Key Democrat Assails GOP’s Threats to Filibuster

A historic confrontation over the federal courts and the rights of legislative minorities continued to escalate Saturday, as a key Democrat sharpened his criticism of Republican threats to eliminate the filibuster for judicial nominations.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada charged that barring the use of the filibuster against court nominees would reduce the Senate to “a rubber stamp for the president.”

“When it comes down to it, stripping away these important checks and balances is about the arrogance of those in power who want to rewrite the rules so that they can get their way,” Reid said in the weekly Democratic radio address.

Reid’s remarks underscored the growing tension in Washington over judicial nominations.

Frustrated by Democrats’ use of the filibuster to block 10 of President Bush’s first-term nominees to the federal appellate courts, GOP leaders are considering changing Senate rules to prohibit the parliamentary tactic for judicial nominations. Currently, 60 votes are required to break a filibuster. New rules would allow Bush’s nominees to be confirmed with 51 votes.

Since the GOP has 55 senators, that would mean Democrats could not block Bush court nominees -- including a potential nomination for a Supreme Court vacancy -- unless they persuaded at least six of the Republican lawmakers to join them. That would be a huge hurdle, given the reluctance of senators to vote against nominees from a president of their own party.

But some Republicans remain uneasy about eliminating the filibuster, which has provided a last line of defense for legislative minorities throughout Senate history. As a result, aides on both sides say neither party appears certain it has enough support to prevail if Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) brings the rules change to a vote.

Conservatives -- especially those who focus on social issues -- are pressuring the Senate leadership to implement the rules change. Those demands have grown louder since state and federal courts refused to order the reinsertion of a feeding tube for Terri Schiavo, the brain-damaged Florida woman who recently died.

Last week, leading social conservatives denounced the courts at a conference in Washington. Some called for impeaching federal judges and excluding entire areas of law, such as same-sex marriage, from their jurisdiction.

But the prospect of exempting judicial nominations from the filibuster has drawn resistance from other parts of the GOP coalition.

Some conservative groups, such as Gun Owners of America, have expressed concern that the move could be the first step toward eliminating the filibuster, which they argue would leave their causes vulnerable to a future Democratic Senate.

Some business lobbyists worry that if Republicans eliminate the filibuster for judges, Democrats will respond with procedural counterattacks that block action on legislation important to industry. “What we want is regular order -- we want bills to pass,” said one business lobbyist close to the White House, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Republican Senate aides increasingly contend Democrats are bluffing with those threats. They argue if Democrats tried to stall the Senate, the party would face a public backlash like the GOP did in 1995 when it shut down the government during budget battles with President Clinton.

Frist and Reid have said recently that they are open to a compromise that could avert a showdown over the filibuster. Frist intends to present a proposal to Democrats “within the next couple of weeks,” said Bob Stevenson, his communications director.

So far, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), a moderate facing reelection next year in a state Bush easily carried in 2004, has developed the most concrete proposal.

Nelson aides said he was preparing legislation that would change the judicial confirmation process to ensure that all nominees received an up-or-down vote on the floor if any senator requested it -- even if the Senate Judiciary Committee had rejected a nomination or refused to schedule a hearing on it.

That would block the tactic the GOP used to thwart some judicial nominations during Clinton’s presidency. The Senate Republican majority never provided a floor vote for 24 of his appellate court nominees.

In a second step, Nelson would bar the use of the filibuster against judicial nominations.

But operatives on both sides consider a deal unlikely.

“I don’t think there will be a compromise,” one Republican heavily involved in the party’s strategy said on condition of anonymity. “Frist wants to go through the motions and say he tried. But I don’t think the Democrats will agree” with anything he proposes.

Reid, in his remarks Saturday, also sounded as if he considered compromise unlikely. Highlighting an increasingly common Democratic theme in the struggle, he portrayed the rules change as part of a GOP pattern that included recent steps by House Republicans making it more difficult to bring ethics charges against lawmakers.

“Republicans are trying to increase their power, even if it means ignoring rules that go back to America’s beginnings,” Reid said.

Congressional Democrats have scheduled a rally for Wednesday to focus attention on their charges of the GOP’s “abuse of power.”

Senate Democrats hope to highlight some of the fissures in conservative ranks by releasing a letter this week from a coalition they call “the unusual suspects,” which opposes the rules change, said one ranking party Senate aide who requested anonymity.