Wrong, Stupid, and Unnecessary

As soon as the votes were counted (the first time) showing that George Bush had been re-elected, most pundits and politicians immediately began talking and writing about the coming Battle Supreme over judicial nominations.

Majority Leader Bill Frist who wants to run for President in 2008, and has a reputation for smarts and urbanity, jumped into the fray by loudly proclaiming the possibility of invoking the "nuclear option" (NO).

The NO, as most of you likely know involves the United States Senate voting to disallow use of the filibuster during votes on judicial nominations. If used, the NO would lower the bar from 60 votes to 51 votes to confirm the President's choice.

While today's Democratic Party deserves any dirty tricks that are sprung on them, the Republicans need to think long and hard about this "option". It would be a stupid move, so ill-advised that it could send the GOP back to minority status far sooner than expected.

Wrong

First, it is wrong because it arbitrarily reverses over 200 years of tradition. The Filibuster was conceived to protect the minority from the majority. It is just one of MANY such protections that exist in our law and practices.

Freedom of Speech is primarily about minority rights. Saddam Hussein enjoyed free speech in pre-war Iraq, but no one else did. In the United States we put tremendous importance on the right to say what you wish because it allows a person or group of persons who otherwise have little or no power, to make their case and help guide decision making.

The fact that SOME people abuse that freedom, is no good excuse for REMOVING the right to free speech. The same is true of the filibuster. If the 60 vote rule to stop a filibuster was EVER a good thing, it still is, regardless of the Democratic Party's abuse of the system.

Stupid

Second, it would be a monumentally stupid action to reverse Senate tradition and change the 60 vote rule. Stupid because American's would see that action for what it is: A power grab by a majority, a short cut born of impatience, and an arrogant taking of minority rights.

American's love an underdog even if they hated him last week. No matter that the Democrats have become an odious collection of special interest whiners and ambulance chasers, it is they who in this instance are playing by the rules and it would be the Republicans who would be viewed as bullies and cheats.

Unnecessary

Finally if wrong and stupid aren't reasons enough, the NO is in fact completely unnecessary. A "real" filibuster is composed of two ingredients that are wholly missing from the modern low fat FilibusterLite. Up until roughly 30-40 years ago, a filibuster brought ALL Senate business to a halt. Nothing else could be voted on or disposed of. Additionally, in order to continue, the filibusters had to speak constantly, around the clock, 24 hours, 48 hours, 200 hours, whatever it took and however long they could stand it.

In the present time the filibuster is a pathetic shadow of its former self. Other business goes on, only the specific issue that the filibuster is related to stops. And, it is no longer required to go around the clock, in fact I don't think they have to speak at all. In effect the "filibuster" has become just another parliamentary maneuver. If one side wants to derail anything they don't actually have the votes to stop, they simply declare a "filibuster" and Voila! 60 votes are required to pass the motion.

The solution is so obvious and so simple. Go back to the way filibusters were administered 50 years ago and for many decades before that. Force the Democrats to bring Senate action to a crashing halt and thereby effectively paralyzing the federal government.

The Republican Party is the MAJORITY party again for the first time since Calvin Coolidge was President. Let's not throw it all away with a bullheaded decision that actually empowers and breaths life into the sorry heap of debris that the Democratic Party has become.