Bust the Filibuster

I find George Will's argument for keeping the filibuster less than compelling. His piece is a critique of Republican reasoning, but it hardly adds weight to the Democrats' arugments, which seem to consist of asserting Constitutionality for a practice that isn't there. The Constitution's checks and balances should not be mistaken for an imperative to delay.

His reason for wanting to keep the filibuster seems to be that the good guys might want to use it themselves in the future. But that presumes that the people will have elected a Democrat majority in the Senate and that Republicans will always be on the right side. It also fails to consider the dire need for judges who will, it is to be hoped, restore a sense of the proper roles of the judiciary. If the ability to block nominees is the price, I'm for paying it. It this may be the best chance we'll have for some time to roll back the ill-advised arrogations of the past 50 years.

I think that this game-playing is destructive to the respect we should have for our institutions. We shouldn't be sending people to Washington merely to maintain a perpetual stand off.