Filibuster deal solves little

e-mail this story discuss this issue in our forums

Modest progress is all it can be called. Left unsettled is the overarching question of whether the president is owed a vote on his judicial nominees. The abuse of the filibuster has allowed a minority of senators to block such votes, and this perverted use of this parliamentary device has allowed the wishes of the minority to trump the rule of the majority. Leaving this critical matter unresolved almost guarantees a similar fight down the road on what is certain to be a nomination or two by Bush to the Supreme Court.

Frist and most other Republicans not party to the deal were prepared this week to end the unprecedented filibustering of the president's appeals court nominees. Those nominees have been demonized by the Democratic Party, called radical right-wingers because they believe judges should interpret the law and not write it, and have been used as fund-raising gimmicks for the party that's out of power.

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham told us last week that he preferred a "graceful" solution to the filibuster-ending vote preferred by most Republicans, including junior South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint. But as Graham also said last week, if the Senate is going to "blow up one day (over this principle involving judges), it might as well happen now." Indeed, "now" likely was the best time for resolving this matter.

Monday night Graham, Sen. John McCain and five other Republicans signed a legal-sounding Memorandum of Understanding with seven Democrats. For reasons not explained to the public, the seven Democrats agreed to allow up-or-down votes on Priscilla Owen (confirmed Wednesday after her nomination was blocked for four years), Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor. Two nominees, William Myers and Henry Saad, won't be afforded the courtesy of a vote.

As part of the deal, the seven Democrats agreed not to filibuster judicial nominees barring "extraordinary circumstances." Those circumstances weren't defined. In return, the seven Republicans agreed to oppose any rules changes during the 109th Congress.

Despite the seemingly clear wording of the agreement, Graham insisted Tuesday in a conference call with reporters and editors that he was free to vote to end the filibuster at any point. He said the agreement was "based on trust and I trust these Democrats to try their best not to filibuster. If we're successful the country moves forward. If we get back in a filibuster fight I haven't given up anything."

South Carolinians who voted for Sen. Graham and President Bush surely hope the senator's trust isn't misplaced.