Filibuster Reform is Good for the Planet

We can’t protect the planet if popular measures supported by majorities of Americans can’t even come up for a vote in the Senate. Which is why it’s good that all 53 returning Democratic Senators have signed on to a letter calling for filibuster reform.

The filibuster – a procedure that’s supposed to be used rarely and sparingly to slow down action to protect minority rights – is now completely out of control. Back when Jimmy Stewart dramatized the tactic in 1939’s “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” filibusters averaged one a year. During Eisenhower’s 8 years, there were only two. In the last two years: 136.

The filibuster used to be the emergency break of the Senate – pulled only on very rare occasions when a minority group felt so strongly about a piece of legislation that it felt the need to temporarily bring the legislative train to a halt.

But over the past two years, Senate Republicans stated their intention: to block President Obama from any and all accomplishments. And they’ve been pulling the emergency break all the time, for everything, to the extent that Majority Leader Harry Reid didn’t even bother bringing things to a vote.

A host of bills languished and died without ever being considered, including a national energy policy, work on climate change, and protecting wilderness lands. Even when he had the votes – on health care, for instance – it takes more than a week to break a filibuster. Pissing away that time meant there were other bills that couldn’t be voted on, which was fine with the Republicans.

Even former Republican Senate Leader Bill Frist recognized the problem. “The use of the filibuster, compared to 10 years ago, 15 years ago, 20 years ago — it’s being used way too much,” Frist said earlier this year. “I think it’s symbolic of the partisanship, the lack of comity here.”

Partisan rancor

In a news article on the subject, the New York Times opined:

[Fixing the filibuster] could touch off a bitter floor fight, escalate the already high partisan tensions in the chamber and hinder President Obama’s ability to advance legislation.

But that rather misses the point – the main thing holding up legislation is the guys pulling the emergency break. Since the high partisan tension isn’t going to go away regardless – incoming Republican leaders have already said they have no intention of compromising – it seems fair and reasonable to fix the rules so they can only use the emergency break in the case of actual emergencies.

Democrats pick up on Republican idea

And of course, filibuster reform was first proposed back in 2005, when Frist led the Republicans and minority Democrats were trying to block four extreme-conservative judicial appointments. Back then the Republicans called it “the nuclear option”, and they insisted that Democrats were being un-democratic by preventing an up-and down vote. Today, when the shoe is on the other foot, they call it a power grab and threaten to retaliate.

Writing at Congress Matters, David Waldman points out:

Now, typically I have answered this argument by pointing out that Republicans were on the verge of forcing through their own version of rules reform when they needed it, in 2005, during the standoff over the so-called “nuclear option.” Given that fact, I argued, there can be little doubt that should the majority change hands, Republicans will have little tolerance for permitting Democrats to engage in the same kind of obstruction they’ve made a matter of policy. In other words, forbearance in reforming the filibuster now is not the same thing as guaranteeing its availability when Democrats want to use it in the future. When they want it, it’ll be gone.

No more holds

Also coming: Senator Clair McCaskill (D-MO) has lined up support for ending anonymous holds. Back in the day when the Senate was a gentleman’s club, it was considered good form to allow any Senator with particularly strong feelings to place a hold on a bill or nomination, to allow for discussion (and possibly horse-trading) before it moved forward.

When it was used on rare occasions, it was a fine way to protect minority interests. But like the filibuster, it is now used only to gum up the works – and not just by the opposition. ConservaDem Mary Landrieu (D-LA) used a hold to express displeasure at the Gulf oil drilling moratorium, blocking President Obama’s choice to head the Office of Management and Budget, leaving the critical management agency without a manager.

Next: We’ll take a look at some of the proposals