Filibuster frustration
Bill Frist, Senate majority leader, offered a proposal that would have ended the bickering over whether judicial nominees are denied an up or down vote on the floor of the Senate. The offer was rejected by Harry Reid, Senate minority leader, although he did indicate that he would consider some of the proposals made.
In his floor speech, however, Senator Reid made a cinematic reference that, quite frankly, is becoming a bit tiresome to hear from any senator. He stated, "Again, I do not really like the proposal given, but I am not going to throw it away. I am going to work on it and see if I can come back with something that is in keeping with what I think is the 'Mr. Smith Goes to Washington' scenario."
In fact, a number of Democrats have recently cited this movie as inspiration for their judicial obstruction. Here are Robert Byrd, Dick Durbin, Harry Reid (again), and Dick Durbin (again), invoking the movie in support of their filibusters of judicial nominees. Here is probably the best description of what the Democrats are not doing, by Dick Durbin (again): "So if I am perplexed by an amendment offered by one of my colleagues, and I stand up to debate it and decide I am going to hold the floor of the Senate as long as my voice and body can hold out, I can do that, until such point as 60 colleagues, Democrats and Republicans, come together and say: Enough, we want to move to a vote. That is what it is all about."
Fine with me. Let's do it. Or as Senator John Kerry might have said, "Bring it on!" If Senator Reid and Senator Durbin really want to preserve the "Mr. Smith" scenario, let's go back to the days when a filibuster was truly a filibuster, when a senator actually had to take the floor and speak for hours on end to slow down debate on a matter. That is not the way filibusters work today. Now, if a party threatens a filibuster, the matter is simply not placed on the Senate agenda for debate. Both parties are to blame for this, however. Neither party wants to bear the political cost of a good, old-fashioned "Mr. Smith"-type filibuster because the Senate proceedings are televised live on C-SPAN (or C-SPAN2 -- not sure which). And Republicans don't want to do their jobs and sit in the chamber during a filibuster to ensure that there are always a majority of Republicans there to prevent a nominee from being voted down.
That "game" is frustrating and worn out. If Senator Reid wants to preserve the "Mr. Smith" scenario, fine. Let the Democrats read from the telephone directory for hours, and let the Republicans sit in their chairs listening (heaven forbid someone doze off and be caught on camera) and find out how America really feels about preserving the filibuster rule in the Senate, and how America feels about the way the Senate conducts business and spends taxpayer money. Take the floor, senators -- let's see how long you can hold out.
In his floor speech, however, Senator Reid made a cinematic reference that, quite frankly, is becoming a bit tiresome to hear from any senator. He stated, "Again, I do not really like the proposal given, but I am not going to throw it away. I am going to work on it and see if I can come back with something that is in keeping with what I think is the 'Mr. Smith Goes to Washington' scenario."
In fact, a number of Democrats have recently cited this movie as inspiration for their judicial obstruction. Here are Robert Byrd, Dick Durbin, Harry Reid (again), and Dick Durbin (again), invoking the movie in support of their filibusters of judicial nominees. Here is probably the best description of what the Democrats are not doing, by Dick Durbin (again): "So if I am perplexed by an amendment offered by one of my colleagues, and I stand up to debate it and decide I am going to hold the floor of the Senate as long as my voice and body can hold out, I can do that, until such point as 60 colleagues, Democrats and Republicans, come together and say: Enough, we want to move to a vote. That is what it is all about."
Fine with me. Let's do it. Or as Senator John Kerry might have said, "Bring it on!" If Senator Reid and Senator Durbin really want to preserve the "Mr. Smith" scenario, let's go back to the days when a filibuster was truly a filibuster, when a senator actually had to take the floor and speak for hours on end to slow down debate on a matter. That is not the way filibusters work today. Now, if a party threatens a filibuster, the matter is simply not placed on the Senate agenda for debate. Both parties are to blame for this, however. Neither party wants to bear the political cost of a good, old-fashioned "Mr. Smith"-type filibuster because the Senate proceedings are televised live on C-SPAN (or C-SPAN2 -- not sure which). And Republicans don't want to do their jobs and sit in the chamber during a filibuster to ensure that there are always a majority of Republicans there to prevent a nominee from being voted down.
That "game" is frustrating and worn out. If Senator Reid wants to preserve the "Mr. Smith" scenario, fine. Let the Democrats read from the telephone directory for hours, and let the Republicans sit in their chairs listening (heaven forbid someone doze off and be caught on camera) and find out how America really feels about preserving the filibuster rule in the Senate, and how America feels about the way the Senate conducts business and spends taxpayer money. Take the floor, senators -- let's see how long you can hold out.
posted by Hal | 4:27 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home