In the classic "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," Jimmy Stewart stands up against political corruption by implementing his right to filibuster for hours on end, until the good guy finally wins. While current-day Washington is miles away from Frank Capra's idealized version, the filibuster remains an important tool to prevent tyranny by the majority party in the Senate.
A filibuster is not a "get out of jail free" card for congressional debate - 60 votes are needed to stop a filibuster and move to a vote. Senate majority leader Bill Frist (R-TN), however, wants to lower this provision to 51 votes so that all of President Bush's judicial nominees will not be blocked by Democrats. Republican leaders are acting like spoil sports, removing any guarantee of fair debate in the Senate in order to ensure that they can always get their way.
Frist and his Republican senators are clearly politically motivated because the filibuster did not become an issue until some of the President's judicial nominees were in jeopardy of not being confirmed. Additionally, the 51 vote rule will not apply to normal legislative debate, only to judicial appointments. Senate Republicans just want to be able to make any appointment without being held accountable by the minority party.
Democrats have already approved 205 of Bush's judicial nominees - this controversy concerns 10 candidates to appellate courts. The stakes are high, since Bush has primarily nominated conservatives who could drastically change the makeup of the federal court system and the Supreme Court itself. It is understandable that the Democrats would object to appointments that could reverse policies on abortion, homosexuality and other hot-button issues. These are changes that must be fully debated by the Senate, which the Republican leaders want to avoid.
Fortunately, a number of Republican senators are uneasy about changing filibuster rules. They understand that these rules were written to protect the rights of the minority party - and drastic changes could hurt Republicans in future sessions. If the filibuster is to be reformed, it must be done without the partisan pressures of appointing judicial nominees that could have long-lasting effects on the future of politics.
Unfortunately, the Hollywood-patented happy endings are not guaranteed in Washington, and a compromise must be reached between Democrats and Republicans so that the Senate can move on from this issue. Republicans must be prepared not to have every single judicial nominee appointed. Democrats may have to let through some nominees they greatly dislike. But politicians must also find a way to resolve this issue without rewriting how the Senate functions at the cost of the minority party.
