Ending the Filibuster Would Destroy the Very Purpose of
the Senate. Here's Why
by Aadi Golchha, 8/29/21, Foundation For Economic Education

In 1787, during the Constitutional Convention, James Madison—
who is often referred to as the Father of the Constitution—
described the Senate as “a necessary fence” which would
protect “the people against their rulers” and from “the
transient impressions into which they themselves might be led.”

George Hoar, who served as a senator from Massachusetts from
1877-1904, said that the Senate was created so that “the
sober second thought of the people might find expression” &
to “resist the hasty, intemperate, passionate desire of
the people.”

The Senate was created to be a slow-moving, deliberate
legislative body where the voice of the minority is heard,
& laws are scrutinized, debated, & passed only after a
consensus is reached. It was set up to be a balance to the
House of Representatives where the majority rules. Destroying
the filibuster would destroy the very purpose of the Senate.

Proponents of destroying the filibuster maintain that it's

obstructionist. Writing for the Brennan Center for Justice
in Oct 2020, Caroline Fredrickson wrote, “During the Obama admin,

Senate Republicans took obstruction to a new level,
using the filibuster more than ever in history. But the use
of the tactic had been climbing even before Obama became
president, prompting recent presidents of both parties to
use executive orders and other administrative tools to
circumvent Congress....Given that the executive branch has
increasingly moved away from legislative initiatives because
of Senate obstruction, the filibuster continues to undermine
a real democracy.”

In a way, she’s correct. But that’s because America was
never supposed to be a pure democracy. Famously, when Ben
Franklin was asked what kind of government the Founding
Fathers had created, he responded, “a republic, if you can
keep it.” The Founders built a system of government that
was supposed to force consensus and compromise. Never was
America to be run by a 51% pure majoritarian rule—or by a
president using executive orders to circumvent the
legislative body.

Those pushing for the removal of the filibuster complain
that the Senate is too slow and nothing ever gets done.

But if the Senate were a pure majoritarian body like the
House, Democrats would pass entirely uncompromising
progressive legislation when in power, only to have it
repealed & replaced by a conservative agenda as soon as
Republicans gained a majority. Engulfed in this perpetual
cycle, a filibuster-free Senate would give the American
people whiplash.

Rachel Bovard, writing for the Heritage Foundation in
April 2017, wrote that “the framers designed the Senate
to be a consensus-driven body. If a majority party knows
they need to garner 60 votes to end debate on a bill, the
necessity of working across the aisle, negotiating, and
finding areas of agreement becomes imperative, rather than
optional. Without the filibuster as a tool of negotiation,
the Senate becomes little more than a smaller version of
the House of Representatives where legislation reflects
the priorities of the majority, with little regard to
concerns of the minority.”

Even President Biden, who has more recently called the
filibuster a “relic of Jim Crow,” previously defended
the filibuster.

“The Framers sought not to ensure simple majority rule,
but to allow minority views—whether they are conservative,
liberal, or moderate—to have an enduring role in the Senate
in order to check the excesses of the majority.” Biden
said in a 2005 speech.

As a Senator, Barack Obama offered a similar defense.

“At the end of the day, [Americans] expect both parties
to work together to get the people's business done. What
they don't expect is for one party—be it Republican or
Democrat—to change the rules in the middle of the game so
that they can make all the decisions while the other party
is told to sit down and keep quiet,” Obama said in a
2005 congressional speech. “We need to rise above an
‘ends justify the means’ mentality because we're here to
answer to the people—all of the people.”

Biden & Obama were right on the importance of the filibuster—
and it remains true today no matter which party holds
political power.

Aadi Golchha is the author of "The Socialist Trap: How the
Leftist Utopia Will Destroy America" and an independent
political analyst.

https://fee.org/articles/ending-the-filibuster-would-destroy-the-very-purpose-of-the-senate-heres-why

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)