Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Key to a Real Revolution
The American Thinker ^ | July 15, 2010 | Bruce Walker

Posted on 07/15/2010 6:58:06 AM PDT by Jack Black

Conservatives often blame elected Republicans for not producing revolutionary changes when in power. This frustration is understandable, but it is also wrongheaded. No political party can make revolutionary changes in American government unless that party not only controls the House of Representatives and the White House, but also, critically, has a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

Until 1919, debate in the Senate was unlimited. There was no Senate Rule which allowed for cloture, or limiting debate. A determined Senate minority could effectively stop any congressional bill, any presidential appointment (which required Senate confirmation), and any treaty.

When Democrats have had that combination of power, they have used it to radically change America. FDR had four consecutive Congresses in which Democrats could do virtually anything they wanted, because Senate Democrats could pass a cloture motion. Democrats also had filibuster-proof Senate majorities from 1963 to 1967, the years in which LBJ's Great Society program was passed.

Senate rules were changed in the 1970s. Cloture required only a three-fifths majority instead of a two-thirds majority. Under these new rules, Democrats had filibuster-proof Senate majorities, along with control of the House and White House, from 1977 to 1979. Until Scott Brown won his special election earlier this year, Obama's Democrats did not need a single Republican to pass his stimulus bill and related measures.

These four separate eras -- in which Democrats could invoke cloture without Republicans and also controlled the House and White House -- have produced those giant leaps towards big government and socialism which bedevil us today. So why have Republicans not rolled Democrat programs when they have had power? Since the cloture rule was adopted over ninety years ago, Republicans have never had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate (much less had that supermajority in the Senate and also controlled the House and White House).

That may change in the next three election cycles. In 2010, Republicans were supposed to lose seats (at least that was the thinking a year ago). Now it seems certain that Republicans will gain seats -- North Dakota, Delaware, Indiana, and Arkansas -- and will have a good shot in other states -- Illinois, Wisconsin, Washington, Colorado, Nevada, California, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania. If Republicans hold Ohio, Florida, and a few other wavering states, then a net gain of twelve Senate seats is conceivable (or a majority of 53). The bigger story, however, is what happens in the next two election cycles.

The Senate class of 2012 will include only two Republicans who are not from red states -- Olympia Snowe of Maine and Scott Brown of Massachusetts. Both are personally popular and should have an excellent chance to win reelection. The Democrats up for election in 2012 include six from red states: McCaskill of Missouri, Tester of Montana, Nelson of Florida, Nelson of Nebraska, Conrad of North Dakota, and Webb of Virginia. If Republicans win those seats, Republican strength in the Senate is 59 seats. Democrats in 2012 will also have to defend seats in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Delaware, New Jersey, Wisconsin, and New Mexico. Winning any of those five strongly contested seats would give Republicans a filibuster-proof majority.

In 2014, the odds again favor Republican gains. Begich in Alaska, Pryor in Arkansas, Udall in Colorado, Landrieu in Louisiana, Baucus in Montana, Sheehan in New Hampshire, Hagan in North Carolina, Franken in Minnesota, Johnson in South Dakota, and Warner in Virginia hold ten Democrat seats which Republicans could easily win. In other races, like West Virginia, if Rockefeller retires, and in New Jersey if Lautenberg retires, Republicans also have real chances to gain seats. What this means is that after 2012 or 2014, Republicans may well have sixty or more Senate seats -- and the House and White House.

What might that mean? Revolution! ...assuming that Republicans control the House and the White House, too. The left transformed America during just such brief periods of total control. National Right to Work, once passed, would cripple coercive union power forever. Gerrymandering at all levels of government could be outlawed. Tough federal voter registration laws and laws to insure a fair counting of votes should be used to end voter fraud.

Obamacare could be repealed and replaced. Republicans could pass a flat tax and repeal taxes on capital gains, creating a boom of prosperity. Homeschooling and the variety of other alternatives to the failed public school system could be helped and funded. English could be made the legal language of the United States. Huge chunks of federal bureaucracy could simply be abolished. Modest entitlement reforms could be passed to make systems solvent, and individual accounts in the Social Security System could be introduced. Tort reform and expedited drug approval by the FDA (for drugs long used safely in Europe) could reduce medical costs naturally.

Would federal judges stop this? Not if Republicans have the will to tame the federal bench. Congress could simply remove jurisdiction from federal courts over many issues. It could also create a number of new federal judges and justices and appoint conservatives to those seats, or it could abolishe and reorganize the whole federal judiciary (only the Supreme Court has any constitutional existence, and its powers and size are set by Congress). It could impeach and remove judges who grossly misinterpreted the Constitution -- what a novel idea!

In short, Republicans could produce a conservative revolution which achieves, in two short years, everything we have been seeking for the last fifty. All this would require great boldness and vision. But our nation needs just such a revolution. Half-measures and compromises simply prolong our slow death. We need a revolution. We have the means to that revolution within our grasp soon.

Bruce Walker is the author of two books: Sinisterism: Secular Religion of the Lie and The Swastika against the Cross: The Nazi War on Christianity.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: cwii; cwiiping; fdr; filibuster; lbj; majority

1 posted on 07/15/2010 6:58:10 AM PDT by Jack Black
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jack Black

bookmark


2 posted on 07/15/2010 7:02:03 AM PDT by Psalm 144 (How many Michael Steele gaffes does it take to make a pattern?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black

He is right. It would take a bold vision to achieve these results. What was naive about the McCain campaign was NOT to point at the fact that Democrats in power would go go beyond the modest steps they proposed to the voters during the campaign. Instead they clamped down on Palin and ignored the prophesies of Limbaugh and Hannity. It did not help that Bush had a secretary of the treasury who was in all but name a Democrat and whose only aim was to save Wall Street.


