So Senate Democrats suddenly regret the rule change they made several years ago, eliminating the filibuster for political and judicial appointments (with the exception of Supreme Court justices). And the Deseret News evidently shares that regret, calling for the 2017 Senate to return to the pre-nuclear-option system. I have a very reasonable suggestion that should “transcend partisanship” and restore good faith all around. Every person previously appointed via the Democrats’ “nuclear option” will resign his or her position. After all, as the Deseret News wrote, these people were appointed due to “bad decision-making made by the majority” and an “abuse of power in Washington.”
The resignation of each person confirmed in that cycle of bad decisions and abuse of power will show Republicans that Senate Democrats are serious about restoring the filibuster. Without this gesture of good faith, the net result of the Deseret News’ request for restoration of the filibuster will be to lock in a one-time abusive advantage for the Democrat Party. I’m sure that the Deseret News’ editors did not intend to send this message. Or did they? I recall that the Deseret News called for a serial womanizer to resign from his candidacy, while failing to call on a serial liar to do the same. This is the second editorial in the past several months in which the Deseret News has advocated advantageous treatment for Democrats.
Unless Senate Democrats give up their ill-gotten gains with respect to the nuclear option, it would be patently unfair for Senate Republicans to unilaterally disarm.
Salt Lake City