[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Courtesy Don Loucks
Contributing columnist to The Statesman

Democrats warn that if they do not get their way in passing their radical legislation through the U.S. Senate, they will do away with the legislative filibuster in order to do so. That’s a dangerous threat.

Let’s review some history of the Senate.

In the original U.S. Constitution, Senators were selected by their state’s legislatures. In the unamended Article I, Section 3, “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.”

Senators were not elected by the voters. Rather, the state legislators who were elected by the people, chose their state’s U.S. senators, accurately described as each state’s ambassadors to the federal government. Thus, there was a degree of separation between the popular culture and governance.

Then came the populist movement in 1913 under Progressive Democrat Woodrow Wilson. The loud complaint was that the Senate was too stodgy and obstructive, and popular and progressive (liberal) legislation was unfairly killed or modified. Also, after the Civil War, many disagreements among state legislators left vacancies in the Senate, some lasting a long time and leaving states without representation in that chamber.

The founders, however, left Senate picks to state legislatures because they knew the dangers of a public that could be easily or temporarily swayed by appealing fads, like socialism.

Then came 17th Amendment — one of several destructive changes to U.S. governance.

The 17th Amendment restates the first paragraph of Article I, section 3 of the Constitution and provides for the election of senators by replacing the phrase “chosen by the Legislature thereof” with “elected by the people thereof.” In addition, it allows the governor or executive authority of each state, if authorized by that state’s legislature, to appoint a senator in the event of a vacancy, until a general election occurs.

Before the 17th Amendment, states were somewhat protected from legislation unfavorable or harmful to them.

The legislative filibuster, a parliamentary procedure used to delay or block legislation in the Senate, also enhanced that protective function.

As it was with the progressives of 1913, our radical Democratic Senate majority of this Congress sees the filibuster as just another impediment to their leftist goals. If the filibuster is eliminated, states will be run over by harmful, unstoppable legislation.

The filibuster is defined by a Senate rule. Under this rule a senator may halt the progress to vote on a bill by invoking their right to continue debate on it. A filibuster may be stopped if three-fifths of all Senators (usually 60) vote to end debate. This vote is commonly called “cloture.”

However, because it is a rule, it can be changed or removed by the Senate if two-thirds of the senators present vote for the change, which would be very difficult to achieve. Senators know the filibuster protects the minority party in that chamber.

Also, the filibuster protects senators from political toss-up states. Those senators are leery of voting for legislation that is unpopular with those who elected them – gun control is a good example.

The Democrat leadership in power now, however, may not honor their desires and may attempt to change the Senate rules without the 67 votes currently required for such a change. The loophole is a provision that requires only a simple majority of 51 votes, to virtually circumvent a Senate rule by an arcane maneuver of claiming “precedence” by allowing for a simple majority vote. This “nuclear option” has been used by Republicans and Democrats, most recently Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., used the option in 2019 to advance President Donald Trump’s executive and judicial nominees.

With Democrats in power now, they will do absolutely anything to ram their radical agenda through to be signed by the president.

Watch closely in the coming weeks to see what the Democrats will try to pass, and watch just as closely as what Congress actually passes.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]