It is time to end the filibuster

In Wednesday’s debate, the best case for reform probably
was made by Sen. McCaskill, whose 10-minute speech was bursting with good
sense.

She recalled coming came to the Senate four years ago,
when one of the first orders of business was adoption of a ban on secret “holds,”
a custom that lets a single senator block legislation anonymously simply by
passing word of his or her opposition to the majority leader.

The ban was approved but the holds continued. “I
discovered the people who voted for this, or a bunch of them, did not mean it,”
McCaskill said. When called on to reveal themselves, they pulled “the old
switcheroo… they would just hand their hold off to someone else.”

Then McCaskill learned that some of her colleagues have
been trying for 15 years or more to end secret holds. “Now, seriously, think
about that,” she implored her colleagues. “We have allowed people to secretly
hold nominations and the people’s business, and there have been members trying
to clean it up for 15 years. We wonder why we are having trouble with our
approval ratings.

“If we cannot get 67 votes to end secret holds and amend
the rules, how seriously can we take anybody who claims they want
accountability and transparency in government? I mean, this is the hall of fame
of hypocrisy,” she concluded.

Her case against secret holds thus made, McCaskill turned
to the filibuster, and was similarly devastating.

She recalled, incredulously, Sen. Alexander’s suggestion
that other Senate rules can be brought into play to stop filibuster abuse.
Those rules, she correctly noted, would force the Senate’s majority to hold
marathon sessions, where members could make repeated motions to break a
filibuster and bring issues to a vote, only to be thwarted by an objection from
a single senator in the minority.

“We cannot make the minority talk. So that means the
majority, whether it is Democrats or Republicans, has to stay all night and
call the question… Is what we need to do to make this place work?” she asked. “That
is (Alexander’s) suggestion, to force the people who are objecting and the
staff and the people around here to stay here all night every night until
someone breaks? That is a good idea?

“I think that means someone has probably been around here
too long. It does not sound like a good idea. That is not a commonsense idea
that we would be promoting on Main Street in Missouri.

“I think it makes more sense, if you are the minority and
you want to block legislation that you own it. Just own it. Block it… The
minority can continue to block legislation whether the Democrats are in the
minority or the Republicans are in the minority. They can block all the
legislation they want. They just have to own it. They have to be willing to say
they are blocking this for the following reasons — because we think it is
important — and let the people decide.”

McCaskill closed with a warning senators on both sides of
the filibuster debate would be wise to heed. “If we do not change this path,
then we are going to be on this path forever… This is going to go on forever
until there are enough people around here who are willing to set aside the
political maneuvering and do what is right for the future of deliberations in a
body that we all want to be proud of. But right now we cannot be so proud of the
way we operate.”

No, they can’t.

Bob Edgar is the president of Common Cause.