Filibusters Fit When Freedom Is On The Line

Investors.com ^ | March 3, 2010 | DWIGHT. R. LEE

[Kaslin]

The Democrats in Congress are not happy with the filibuster. They see it as allowing the 41 Senate Republicans, representing less than 41% of the population, to prevent Congress from responding to the "will of the majority."

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., along with Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, claims to be standing up for the majority by introducing a bill to reduce the votes required to override a filibuster. According to her, "the time has come to end the gridlock that's crippling our government and hurting our ability to tackle the big challenges facing our country."

The real problem is quite different. The use of filibusters, or supermajorities, should be expanded at all levels of government precisely because politicians increasingly believe that they can tackle our problems by reducing our freedom with controls over ever more of what were once private decisions.

If our political representatives were prevented by effective constitutional limits from treating us as children incapable of solving most of our problems through productive market cooperation with each other, there would be much less need for supermajorities. But those constitutional limits have eroded badly at every level of government.

When governments can tell us how much water we can have in our toilets, what light bulbs we can buy, how much garbage we have to save for composting, how much electricity our televisions can use and how much to subsidize corn farmers when we buy gasoline, it is difficult to think of controls that are out of bounds.

[gunnyg]

“If our political representatives were prevented by effective constitutional limits from treating us as children incapable of solving most of our problems through productive market cooperation with each other, there would be much less need for supermajorities. But those constitutional limits have eroded badly at every level of government.

When governments can tell us how much water we can have in our toilets, what light bulbs we can buy, how much garbage we have to save for composting, how much electricity our televisions can use and how much to subsidize corn farmers when we buy gasoline, it is difficult to think of controls that are out of bounds.”
****************
***************************

“...and we ain’t got a hair on our @$$es...”

[grobdriver]

standing up for the majority by introducing a bill to reduce the votes required to override a filibuster

Filibuster it.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahahaha! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

[VRW Conspirator]

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, "the time has come to end the gridlock that's crippling our government and hurting our ability to tackle the big challenges facing our country."

I love the smell of arrogance in the morning. It's the smell...the smell of tyranny. Frankly, Jeanne baby, I love gridlock.

[DJ Frisat]

The problem is, they're talking about the "will of the majority" of LIBERALS AND PROGRESSIVES in government, not the will of the American people, who have spoken clearly in poll-after-poll about the takeover of our healthcare.

When our representatives get back to representing US, we'll take this more seriously.

[Non-Sequitur]

And if the Republicans take back the Senate in the fall and the White House in 2012, and the Democrats filibuster everything in sight, will Dwight Lee still feel the same way?

[thulldud]

They see it as allowing the 41 Senate Republicans, representing less than 41% of the population, to prevent Congress from responding to the "will of the majority."

41 Senators DO NOT represent 41% of the population. That is not what the Senate is for.

Somebody needs a remedial course in civics. This used to be fifth-grade level stuff.

[TMA62]

“41 Senators DO NOT represent 41% of the population. That is not what the Senate is for.”

____________________________________________________________
Great point. I would imagine that most Congressmen and Senators will flunk a simple High School government class exam.

Senate was not about the populace and was intended to prevent unpopular legislation through. These 41 Senators actually represents almost 2/3’s of the American people who don’t want this thing.

[LearsFool]

When governments can tell us how much water we can have in our toilets,...(etc.), it is difficult to think of controls that are out of bounds.

This is an essential point.

If we like freedom, we'd better figure out to preserve it. As the author argues, filibusters aren't out of bounds when freedom is on the line. And when you consider that there aren't many weapons that ARE out of bounds when fighting tyranny, filibusters seem rather mild and restained.

Better to use the filibuster - and better to PERMIT ITS USE - than to have the situation escalate to the use of more dangerous weapons.

[Kegger]

41 Senators DO NOT represent 41% of the population. That is not what the Senate is for.


Correct! Each senator is supposed to represent their state's interests.

[LearsFool]

Err...

“we’d better figure out how to preserve it.”

“filibusters seem rather mild and restrained.”

Sorry for my lazy proofreading.

[Cheerio]

They see it as allowing the 41 Senate Republicans, representing less than 41% of the population, to prevent Congress from responding to the "will of the majority."

NEWS FLASH - The United States of America is NOT a Democracy. We are a REPUBLIC. As long as the media continues to lie to America about this administration (yesterday telling a dumbed down America that Bunning was 'filibustering' when the bill hadn't even reached the floor), America will continue to be TRANSFORMED by the 'most historic President' this country has ever elected.

[RobinOfKingston]

A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what’s for dinner. A republic is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.