Soon the Senate will most likely vote on what the radical conservative Republicans call the "nuclear option." This is about radical Republicans grasping for absolute power so they can appoint Supreme Court justices who favor corporate interests and an extreme-right agenda over the rest of us.
I sincerely urge our senators and my fellow Americans to stand up for the centuries of checks and balances that have made this country so great, and oppose the "nuclear option."
Despite Senate confirmation of almost 95 percent of President Bush's nominees, radical Republicans are threatening to eliminate the filibuster to gain complete control over the Supreme Court. They want to use their courts to pay back big donors by rolling back worker protections, environmental laws, and privacy rights -- all at our expense. This is not a partisan issue.
Ultimately, you don't even have to oppose President Bush's judges to oppose the "nuclear option." This is about supporting checks and balances and opposing absolute power in the hands of one party. And that's something we can and should all agree on.
Stanley H. Garber Jr.
Greensboro
Comments (13)
Mr. Garber,
What are you talking about? What is being discussed is the Senate voting to change Senate rules to terminate fillibuster with 51%, rather than 60%. This is not mentioned anywhere in the constitution, and it has absolutely nothing to do with "checks and balances". Checks and balances refers to the balance between the three branches of government, not between the two political parties. If any party has control of the Senate, it is through the election process, and in the current case, the Republicans have that control granted to them by the American people.
Posted by Teddy Ballgame | April 6, 2005 8:52 AM
Thank you Teddy for clearing up Checks and Balances for us. Hopefully, this will stop some of the ignorant rants regarding this topic.
I do, however, believe that there should be more than a simple majority when it comes to approving justices. At least if a democrat is in office! :)
Posted by another bigmouth | April 6, 2005 12:27 PM
54-40 or fight. Shucks that was a boundary dispute. Sorry.
Posted by EricStratton | April 6, 2005 2:35 PM
Teddy and Bigmouth are right. The Constitution does not require 60% of the Senators' approval. Neither does it even say anything about political parties.
I hope the Republicans do end the filibuster. Then the country will get to see their true colors. If they end the filibuster and still fail to do everything they've always claimed to want to do, such as cut taxes and spending, reduce the size of government, etc, then perhaps America will finally realize what frauds they are and seek out other parties such as the Libertarian Party, which truly espouses the fiscal conservatism the Republicans have always claimed to espouse. Ending the filibuster may be the Republicans' own undoing.
Posted by Paul Elledge | April 6, 2005 2:43 PM
The Republicans are fighting to return the rule of law to the Congress, and end unlawful behavior by power-hungry Democrats who are still boo-hooing after election results that show the majority of us don't want their kind of politics.
Democrats are power mad, pure and simple. And they don't care what rights or lives they destroy to regain power.
Posted by Bobbie | April 6, 2005 4:23 PM
Bobbie, the Republicans are not trying to return the rule of law to Congress. Almost everything they do is unconstitutional. Read Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, and you'll see what I mean. I agree with what you said about the Democrats, but the Republicans are no better.
Posted by Paul Elledge | April 6, 2005 9:11 PM
Quite the contrary, Mr. Elledge.
Posted by Bobbie | April 6, 2005 11:13 PM
the national democratic party is the most dangerous organization on the face of the earth. why? they have a chance to get elected.
Posted by Mr. K | April 6, 2005 11:57 PM
"The Republicans are fighting to return the rule of law to the Congress, and end unlawful behavior by power-hungry Democrats who are still boo-hooing after election results that show the majority of us don't want their kind of politics."
This is the lamest of all excuses for whats going on. The conservatives tried like crazy for 8 years to regain control. They did all they could. The were filled with rage and hatred much like liberals are said to have now. The party not in power will always do what they must to get power. Get over it! BTW, yes a majority of Americans do prefer Bush, but only 2% more do and well Kerry wasn't much of a choice. As long as the conservatives insist that "some life" is important and not others, as long as they continue to explode the decifit, and as long as they claim moral superiority they will not be in power long. They are slowly upsetting their own base.
Posted by M. Sawyer | April 7, 2005 1:32 AM
Bobbie, what is your basis for refuting what I said? Do you know what Article I, Section 8 and the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution say? If you do, you'll know that almost everything Congress does is unconstitutional. There's really no way to refute that.
Posted by Paul Elledge | April 7, 2005 1:47 AM
"Kerry wasn't much of a choice".
M Sawyer, I couldn't have said it better myself. Unfortunately, Kerry was the BEST thing that the democrats had to offer as a candidate for President. And he couldn't even beat Bush. That should tell you something about the Democrat party.
Posted by another bigmouth | April 7, 2005 11:39 AM
"Kerry wasn't much of a choice".
Snicker, Like GWB was!
Posted by marshall | April 7, 2005 1:28 PM
Exactly. And he still beat Kerry.
Posted by another bigmouth | April 7, 2005 1:46 PM