CWA: Let the Senate Breathe and Work, End Republican Filibuster Stranglehold   by Mike Hall, Jul 30, 2010

Share

Long gone are the days of U.S. senators standing on the floor of the Senate as hours turned to days while they filibustered legislation they hoped they could talk to death because they didn’t have the votes to kill it outright.

Senate rules no longer require filibustering senators to stay on the floor and speak while all Senate business grinds to a halt, as in the iconic scene in “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” where Jimmy Stewart’s character filibusters to exhaustion.

That’s meant the once-rare filibuster that requires 60 votes to break is now the biggest and most frequent weapon in the Republican obstructionist arsenal. And it’s being fired at a record rate, stalling or killing legislation such as health care reform, unemployment insurance, Wall Street reform, jobs legislation, aid to states, vital spending bills and just about anything that’s not on the Republican corporate/right-wing agenda. These and other filibuster targets likely would have passed on a simple majority vote.

This week at the Communications Workers of America (CWA) convention in Washington, D.C., delegates approved a resolution calling for an end to filibusters and the use of  “holds” on nominations that have stalled hundreds of Obama administration judicial nominees and other vital appointments.

The resolution says the frequent use of the filibuster has now become:

a vicious partisan tool that prevents consideration of most legislation. As the use of the filibuster has become routine, it has become increasingly rare for the Senate to consider legislation, approve nominations and pass annual appropriations bills. The Senate’s dysfunction and the continued abuse of this procedure by the current Republican minority have led to paralysis throughout the federal government.

Senators aren’t even required to officially filibuster. The threat of a filibuster alone stalls legislation, writes Paul Hogarth at BeyondChron.com.

Senate Republicans have made “60 the new 51” by simply announcing that they’ll filibuster everything. But these are effectively pre-emptive filibusters—killing legislation before any debate starts (let alone ends).

The CWA resolution says reform of Senate rules must take place:

if we are to make progress on any progressive reforms in our country….The filibuster must be eliminated and the use of holds to deny the appointment of qualified individuals must come to an end.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) this week told Talking Points Memo (TPM) that Republican filibuster tactics are taking their toll.

A lot of us have been completely worn down by a requirement of 60 votes on everything. This was rare when I got here 14 years ago and now it is rare otherwise.

While CWA’s resolution calls on the Senate to change its rules when it reconvenes as the 112th Congress in January and completely eliminate filibusters and holds, there are other efforts to modify the filibuster and hold rules that would still allow the tactics but make it easier for a majority to end the stalls.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) addressed the Netroots Nation meeting last week and said:

We’re going to have to change it….We’re looking at ways to change what has been an abuse.

Earlier this week, Dylan Matthews at Ezra Klein’s Washington Post blog reported on proposals from Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.). Bennet’s would:

eliminate anonymous holds, limit holds without bipartisan support to two days and limit all holds to 30 days. It would require 41 senators to vote to uphold the filibuster, reversing the current requirement that 60 senators vote to stop it.

Lautenberg’s plan has been dubbed the “Mr. Smith bill” because it would require senators to stay in the chamber and continue speaking throughout the filibuster. Says Lautenberg:

Filibusters should happen on Capitol Hill, not from the Capital Grille [restaurant]. If any of my colleagues feel strongly enough about a bill or nomination to stop all work in the Senate, they should have no problem standing on the Senate floor to explain their opposition to the American public.

Click here for more from Matthews on a Senate Rules and Administration Committee hearing on filibusters and holds.

Also, Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) has proposed that the Senate assert its authority at the beginning of the next Congress to change the filibuster rule by a majority vote of the Senate, rather than subject that change itself to a filibuster. And Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) has proposed a rule that would enable successive votes to end debate on a matter, with 60 as the first necessary threshold, then 57, 54 and 51—a simple majority.

Print This Article | E-Mail This Article |Comments (2)