[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 7]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 10048-10049]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      THE FILIBUSTER MUST BE SAVED

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. SHEILA JACKSON-LEE

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, May 17, 2005

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to pay 
homage to heroes of equality, justice, and tenacity in spirit. On May 
17, 1954, the highest court in the country announced its decision that 
``separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.'' This 
opinion served to deny the legal basis for segregation in Kansas and 20 
other States with segregated classrooms and effectively change the 
dynamics of race relations for the country.
  While the dynamics were dramatically changed with that jurisprudence, 
the unequal treatment was not completely eradicated. Even today, we see 
the vestiges of bigotry and Jim Crow. For example, let me cite the 
recent status of the Senate 60-vote filibuster for judicial nominations 
and the disingenuous reference by certain members to the historic civil 
rights struggles of the 1950's and 1960's.
  The filibuster, no matter how negatively it has been used in the 
past, remains a vital tool with which we as legislators protect the 
rights of the minority party. We will not forget the longest filibuster 
in Senate history in 1957 by Senator Strom Thurmond to thwart civil 
rights legislation from passage.
  Senator Jesse Helms used the filibuster for years to block many 
highly-qualified nominees from North Carolina, including a woman and 
three African-Americans. Not one of these nominees received a vote from 
the Senate. Consequently, the seat remained open for over 6 years--
until such time as Senator Helms could hand-pick someone to fill it. A 
recent national survey found that nearly 70 percent of Americans oppose 
eliminating filibuster, including many of those who even support the 
judges who are in question now.
  The effectiveness of this tool must be preserved because it is the 
hallmark of the democratic process. Straight up-or-down votes on issues 
that affect the lives of vulnerable Americans will allow harsh and 
insensitive legislation to be forced onto these people at the whim of 
the majority party. In essence, allowing the filibuster to die on this 
matter will close the doors to many needy Americans for relief by way 
of legislation or the court system.
  Overly restrictive legislation that has recently passed in the House 
such as the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 
2005, S. 256; the Class Action Fairness Act; Marriage Protection Act; 
the Pledge Protection Act; and others that propose to block access to 
the courts and to relief. At some level, it seems that some American 
people will experience a time when they will not have access to the 
federal courts and would be subject to adverse judicial scrutiny if 
they had that access. Eventually, this trend

[[Page 10049]]

would lead to a less nationalistic America where residency in certain 
States will equate to legalization of disparate treatment.
  Mr. Speaker, I submit that the filibuster must be saved in order to 
save the federal system and the notion of democracy. The fall of 
democracy will give rise to a government that can be represented as 
``the tyranny of the majority.''

                          ____________________