Then and Now: A Story of Hypocrisy

President George Washington once said, “We pour legislation into the senatorial saucer to cool it.”

Washington was referring to the Framers’ decision to create the Senate. It would serve as an important check and balance to the House of Representatives, where the popular will of the people could more quickly be realized. In their opinion, rapidly passed legislation was not wise.

What has the Senate become today? Is it still a body that largely accepts its role as a deliberative body? The preponderance of the evidence gives a resounding answer of “no.”

In part, this assessment comes after years of using, albeit infrequently, the process of reconciliation. Such a process allows the Senate to pass legislation with 51 votes, without first garnering 60 votes to end debate.

Without question, both Republicans and Democrats are guilty of using reconciliation over the years. Each and every case has been unfortunate because it provides evidence that our leaders no longer respect the rules which were established for the benefit of the country as a whole.

As noted, Republicans have been guilty of misusing power in the past. Similarly, Democrats are threatening to enact health care legislation by reconciliation if Republicans do not accede to Democratic demands.

What did Democrats say when they were threatened with a similar ultimatum?

Then-Sen. Barack Obama said, “What I worry about would be that you would essentially still have two chambers, the House and the Senate, but you have simply majoritarian absolute power on either side, and that’s just not what the Founders intended.”

He also said it was his understanding of the Senate “that you need 60 votes to get something significant to happen.”

Then Sen. Joe Biden said that when Democrats took power he prayed to God that they wouldn’t “make the kind of naked power grab that (the Republicans) are doing.”

Chuck Schumer said, “We are on the precipice of a crisis, a constitutional crisis. The checks and balances which have been at the core of this republic are about to be evaporated by the ‘nuclear option.’ The checks and balances, which say that if you get 51 percent of the vote you don’t get your way 100 percent of the time. It is amazing. It’s almost a temper tantrum.”

Harry Reid said, “The right to extended debate is never more important than when one party controls Congress and the White House.

In these cases, a filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves limited government.”

Hillary Clinton said reconciliation was only “for immediate gratification of the present president.”

For once, something Democrats had to say actually made sense. It is too bad that such arguments were only made because they wanted to derail President Bush’s agenda. Are there any patriots left among our leaders? Certainly there are, but they are not in the majority. Seek out those, from both sides of the aisle, who will stand against tyranny of both the majority and minority. Our leaders must maintain that delicate balance.

Demand that our senators follow the advice of their colleague, Sen. Robert Byrd said. He warned that, “The Senate cannot perform its constitutional role if senators forego debate and amendments. I urge senators to jealously guard their individual rights to represent their constituents on such critical matters.”

If the reconciliation process is used, against the advice of one of its creators, Sen. Byrd, we will be led even closer to the destruction of our republic. As Sen. Max Baucus said, “This is the way democracy ends—not with a bomb, but with a gavel.”

--As Appeared in The Daily Mississippian on Tuesday, March 9, 2010