Cartwheels No Way to Break Senate Stalemate

The New York Times reports today, in an article that's typically long on he-said/she-said and short on analysis, that Harry Reid proposes that the Democrats do cartwheels down the aisles of the Senate chamber to protest the Republicans' legislative obstructions. That's a very clever take on the old expression, "I shouldn't have to do cartwheels to get you to clean your room." So, Harry Reid wants to be the Republicans' Mom.

This would be funnier if Reid and the Blue Dogs Democrats hadn't spent the last seven years performing whatever contortions the Republicans and the President wanted them to in order to seem "bipartisan", refusing to filibuster when they were in the minority, even to defend Habeas Freakin' Corpus, then acting surprised when the Republicans in the minority filibuster ehhhehhheeeeverything! It's OK, though, because I've got the solution. Several solutions, actually.

Let me start by suggesting that the New York Times, and by extension the rest of the mainstream media, refer to their Journalism 101 textbooks..hmmm..here it is, page 451, "...when there are competing claims in a story, a journalist should attempt to weigh things called facts (fig. 3.4) and provide analysis (diagram y) of which claim is supported by fact."

Since that's obviously not going to happen, we need to figure out a new way to break a stalemate in the Senate. The filibuster isn't working out. Obviously, some check is needed to prevent mob rule, but the filibuster, as republicans correctly noted while in the majority, should be used only to prevent passage of a law that defies the will of the people or the conscience of the legislator to an extreme degree, like an unfit Supreme Court appointment or the repeal of Habeas Corpus. Instead, it has been turned into a de facto requirement to get a bill past the Republicans. The Democrats, in turn, have shown they can't be trusted as a body to know when to use it.

My solution? I like Zell Miller's idea. I think if someone wants to filibuster, another Senator should be able to challenge him or her to a duel. Obviously, traditional duelling methods would be out of the question, since no Democrat is going to know how to fire a pistol, but there are endless alternatives. I suggest that the challenged Senator be allowed to pick from a pre-approved list of contests, and the winner decides on cloture.

Senate Jeopardy: You know how they do it on Jeopardy, where some of the categories play to each of the contestant's strengths. This would work well for deciding these issues. Buzz! "What is...Habeas Corpus Christi, Alex?"

They could actually have a menu of game show premises to choose from, with the exception of "Deal or No Deal." They already use that one now with the lobbyists.

Rock 'em Sock 'em Romneys: They're like Rock 'em Sock 'em Robots, only politically themed. Get it?

Pin the Tail on the Intern: Using a cardboard cutout, of course, the cathartic nature of this game could also head off other problems before they start.

Senate Dodgeball: This would be my personal favorite, provided they amended the rules to allow the big red ball to the face.

Senate Idol: These guys are up to it, as my 10 Political Music Moments amply demonstrates.

Staring Contest

The Doughnut Game: For the uninitiated, contestants sit face-to-face and simultaneously eat powdered jelly doughnuts. the object is to eat the doughnuts without licking your lips or otherwise wiping your mouth. The first to lick loses.

The contests could be televised, with ad revenues supporting the federal budget.

Or they could respect the institution of the Senate enough to conduct themselves the way the founders intended. A majority vote is theoretically the expression of the will of the people. The filibuster should really only be used in matters of conscience. I guess many of these guys just don't have one of those.