3 posted on 07/15/2010 7:12:16 AM PDT by RobbyS (Pray with the suffering souls.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

When Republicans have majorities they just like to spend money.


4 posted on 07/15/2010 8:17:42 AM PDT by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black

Wishful thinking. Even if pubbies get it all, it is still wishful thinking, why? Because Obama and his Chicago thugs coerced any wavering democrats in ways that they never expected. Pubbies on the other hand will take the ‘High Road’; the high road straight off a cliff.

The GOP will never effectuate revolution. Only a grass roots movement can do that. People must remember that the GOP establishment are democrat-lites, not Tea Party heavies.


5 posted on 07/15/2010 8:24:41 AM PDT by Hostage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
What might that mean? Revolution! ...assuming that Republicans control the House and the White House, too.

Based on the HUGE assumption that these (R) majorities acted in unison and with a spine.

6 posted on 07/15/2010 8:25:07 AM PDT by DTogo (High time to bring back the Sons of Liberty !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eaker; afnamvet; AK2KX; Ancesthntr; An Old Man; ApesForEvolution; aragorn; archy; ArmedSkeptic; ...
CWII Ping. It's electoral revolution or something even more revolutionary. The status quo is corrupt, broken and bankrupt and can not and will not hold.

God pray that we find the leaders to effect the changes we so deeply desire and require while there is still some time to fix things in the political realm.


7 posted on 07/15/2010 8:46:12 AM PDT by Jack Black ( Whatever is left of American patriotism is now identical with counter-revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
I'll believe it when monkeys fly out of Obama's backside!


8 posted on 07/15/2010 9:07:13 AM PDT by Sparticus (November - no unrung doorbells!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DTogo
Something they haven't exhibited since Lincoln was still going to plays...

Heck, they can't even get rid of their Chairmen when he sticks his foot in his mouth... Repeatedly.

9 posted on 07/15/2010 9:35:04 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (III, Alarm and Muster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DTogo; Jack Black

” Based on the HUGE assumption that these (R) majorities acted in unison and with a spine. “

An assumption NOT in evidence.


10 posted on 07/15/2010 9:54:27 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (Support our Troops, and vote out the RINOS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

The Republican Party is committing suicide. They won’t stand up and fight for anything!

I admit it...I’m mortified!


11 posted on 07/15/2010 9:57:20 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (Support our Troops, and vote out the RINOS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black

...only if a bold leader takes the reigns. The Rs have had full power under Bush, and only gave us results less bad than otherwise.

Nobody is going to fix anything until it outright breaks.


12 posted on 07/15/2010 10:33:36 AM PDT by ctdonath2 (+)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sparticus

OMG! Now that’s funny!


13 posted on 07/15/2010 1:16:49 PM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: arthurus
When Republicans have majorities they just like to spend money.

I would argue that the majority of the current crop of Republicans are either outright RINOs or moderate/centrists which are just about the same thing. If the grassroots elects real conservative Republicans at all levels (Federal, state and local) then there is a real chance for significant change. I think we're beginning to see this take place in the primaries. Okay so California wasn't a great result but the landscape is still promising.

14 posted on 07/15/2010 1:32:35 PM PDT by ExSoldier (Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on dinner. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

Yes, it goes back to the Eisenhower years when the party decided to accept the New Deal reforms and just spend the money at a lesser rate. Nixon, the bete noir of the Liberals was actually a liberal spender. His cutting loose from gold set the stage of the economic events of the late ‘70s.


15 posted on 07/15/2010 2:30:21 PM PDT by RobbyS (Pray with the suffering souls.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier

Bush’s choice of treasury secretary that last year shows where he liberal wing of the party comes from.


16 posted on 07/15/2010 2:32:45 PM PDT by RobbyS (Pray with the suffering souls.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black

I dunno, this really looks like wishful thinking...

Big assumptions that everyone is going to be happy with the results of this next November...

After we make those gains, everything can still come to a screeching halt when measures to correct the economic death spiral gets to Obama’s desk are vetoed...

I would not doubt Obama’s petulent immaturity for one second...

We’ll have to see...


17 posted on 07/15/2010 3:00:03 PM PDT by stevie_d_64 (I'm jus' sayin')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
His cutting loose from gold set the stage of the economic events of the late ‘70s.

And much that is going on today. No infinite capacity to print money, no giant government, no trillion dollar defict and no $100 Trillion in debt and unfunded mandates.

40 years is a good run for a pure fiat currency. Most don't make it that long.

18 posted on 07/15/2010 3:00:03 PM PDT by Jack Black ( Whatever is left of American patriotism is now identical with counter-revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black

I dunno, this really looks like wishful thinking...

Big assumptions that everyone is going to be happy with the results of this next November...

After we make those gains, everything can still come to a screeching halt when measures to correct the economic death spiral gets to Obama’s desk are vetoed...

I would not doubt Obama’s petulent immaturity for one second...

We’ll have to see...


19 posted on 07/15/2010 3:00:14 PM PDT by stevie_d_64 (I'm jus' sayin')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson