ConfirmThem

By AndrewHyman Posted in Fillibuster — Comments () / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

People like Senator Schumer of New York have tried to justify their unprecedented filibuster campaign against judicial nominees by pretending that there is some basis in American history for what they've been doing. Perhaps Schumer's most annoying habit has been to repeatedly assert that James Madison called the Senate a "cooling saucer," which somehow is supposed to justify Schumer's efforts to prevent a final vote on nominees. But Schumer is wrong on multiple counts.

First of all, Madison had nothing to do with this story.

There is a tradition that, on his return from France, JEFFERSON called WASHINGTON to account at the breakfast-table for having agreed to a second chamber. "Why," asked Washington, "did you pour that coffee into your saucer." "To cool it," quoth Jefferson. "Even so," said Washington, "we pour LEGISLATION into the senatorial saucer to cool it."

Second, this story has nothing to do with nominations, and only refers to legislation.

Third, the entire story about the "saucer" is probably apocryphal.

Fourth, the idea is to cool an issue down, "but not freeze it into an ice cube," as Senator Chambliss has put it. If Senator Schumer truly wanted to cool things down, then he would allow eventual votes on the nominees, instead of trying to completely freeze out the nominees he dislikes.

Fifth, this "saucer" story has nothing whatsoever to do with filibustering, as C-Span has explained:

[T]he Senate was designed to protect against the popular passions of the moment. Senators stand for election every six years. Moreover, only one-third of its membership runs for re-election at any one time. This continuity and the longer term are meant to enable Senators to resist the pressure of immediate popular opinion and be able to serve as a restraining influence -- or a court of appeals -- for House action. The framers expected Senators to be older, wiser, and more deliberative than Representatives and thus able to offer a long-term view of what makes good public policy.

Speaking of older and wiser Senators, Orrin Hatch talked to The Hill today about nomination filibusters. Also, former Senator and Senate President Fritz Mondale did an interview tacitly supporting up-or-down votes on judicial nominees, provided "the traditional ability of the Senate to ventilate these issues" is preserved.