Inappropriate Content: Kakistocracy©

So the big news of today is the signature of SALT-III—The Senate Arms Limitation Treaty. Fourteen senators from both sides of the aisle announced that they had reached a deal to resolve the the filibuster crisis that has been plauging our august body for months now. The Washington Post has a roll call:

The negotiators largely credited Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), and said they recieved signifigant support from veteran senators John W. Warner (R-Va.) and Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.). ... Other signers were Democrats Joseph Lieberman (Conn.), Mark Pryor (Ark.), Mary Landrieu (La.), Ken Salazar (Colo.), and Daniel Inouye (Hawaii), and Republicans Susan Collins (Maine), Olympia Snowe (Maine) and Lincoln Chaffee (R.I.).

The AP calls them an “assortment of moderates, mavericks, and senior statesmen—a description that conviently covers every single member of the U.S. Senate except for the party leaders. The Post has the best reporting on the subject; staff writer Dan Balz has an analysis piece. Charles Babington and Shailagh Murray's initial reporting mentions the impact this will have on Sen. Frist's presidential bid:

Depending on how conservative groups digest the news over the next few days, one of the biggest losers in the deal could be Frist, who is weighing a presidential run in 2008. He has always insisted on up-or-down votes on judicial nominees. Amassing the support needed to win the vote on the nuclear option was considered a major test of his leadership skills and his adeptness at promoting social conservative causes.

‘Digestion’ is a good word there—James Dobson's reaction, quoted in the AP story, suggests an ulcer: Dobson “said the agreement ‘represents a complete bailout and a betrayal by a cabal of Republicans.’” Focus on Family's website has published the phone numbers of the deal's signatories and exclaims “all attempts to broker such a deal must be stopped.”

As a rational person, I enjoy seeing anything that upset's Focus on Family. But I'm hoping this helps marginalize the "values voters" groups that, apparently hold Frist in thrall. Certainly Frist appears petulant in the New York Times article:

Dr. Frist and his allies potrayed the agreement as a positive step but noted that it still did not fully meet their requirement that all judicial nominees ultimately recieve up-or-down votes. "This agreement falls short of that principle," the majority leader said.

GOP Senators Mike DeWine and Mitch McConnell both said that the agreement didn't prevent Republicans from attempting to eliminate the filibuster. That statement carrys more weight from DeWine, of course, since he was actually a party to the agreement, whereas Mitch McConnell is merely jockeying for Dr. Frist's job.

In any case, the Republican leadership cannot be all that pleased with what the Post article called “an attempt to wrest power from the leadership.” I think, unfortunately, that will blind them to the fact that there really is a downside to kow-towing to the James Dobson's of the world.

The Democrats have their own blindess, of course. Reid is quoted in all three articles: “The nuclear option is off the table.” The Times opined that Reid is “clearly euphoric and relieved,” and the Post reports that “several Democrats quickly declared victory.” They're setting themselves up for dissapointment. With Frist, McConnell, DeWine, and others saying that the nuclear option is still on the table, than it's possible that the nuclear option is still on the table. Reed should not convince himself or others that this is anything more than a temporary victory.

Look: as much as I hate to see nut-jobs like Priscilla Owen appointed dog-catcher, let alone federal judge, this deal is as close to rational and clear-headed thinking the U.S. Senate has produced in a qhile. So props to John McCain for that. But rationality has a short half-life in politics. The center, as they say, will not hold.