Democratic Filibuster of Gorsuch, Trump’s Supreme Court Nominee
So, the Democrats now have 41 votes against, meaning Gorsuch can’t pass without changing the Senate rules to allow majority votes (a.k.a. to remove the filibuster on supreme court nominees, the “nuclear option.”) The Democrats removed the filibuster on non-supreme court nominees some years back, and came to regret not removing it all on nominees when the Republicans refused to pass anyone nominated by Obama, denying Democrats a majority on the Supreme Court.
“The next President should decide.”
Republican leadership has said that they will, in fact use the nuclear option.
I’m ok with this. The filibuster is anti-democratic. The Founders put in checks and balances, but they didn’t intend that if one party had control of all branches of government they couldn’t do what they wanted, subject to the Constitution.
(Related: The two-term limit on Presidential terms is a vastly bad idea and anti-democratic as well.)
Republicans want an excuse not to pass some of the crap that the House passes on to them, so they are talking about not removing the filibuster for legislation, however. (Yes, this is dodging responsibility.)
Subject to the constitution, written and unwritten, people should get who and what they voted for, and if politicians betray voters, their responsibility for doing so should be clear.
So, yeah, losing the filibuster will make Americans worse off. So be it. Democracy without responsibility is not democracy and the filibuster has just as often been used to stop good things and people as bad.
(Also, if the nuclear option is not used, Democrats should filibuster every Trump nominee, saying “the next President should decide.”)
The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.