Going Nuclear

More
Capitol_Building_Full_View%201.jpg

Dave Roberts contemplates the filibuster and runs pretty exhaustively through the flaws with the conventional thinking on how Democrats might effectively respond to Republican obstructionism. And I think he's right -- no amount of grandstanding will really work. The good news is that there's a perfectly workable solution to this problem:

At issue is a seldom-used, complicated and highly controversial parliamentary maneuver in which Republicans could seek a ruling from the chamber's presiding officer, presumably Vice President Cheney, that filibusters against judicial nominees are unconstitutional. Under this procedure, it would take only a simple majority or 51 votes to uphold the ruling -- far easier for the 55-member GOP majority to get than the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster or the 67 votes needed to change the rules under normal procedures.

Republicans wound up not doing that because of the dumb "Gang of 14" deal. Democrats could do the same thing (you'd need to pick a time when a Democrat, rather than Cheney, was presiding) except instead of "filibusters against judicial nominees" you'd just rule that filibusters in general are unconstitutional. The rules of the Senate aren't written in stone -- they've changed several times over the years. The filibuster rule, though obviously useful when the political party I prefer is in the minority, isn't a procedure with some strong claims of universal justice. Democrats should scrap it.

And they should scrap it this term. It'd be a huge controversy. But the controversy would die down a bit as attention moved to veto battles and the presidential campaign. That way, by 2009 it'll be a fait accompli and the GOP minority won't be able to scuttle the new administration. It's not going to happen, but it's what ought to be done.

Jump to comments
Presented by

Matthew Yglesias is a former writer and editor at The Atlantic.

Get Today's Top Stories in Your Inbox (preview)

The Time JFK Called the Air Force to Complain About a 'Silly Bastard'

51 years ago, President John F. Kennedy made a very angry phone call.


Elsewhere on the web

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register. blog comments powered by Disqus

Video

Adventures in Legal Weed

Colorado is now well into its first year as the first state to legalize recreational marijuana. How's it going? James Hamblin visits Aspen.

Video

What Makes a Story Great?

The storytellers behind House of CardsandThis American Life reflect on the creative process.

Video

Tracing Sriracha's Origin to Thailand

Ever wonder how the wildly popular hot sauce got its name? It all started in Si Racha.

Video

Where Confiscated Wildlife Ends Up

A government facility outside of Denver houses more than a million products of the illegal wildlife trade, from tigers and bears to bald eagles.

Video

Is Wine Healthy?

James Hamblin prepares to impress his date with knowledge about the health benefits of wine.

Video

The World's Largest Balloon Festival

Nine days, more than 700 balloons, and a whole lot of hot air

Writers

Up
Down

More in Politics

Just In