Opponents of Progress
July 17, 2007
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced yesterday that the Senate
will stay up all
night tonight and force lawmakers to stand and debate a bill that provides a timetable for the withdrawal
of American troops. If conservatives refuse to allow a majority vote
on Iraq redeployment legislation, "we will work straight through the
night on Tuesday," Reid said. Last week, Sens. Carl
Levin (D-MI) and Jack Reed (D-RI) introduced their measure to begin a redeployment from Iraq within
120 days of its passage, with a target end date of April
30, 2008. Senate Republican
Conference Chairman Jon Kyl (R-AZ) yesterday "formally registered" an objection
to having a simple majority vote on the bill's passage, forcing the Senate
majority to overcome a 60-vote
hurdle in order to beat back a potential
filibuster. Three Republicans--Sens. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), Gordon Smith (R-OR),
and Olympia
Snowe (R-ME)--have indicated their
public support for the Levin/Reed bill. Many of their colleagues on the right,
while voicing
support for withdrawal, have refused to
turn their rhetoric into voting action.
- The filibuster will expose the opponents of progress on the war in Iraq. The late Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-SC), "armed with throat lozenges and malted milk tablets," held the Senate floor for more than 24 consecutive hours in an attempt to stop the passage of the 1957 Civil Rights Act. John Nichols writes in The Nation, "Like the southern senators who filibustered against civil rights legislation in the 1950s," those who choose to "rant on and on about how Congress cannot block the president's war making will expose themselves...to the harsh light of day--and potentially to the harsh response of the voters in 2008" if they filibuster the Levin/Reed bill. Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) said, "I believe on critical issues like the war, it's time to make the Republicans stand on their feet and go through a traditional filibuster, so that the rest of the nation will understand...what they're doing, who is obfuscating, who is creating impediments to changing the course of the war."
- This is just the latest in a series of blocked votes on issues where Americans want action. In the 109th Congress, conservatives have used the filibuster to block the passage of a minimum wage increase, ethics reforms, comprehensive immigration reform, funding for renewable energy, and funding for the inelligence community, among a host of other legislative priorities. Many of these measures enjoy strong majority support. Last week, for instance, conservatives held up a measure offered by Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) that would have required members of the Armed Forces deployed overseas to be given more rest at home. Webb's amendment received a strong 56 votes, but not enough to kill the minority's stranglehold on the bill's passage. When asked if the majority should start forcing the minority to stand and physically filibuster these bills, Conrad responded, "Yeah, I think there's a growing consensus that we ought to do that."
- Conservatives are now embracing the tactic they sought to 'nuke' just a few years ago. Conservatives who are now fully embracing the filibuster as a tool to thwart passage of Iraq redeployment bills are the very same lawmakers who were calling for the "nuclear option" in 2005. Back then, the majority called for upending the practice of filibustering judicial appointments. Now, those same senators--who are currently in the minority--have been constantly deploying the threat of a filibuster. Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS) previously said the filibuster was "bad for the institution. It's wrong. It's not supportable under the Constitution. And if they insist on persisting with these filibusters, I'm perfectly prepared to blow the place up. No problem." Now, Lott, along with Kyl, is using the filibuster to provide political cover for President Bush and prevent passage of legislation that retains the majority support of Americans.
