The United States of Filibuster

Sarah Palin: American politics' answer to Paris Hilton. We're not sure where or why the first person thought she warranted any legitimate public attention. We thought we were sure that such a self-satirizing political celebutante couldn't long be an idol of Americana, that she must one day slide off on her showers of word-vomit into the realm of the bitter and obscure. Hopefully we can say that's begun with her step down from media-politician to political media correspondent. But for now the possibility of her political candidacy is still on the table, the showers will keep coming and an alarming portion of the population will keep drinking them up like the water of the Word. And so Palin makes the unfortunate starting point for my discussion of American legislative debate. With her ambitious propagation of untruths like the "downright evil system" of "Obama's death panels," she set a nice trend of toxic filibustering that has pretty much held out in the health care debates.Of course, it's not just the celebrity politicians that we need worry about. Parallels between American elections, persona-marketing and entertainment news run so deep that this article would burst if I really tried to take them on. But for this argument's sake, the politics of self-image embodied in Sarah Palin is a useful baseline. As we move up the political stratum, self-image construction becomes slightly less explicit, slightly more crafty-but even those at the top are more than happy to pass Joe-the-plumber around like a football. Campaigners place their bets on which circus acts will snatch the most viewers, and where it comes to issues they simply make five-point lists: "shore-up," "mainstreet," "jobs," "America" and "strong." And like any bit of mass marketing, the election process is governed by reaction to social image rather than real-world proposals. In the words of McCain's campaign manager Rick Davis just two months before voting day, "This election is not about issues. This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates."

Given this state of affairs, it's pretty silly of us to expect that our elected officials will ever really get down to business. They draft bills of course, but they tend to ignore that other essential job expectation of debating in our interests to improve those bills. Instead, they prefer to just bludgeon each other with party images. Take the health care debate. Democrats spend most days making emotional appeals to America's 30 million uninsured (because after all they're the party for the marginalized) and cowering before nonsense arguments from the other camp. Republicans bemoan the expanding power of government, a libertarian principle they keep on the back burner to bring out whenever Democrats take power. I seem to remember a Bush-era Republican party eager to erase the boundaries of executive power. Meanwhile, health care reform fails to be discussed. And conservatives at every level of the chain gripe about Democrats "shoving reform down America's throat." Well, that assessment seems unavoidable coming from a party opposed to health care reform period. As does the suggestion that we "start over with a blank sheet of paper"-which would amount to forgoing reform entirely since the "Grand Old Party" (GOP), who by then would have veto power, still opposes all measures. Except of course for Tort reform and interstate spending, i.e. the smokescreen and the laissez-faire (read neoliberal) plan that would further cripple the growing numbers of uninsured Americans.

And after a full year of debate, these are still the best arguments? Let's top them.how about rejecting a factually accurate interpretation of the bill on which to argue? At Obama's health care summit two weeks ago, Republican leaders still clung to the claims such as "the Senate bill will raise middle-class premiums"-deliberate misrepresentations of the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) report. This kind of evasion is how we end up with seven hours of debate and no progress made. When filibustering and party-lining are the only game plans, you're pretty much guaranteed to end up where you start.

Of course, this style of non-debate is quite useful for Republicans. Outnumbered in Congress right now, they cast themselves as maligned and mistreated by overbearing Democrats to rally their base, because nothing gathers spirits like an underdog. Not to mention that throwing temper tantrums and acting like the Republican voice has been left out may help garner sympathy from the few moderate Democrats needed to block the bill. That can also be achieved by making budget reconciliation seem like a resort to pure evil (the "nuclear option") despite its past use by both parties for many significant reforms. Indeed, whenever a usable majority exists our legislators tend to see filibustering and reconciliation as the only possible outcomes. And since they limit themselves to communicating only in opposed "composite views," they're probably correct in a circular sort of way.

But we should feel no sympathy for Republicans, not now nor after reconciliation brings the bill through (assuming it does). Party distributions in Congress were created by our votes, that's one of the contingencies of participating in a democracy, and we should shame minority parties that act like they're abused (which they always do). Republican leaders knew their position in Congress, they wagered on the filibuster, and if they lose we can't pretend they were without options. In fact, we have to assume that from their perspective refusing to participate in the health care debate seemed like the smartest bet. Maybe they hope the victim role will reinforce party cohesion for upcoming elections. The alternative, simply setting aside smokescreens and entering the debate with legitimate ideas, would at least have allowed them real influence on the reform. But they choose never to stoop-probably they would take too large a hit with their base. So they went for the big prize, and like any gambler they should be credited for their own loss.