Filibuster-riddled democracy

By Mike Pellicio

WASHINGTON

With President Bush's nomination of Federal Appeals Court Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, we seem to have on our hands the scenario left-wing senators, pro-choice partisans, racial discrimination whistle blowers, and ostentatious atheists who have been licking their lips for years. Alito is everything these people have sworn to destroy: a conservative, religious, white, male Supreme Court nominee with a substantive paper trail.

The Democrats will ask nagging questions, make a lot of noise, oppose the nomination, but ultimately allow a vote, in which case Alito gets confirmed fairly easily. This is the respectable thing for the party to do. But why has this motley crew of disgruntled radicals and their supporters been anxiously awaiting this day since Bush's first inauguration? Because their plan is the disrespectable thing to do: filibuster Alito into oblivion.

To address this problem, the always-useful Senator John McCain brought together a "Gang of 14," seven moderate senators from each party, who decided that the filibuster was a terrible idea in all but "extraordinary circumstances."

It's clear that the current circumstances are fairly ordinary. Alito's conservatism makes him neither extraordinary nor unqualified. Liberalism also fails to disqualify a judge, as we have seen with the passing of President Clinton's liberal nominations, Stephen Breyer (87-9) and Ruth Bader Ginsburg (96-3). The latter was the director of the American Civil Liberties Union Women's Rights Project. Only three conservative Republicans voted against her.

Given these precedents, the opposition of the clearly qualified new Chief Justice John Roberts (who passed, 78-22) seems unusually strong. Democrats seem more hesitant to confirm conservative judges. But will this lead to a filibuster?

It might, although it shouldn't. The Democratic Party is already thought to legislate from the bench; opposing the up or down vote of nominees isn't going to help. Filibustering qualified judges on the basis of ideology is the most undemocratic maneuver possible.

Alito has already passed through the Senate 100-0, twice. A filibuster would be a new low, even from senators who, with access to the same intelligence as President Bush, insist that he manipulated the CIA, the 15 intelligence agencies involved in gathering intelligence for Washington, as well as a half-dozen other countries, to illegally lead us into Iraq.

As the Democratic party tries to paint its counterpart as the party of corruption and conspiracy, it is dangerously becoming the embodiment of the filibuster: a hysterical minority unaccountable to the core principles of democratic debate.

Mike Pellicio is a junior political science major.