Democrats Have Better Filibuster Record
The recent editorial, "Busting Loose," unjustifiably equates changes of position by Senate Republicans and Democrats on filibusters of judicial nominees, claiming that both have "executed a U-turn on filibusters."GOP senators recently threatened to filibuster President Barack Obama's judicial nominees. These include many senators who previously claimed that such filibusters are always improper and unconstitutional. For example, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) repeatedly pledged in 2005 that "I would never filibuster any president's judicial nominee, period. I might vote against them, but I will always see they come to a vote."
In contrast, Senate Democrats have not altered their position on the ability to filibuster, including their opposition to the nuclear option to ban judicial nominee filibusters. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid recently explained that he hoped Republicans would not filibuster Obama's judicial nominees, but he added that it was their prerogative to do so.
Moreover, it was Republican nuclear option supporters who tried to rewrite the Constitution, which gives the Senate the power to make its own rules. The nonpartisan Senate parliamentarian, conservative former Republican senators, more than 600 editorial boards, and other objective thinkers agreed: The fact that the Constitution does not require filibusters does not mean they are forbidden.
Glenn Sugameli. Washington, D.C.
Email
Facebook
Google
Twitter
Favorites
More
Advertisement