I have argued that a filibuster of Judge Alito's nomination is not justified on the merits and is, to boot, a poor political move for the Senate Democrats and for the national Democratic Party.
But Sen. Kerry's announcement that he will lead a filibuster got me thinking more. It seems clear now that most of the Senate Democrats agree that a filibuster is unwise, and in any event it is evident that there are enough votes to invoke cloture.
So why did Sen. Kerry decide to launch a futile filibuster? This commentator, from RedState, has it figured out:
"[T]his Kerry statement is less "news" than it is a rather predictable and cynical fundraising appeal aimed at the liberal-left activist crowd and those special interest lobbyists who have opposed Alito from the get go. It is, not to put too fine a point on it, an exercise in branding, a marketing campaign that is eminating, unsurprisingly, from the Mass Democratic camp, and from Senator Kerry in particular--a pure political animal who still believes he has an olive's chance in Teddy Kennedy's martini pitcher to win the 2008 presidency if he can Kos(t) past Hillary and her formidable cankles in the primaries. And to do so, he realizes he must stroke the hard left base.
What makes the move so risibly calculated is that the votes for a filibuster simply aren't there, and Kerry knows it--Dick Durbin all but pronounced the filibuster dead today, and no less than Robert Byrd committed to supporting Alito's affirmation. And just to be on the safe side, Bill Frist has apparently already counted up the 60 votes needed for cloture.
So what we have here from Kerry is Kerry at his political "best"--taking the safely contrarian position (an attempted filibuster of Alito would be disastrous for the Democratic party, as their leadership well recognizes, and the so the best time to advocate for it is when it is unlikely to work--Kerry can press his position as a sign of "principle") in order to appeal to the portion of the Democratic party faithful that vote in primaries.
As he did during his 2004 Presidential run, Kerry continues to believe careful political caluculation and taking the odd, showily "independent" positions on certain issues that won't harm the caucus but that will score him points with the base, is a more effective strategy than simply doing what is right and honorable.
A nearly unanimous party-line vote against Samuel Alito, as I noted elsewhere, bespeaks a broken system of advice and consent; and politicians like John Kerry embody the cynicism and partisanship that has turned the judicial confirmation process into an extension of electoral politics based around ideology and the power to control its spread and influence into social policy."
Couldn't have said it better myself. Senator Kerry's motives are purely political, aimed at building support for 2008. He is not standing on principle here, which is probably good because, as I have said, there is very little principle involved in filibustering Judge Alito.
UPDATE: It appears there are sixty votes to end debate. Five Democratic Senators - Johnson, Nelson, Byrd, Salazar, and Pryor - have said they'll vote for cloture. Assuming all 55 Republicans do, too, the ballgame's over. So tell me, again, what is the point of undertaking this filibuster?