|
|
|
As I watched the shenanigans on Capital Hill last week, I was amazed at the total disregard Majority Leader Harry Reid and the Senate have for the rule of law. Reid executed his duties on the floor of the Senate like a tyrannical ruler that needs to be dethroned. This nation is in a lot of trouble. To think that this despot can shackle the Senate and force the wishes of the majority without a debate is unconstitutional. A filibuster by the minority is the only way to secure the right to be heard. DeMint is right when he said that, “a government that allows the majority to trample the rights of a minority loses its legitimacy to govern. The majority isn’t always right and the Senate has always been this Nations check against tyranny.”
The Senates foremost purpose is equal representation of the states as stated in Article V, “.... that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of it’s equal Suffrage in the Senate.” For two hundred years, the U.S. Senate has had the distinguished reputation throughout the world as the greatest deliberating body because of its rule of ensuring the right of every senator to force consideration through discussion or debate, and record a vote on any issue. Our Senate has enjoyed the reputation as the only legislative body in the world in which the rights of the majorities and minorities were equally protected. But after 221 years the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who for no other reason than to avoid an embarrassing vote for the President, used a procedural sleight of hand to irradicate minority rights in the upper chamber.
Here is what happened: President Obama, who is in full campaign mode, has demanded, through the media and in public speeches, that Congress pass his $447 billion stimulus/jobs bill. Reid and fellow Democrats were trying to get the China currency bill passed when Republicans refused to allow passage unless the Democrats agreed to vote on Obama’s jobs package in its original draft. The Republicans knew that Democrats facing re-election didn’t want to vote on the bill because it calls for increased taxes on higher incomes. So it was attached to the China currency bill. The Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell asked for a suspension of the rules so that the Senate could debate the jobs bill. Reid overturned the Senate parliamentarian and used what is known as “filling the amendment tree” to block Republicans from adding any amendments to the jobs bill. Reid forced a motion, which was approved on the party-line vote 51-48, that stripped the Republicans of their power to offer amendments. This vote effectively changed the Senate rules, which had always required 67 votes. This is why it is called the “nuclear option.“ Prior administrations have never used this option because they knew it would permanently damage the legislative process by nullifying the right of the Minority Party to be heard on the Senate floor. There will be fallout and it could be very detrimental. Reid’s action has effectively eliminated all chances of any bipartisan efforts in the Senate for some time to come.
McConnell said after the vote that they fundamentally turned the Senate into the House, with the nuclear option procedure. No amendments or debates will be allowed. The Minority Party is out of business, equal representation by the States, along with the checks and balances, no longer exists. Only the party line and/or policy of the Majority in control of the Senate will be allowed. In the future, senators will only be able to modify legislation if Harry Reid agrees to it.
Republicans can protect their rights in the Senate, unfortunately too many lack the courage to stand together to fight for the principles of freedom. This is why we need moral and virtuous leaders. Men and Women who stand for principles and the rights of their individual States and the People.
But, there is another movement that has come to my attention. It is a grassroots movement, within the States to repeal of the 17th Amendment, returning State Sovereignty. It would allow Senators to be appointed by their State Legislature. It would return the original design that was intended by the Framers of our Constitution. Essentially, it would reinstate an effective check on Congress through the State Legislatures giving back the power to appoint (and remove) their U.S. Senators. There is growing support at the State level to repeal the 17th Amendment as this amendment altered the balance of power. It took the states out of the Federal process because there are no checks and balances available to the states over the Federal government or Congress in any area. (see Representative Paul Curtman, “Don’t Tread on Me;” http://paulcurtman.net)
The 17th Amendment has allowed federal deficit spending, inappropriate federal mandates, and federal control over a number of state institutions. It has caused a fundamental breakdown in campaign financing issues with respect to the Senate. If repealed there would be no need for campaign financing. It would also re-link the states to the federal political process and in effect elevate the present status of state legislatures from that of a lobbyist to a partner in the federal political process. It would give the states direct influence over the selection of federal judges, influence over the federal judiciary and a greater ability to modify the power of the federal judiciary. It would allow for a better flow of power between the states and the federal government as the needs of the republic changes.
I wonder what Congress would be like today without the 17 amendment. No deficits, no unfunded liabilities, a possible balanced budget, lower taxes. The States would have nearly all the power. The original intent behind our Constitution was to empower the People through their State Government and limit the power of the federal government. Madison once said, “The Government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general.“ I would have loved to demand a recall of Roy Blunt when he voted for the Medicare prescription drug plan we couldn’t afford. Or, recall Claire McCaskill when she voted for Obamacare, or when they raised the debt ceiling against their constituents demands. Sounds great doesn’t it? I’m going to think about. How about You?
Jane Boyce,
Board Member of Lake Area Conservative Club
As I watched the shenanigans on Capital Hill last week, I was amazed at the total disregard Majority Leader Harry Reid and the Senate have for the rule of law. Reid executed his duties on the floor of the Senate like a tyrannical ruler that needs to be dethroned. This nation is in a lot of trouble. To think that this despot can shackle the Senate and force the wishes of the majority without a debate is unconstitutional. A filibuster by the minority is the only way to secure the right to be heard. DeMint is right when he said that, “a government that allows the majority to trample the rights of a minority loses its legitimacy to govern. The majority isn’t always right and the Senate has always been this Nations check against tyranny.”
The Senates foremost purpose is equal representation of the states as stated in Article V, “.... that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of it’s equal Suffrage in the Senate.” For two hundred years, the U.S. Senate has had the distinguished reputation throughout the world as the greatest deliberating body because of its rule of ensuring the right of every senator to force consideration through discussion or debate, and record a vote on any issue. Our Senate has enjoyed the reputation as the only legislative body in the world in which the rights of the majorities and minorities were equally protected. But after 221 years the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who for no other reason than to avoid an embarrassing vote for the President, used a procedural sleight of hand to irradicate minority rights in the upper chamber.
Here is what happened: President Obama, who is in full campaign mode, has demanded, through the media and in public speeches, that Congress pass his $447 billion stimulus/jobs bill. Reid and fellow Democrats were trying to get the China currency bill passed when Republicans refused to allow passage unless the Democrats agreed to vote on Obama’s jobs package in its original draft. The Republicans knew that Democrats facing re-election didn’t want to vote on the bill because it calls for increased taxes on higher incomes. So it was attached to the China currency bill. The Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell asked for a suspension of the rules so that the Senate could debate the jobs bill. Reid overturned the Senate parliamentarian and used what is known as “filling the amendment tree” to block Republicans from adding any amendments to the jobs bill. Reid forced a motion, which was approved on the party-line vote 51-48, that stripped the Republicans of their power to offer amendments. This vote effectively changed the Senate rules, which had always required 67 votes. This is why it is called the “nuclear option.“ Prior administrations have never used this option because they knew it would permanently damage the legislative process by nullifying the right of the Minority Party to be heard on the Senate floor. There will be fallout and it could be very detrimental. Reid’s action has effectively eliminated all chances of any bipartisan efforts in the Senate for some time to come.
McConnell said after the vote that they fundamentally turned the Senate into the House, with the nuclear option procedure. No amendments or debates will be allowed. The Minority Party is out of business, equal representation by the States, along with the checks and balances, no longer exists. Only the party line and/or policy of the Majority in control of the Senate will be allowed. In the future, senators will only be able to modify legislation if Harry Reid agrees to it.
Republicans can protect their rights in the Senate, unfortunately too many lack the courage to stand together to fight for the principles of freedom. This is why we need moral and virtuous leaders. Men and Women who stand for principles and the rights of their individual States and the People.
But, there is another movement that has come to my attention. It is a grassroots movement, within the States to repeal of the 17th Amendment, returning State Sovereignty. It would allow Senators to be appointed by their State Legislature. It would return the original design that was intended by the Framers of our Constitution. Essentially, it would reinstate an effective check on Congress through the State Legislatures giving back the power to appoint (and remove) their U.S. Senators. There is growing support at the State level to repeal the 17th Amendment as this amendment altered the balance of power. It took the states out of the Federal process because there are no checks and balances available to the states over the Federal government or Congress in any area. (see Representative Paul Curtman, “Don’t Tread on Me;” http://paulcurtman.net)
The 17th Amendment has allowed federal deficit spending, inappropriate federal mandates, and federal control over a number of state institutions. It has caused a fundamental breakdown in campaign financing issues with respect to the Senate. If repealed there would be no need for campaign financing. It would also re-link the states to the federal political process and in effect elevate the present status of state legislatures from that of a lobbyist to a partner in the federal political process. It would give the states direct influence over the selection of federal judges, influence over the federal judiciary and a greater ability to modify the power of the federal judiciary. It would allow for a better flow of power between the states and the federal government as the needs of the republic changes.
I wonder what Congress would be like today without the 17 amendment. No deficits, no unfunded liabilities, a possible balanced budget, lower taxes. The States would have nearly all the power. The original intent behind our Constitution was to empower the People through their State Government and limit the power of the federal government. Madison once said, “The Government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general.“ I would have loved to demand a recall of Roy Blunt when he voted for the Medicare prescription drug plan we couldn’t afford. Or, recall Claire McCaskill when she voted for Obamacare, or when they raised the debt ceiling against their constituents demands. Sounds great doesn’t it? I’m going to think about. How about You?
Jane Boyce,
Board Member of Lake Area Conservative Club
