McCain Sees ‘Slippery Slope’ in Filibuster Ban

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), breaking from his party’s Senate leadership, said Sunday that he would oppose any move to prohibit filibusters against judicial nominations.

Appearing on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” McCain said a ban on filibusters for judicial nominations could spread to other legislative issues, fundamentally changing the Senate.

“I think that there’s a problem with a slippery slope,” he said.

In that way, he argued, the precedent could ultimately hurt the GOP by allowing Democrats to bar the filibuster the next time they hold the White House and a majority in the Senate.

“If we don’t protect the rights of the minority ... if you had a liberal president and a Democrat-controlled Senate, I think that it could do great damage,” said McCain, who sought the GOP presidential nomination in 2000 and is considering another run in 2008.

Although McCain has previously said he was leaning against a move to restrict the filibuster, his comments Sunday represented his most explicit opposition to the idea. McCain said he would still confer with his party leadership on the controversy and wanted to see President Bush’s judicial appointments confirmed. But he answered a crisp “yes” when asked if he opposed eliminating the filibuster for judges.

Frustrated with Democratic filibusters that blocked consideration by the full Senate of 10 of Bush’s first-term nominees to the powerful federal appellate courts, Republican leaders have said they are considering a change in Senate rules to prohibit the use of the filibuster, which requires 60 votes to override, on judicial appointments.

Neither side appears certain if Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) has the votes to implement the change. In addition to McCain, several other moderate Republican senators, as well as some veteran GOP senators reluctant to change the institution’s traditions, have expressed concerns about the change.

Supporters of the change argue that Democratic filibusters have established a “supermajority” requirement for judicial confirmations that the founding fathers never anticipated.

Critics argue that eliminating the filibuster, which has been part of Senate procedure throughout its history, would undermine minority rights and eviscerate the deliberative role the founders intended for the upper chamber.

Also appearing on “Face the Nation,” Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) repeatedly refused to specify how Democrats would respond if Republicans push through the rules change -- a maneuver Democrats call “the nuclear option” and Republicans term “the constitutional option.”

Democrats have backed off earlier suggestions that they might “shut down” the Senate amid Republican predictions that such a move would inspire a public backlash like the GOP’s efforts to close the federal government during the budget confrontation with President Clinton in 1995. But Reid said that if Republicans barred the filibuster, “the Senate will slow down” and “there won’t be a lot of legislation passed” because of Democratic procedural objections.

McCain predicted that both parties could face a backlash if they could not avert a confrontation. “I think both parties have to understand that the price they would pay would be very high ... with the American people,” he said.

McCain and Reid made their remarks on a day when the escalating partisan dispute over judges produced heated discussion on the Sunday talk shows.

Appearing on ABC’s “This Week,” Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) lent support to conservative calls for Congress to intensify its oversight of the federal courts, which have drawn intense criticism from the right for refusing to intervene in the case of Terri Schiavo, the brain-damaged Florida women who died after her feeding tube was removed. Before her death, Congress passed legislation giving her parents the right to present the case in federal court, but no federal court chose to get involved.

At a Washington conference last week, leading social conservatives urged Congress to impeach what they termed activist federal judges, with several citing Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who was appointed by President Reagan and who initially received Schiavo’s parents’ appeal to the high court. Speakers at the conference also urged Congress to exempt entire areas of law, such as same-sex marriage, from the jurisdiction of federal courts.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) has also condemned “a judiciary run amok” and urged the House Judiciary Committee to make recommendations on ways to increase congressional influence over the federal courts.

Asked about such comments, Santorum, the chairman of the Senate Republican conference, offered more support than criticism. “Well, I don’t necessarily go along with impeaching Justice Kennedy,” he said. “But should [we] impeach justices who violate the law? We have in the past.”

Santorum, who faces a potentially tough reelection fight next year, continued: “Should we look at situations where judges have decided to go off on their own tangent and disobey the statutes of the United States of America? I think that’s a legitimate area for oversight.”

Those remarks drew a sharp response from Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), who appeared with Santorum. “This is one of the reasons, I think, why the public has such a low opinion of Congress today,” Dodd said. “This is extremism.... This is very worrisome to me to have a leader in the Congress of the United States start threatening judges because we don’t like their opinions. That’s not a way to proceed, and that’s why I think many people are concerned about this.”

The tone was just as contentious on “Fox News Sunday,” where Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) squared off over the issue.

Schumer said eliminating the filibuster for judicial nominations would transform the Senate into “a banana republic” and “destroy the checks and balances in the Senate.”

But Cornyn said such charges were overblown. “Obviously they want to make it sound radical when all it is restoring 200 years of Senate tradition in majority rule,” he said.

Cornyn predicted that if Frist brought the change to a vote, it would pass. “If necessary I do believe there are the votes there to restore majority rule to the United States Senate,” he said.