The Omaha guide., 1957-01-11
FiIibUSfer
Show Down
IS Certain

The United States Senate is
facing a real showdown on the
old question of filibustering When
Congress opens this week BIZ
partisan group led by Senators
Douglas, Humphrey, Ives, and
Clark will make bold bid to
change the Senate rules. They
are aiming especially at an inter-
probation of the rules which in
effect requires unanimous con-
sent to change them. But their
ultimate objective is to curb
filibusters and clear path for
civil-rights legislation.
It would be we'll if the civil
rights controversy were not al
lowed to confuse the issue over
filibusters. For this issue con-
Germs the larger and continuing
question as to- whether a small
minority should be able to veto
indefinitely congressional action
on any subject. Opinions may
differ as to the purposes for
which filibusters have been used;
many who have opposed their use
at one time have favored it at
another.
The best arguments for it are
that it provides a ditch safe
guard of the rights of minority
and that on some questions the
intensity of minority feeling to
be given extra weight There
may be wisdom in such reasoning.
But the civil-rights issue raises
| further question, for here the
filibuster has been used to deny
the rights of a minority within
minority.
theoretically and historically
the filibuster looks like poor
adjunct of effective representa-.
tive government. 1t is not really
a safeguard of free speech, but
rather an abuse of speech. Often
it is a doling of words which
makes speech meaningless and
illustrates democratic action. His
tory attributes most of the weak
ness which permitted the repeat
ed partitioning of Poland to rules
that blocked action by its Parlia-
ment. The Senate's cloture rule
requiring "a affirmative votes
is not so stringent, but the pro-
vision barring any closing of de |
bate on a change of rules does |,
permit a veto by one member.
If the filibuster we're generally |
used, it would not be tolerated.
If it were frequently used against
those who favor it most, they may
lose their taste for it. We do not |
recommend a resort to such ex-
treme measures. But those who
defend the filibuster should think
twice about the extremes to which
they may be tempted. At the
very least they ought to concede
that the Senate rules should not
be frozen until unanimous con-
sent is obtained to amend them.
The senators proposing a change |
will make their move in the first |
minutes of the 85th Congress. |
They contend that at that moment |
the Senate, like the House, can
adopt a new set of rules by
simple majority vote. Their OPP
ponents argue that the Senate is
a Continuing body" because two
thirds of its members carry over.
The advocates of change declare |
the legislation and appointments
before the Senate expire with |
each congressional session and
have to be renewed. hey point out /
also that new embers should have
some effective voice in the rules
that govern them. Indeed, they
contend that even if the Senate
be considered continuing body, /
that does not deprive it of the
right granted by the Constitution
TO determine the Rules of its
Proceedings"
Let US recognize that checks
on impulsive majority action may
be wise and useful. But nothing
in the American constitutional +
system favors a perpetual frustra-
ton of the established purpose of
the people. Sooner or later pro- !,
cedures which permit such frus-
tTations must be modified.