The Senate was never meant to be an instrument of vulgar majoritarianism

The problem with the Senate is not its rules (on filibusters and other procedural matters) but the character of the men and women who serve in it; this is not to say that senators such as Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are of low character, though they may be, but that they are not temperamentally inclined toward caution, patience, and inaction. In both parties, there are senators who are radicals and demagogues who do not serve well in a body that is designed to suffocate radicalism and demagoguery. We need more senators along the lines of Rick Scott, who is less inclined to shout, “Once more into the breach!” than to mutter, “But what does it cost?”

Advertisement

A handful of senators can cause a great deal of inconvenience for a president. And have you seen the kind of men we have been electing president lately?

On the particular matter of the filibuster, it is true that the maneuver has been irresponsibly weaponized, and that intelligent and patriotic leaders in both parties should work to tamp that down. But we might say much the same thing about Senate confirmation hearings for judges and presidential appointees, omnibus spending bills, and other occasions for parliamentary shenanigans and risible grandstanding. That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t have Senate confirmation hearings — it means only that they should be conducted as though adults were in charge of them.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on HotAir Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement