democrats have a majority.
If Mr. Geoghagen and other Democrats all of a sudden believe in a strict interpretation of our founding fathers words can we expect them to revisit their approach to abortion, illegal immigration and the health care bill itself? No question our founding fathers would be against a health care mandate. Abortion? I can’t imagine a genuine reading of the Constitution or the vox populi circa 1780 not granting full rights to the unborn. However, I digress.
Mr. Geoghagen isn’t the only leftist looking to amend the 60 vote rule. Aaron Zelinsky is calling for bringing back the original filibuster over at the Huffington Post. Mr. Zelinsky wants the filibuster to be in a more “pure” form, one where Senators literally have to stay in the chamber reading for hours on end. Again, Mr. Zelinsky had no problem with the “easy” filibuster during the time when Democrats were in the minority during the Bush years. Is there any question what Mr. Zelinsky wants is no dissent to a progressive agenda? The highest profile Democrat in office currently calling for an end to the filibuster is Iowa Senator Tom Harkin. Mr. Harkin told Ezra Klein of the Washington Post that “filibusters are no longer used to debate something, but to stop everything.” Not to beat a dead horse, but Mr Harkin had no problem filibustering Bush judicial nominees during the 2000′s.
The bottom line is as follows: the Democrats believe that they will be the majority party in the Senate for decades, if not forever. Getting rid of the filibuster would give them rule with an iron fist. Dissent being the highest form of patriotism was for the aught’s, it is now time for the populace to be silent and follow Mr. Obama wherever he deems we should go. Hugo Chavez and his allies have the same opinion of the people of Venezuela.
Some Republicans flirted with the “no filibuster” idea when they had the majority. Cooler heads quickly dashed it. The Democrats have just enough hubris, and media backing, to try it. I hope they do. The Democrat majority would melt away quicker than ice in the desert. The American people won’t stand for this most important check and balance being taken away. Americans like a robust divided government. Besides, even a plurality of Democrats point to the Clinton (and many to the Reagan) years of divided government as the best governed in their lifetimes.
The filibuster stays, regardless of which party is in power. Hey, I have a novel idea, how about coming up with legislation that would pass with opposition support? Yeah, Chavez doesn’t like that kind of thing either.
Related posts:
- Ending Williams-Sonoma’s Annoying ZIP Code Trick
- Mr. Bernanke, Call Your Office!
- I think they call that inflation Ace Lefty…
John Romano is the publisher and editor of Yes, But However!, a musician, a former political correspondent for BBC Radio London, and a serial web entrepreneur. Follow him on twitter: twitter.com/yesbuthowever or John Romano on Google+John Romano article archive.
