MODERATION RULES

An agreement among senators Monday to avoid a fight over the use of filibusters on judicial nominations was a reassertion of that body’s elevated practices of debate that had all but collapsed in recent years. The seven Republicans, including Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, and seven Democrats, intentionally or not, rebuked their leaders’ styles of confrontation over achievement. For now, at least, they have returned to the Senate a sense of cooperation that was disappearing.

The evidence for that is in the occasion to praise senators for acting like statesmen, which is what they are supposed to do, but on this issue -the nuclear option – there was such a giddy eagerness from activists on both sides to see the traditions of the Senate torn up. The fact traditionalists and moderates prevented that from happening is gratifying and encouraging.

It is gratifying because it showed that the politics of moderation are still influential. Neither party leaders, Republican Bill Frist nor Democrat Harry Reid, seemed to know how to do anything last week but accuse the other of attacking the institution of the Senate. Caught by the wave of activists in their parties, they threatened and warned of dire consequences, pretended to be victims and appealed to the public’s sense of fairness – they did everything but employ the skills needed to remove themselves from a situation they should have been able to avoid entirely.

The deal has Democrats agreeing not to filibuster certain Bush nominees in exchange for Republicans agreeing to oppose rule changes in the 109th Congress that would declare the filibuster doesn’t apply to judicial consent. Filibusters would be used only under “extraordinary circumstances.”

Sen. Collins describes what makes the deal so encouraging: “The spirit of this agreement is more important than the text of the document itself. This agreement is based on trust. And most important, it helps preserve the unique culture of this institution. It is a culture that is built upon a foundation of collegiality and cooperation that transcends partisanship.”

The next couple of days will contain a lot of talk of who won the showdown – the answer is both parties lost, especially the leaders of those parties and especially so after Sen. Reid’s intemperate remarks following the announcement of the deal. The 14 demonstrated they could reach agreement, which makes them as a group or in sub groups more credible the next time something like this occurs. The Bush administration, which skillfully had set itself up so it could not lose, didn’t.

Had the agreement not been reached, much of the nation’s business would have been slowed and the atmosphere of Congress would have become even more poisoned. Though the party faithful may be unhappy that comity to some degree has been restored, anyone who wanted to see Congress act on legislation should be pleased today. As Sen. Collins pointed out yesterday, the next major bill before the Senate is the Defense reauthorization, which is important to Maine and most other states.

A final point: Throughout the debate on the nuclear option, Senate Democrats warned that should the trigger be pulled the Senate would become no better than – sniff – the House. It’s worth noting that during the prolonged debate over whether senators should shoot themselves in the foot and, if so, which foot and from what angle, the House saw a Democratic plan on Social Security and a bipartisan agreement to consider new stem-cell research rules. That is certainly unusual for the House, but perhaps it has been feeling more like the Senate recently.