Letter 2 America for January 29, 2013

Dear America,

There was bad news for Democrats on January 24...for the whole country really.  After fulminations to the contrary for at least a year, Senator Harry Reid, the majority leader in that body, agreed with minority leader Mitch McConnell that they wouldn't change the filibuster rules fundamentally, but would rather just agree to use restraint in using the filibuster.  There were some minor rules changes, but for the most part, it was just what Reid has in the past called "a handshake deal," which Reid also said he would not accept again because of the way the last handshake deal was abused by the Republicans.  But Reid, showing himself to be the political poltroon that he is, now justifies this deal by claiming that only the filibuster stopped George W. Bush from implementing his conservative program.  So, like that last handshake deal, this one portends to cripple the Democrats in their effort to implement their own platform of socially conscious legislation on issues like climate change, immigration reform, additional health care reform and gun control, but the Democrats would rather that than sacrifice their own right to cripple the conservatives on the next swing of the political pendulum.  So much for the courage of convictions and respect for the will of the people.  It is a deal with the devil.  Frankly, it is a deal between two devils.

It is not that the legislative butter wouldn't melt in the Democrats' mouths when it comes to the filibuster and other parliamentary maneuvers intended to circumvent the democratic notion that the majority rules.  They too have abused the filibuster when they were in the minority, and to be candid about it, if candor were a quality to be expected from senators, the Democrats would admit that they are not eager to give up the filibuster wild card either because they know that one day, they will be in the minority again.  So once again, the people's business...our business...has been sacrificed for political expediency, and so that The Senate can continue to wallow in the conceit that it is the collective voice of not just moderation, but of prudence as well.  They kid themselves into thinking that they are wiser than the majority of the American people, which might have been the case at one time, but from what I can see is now nothing but a self-serving canard.  For example, speaking of canards and senators, Senator Rand Paul once commented on the record that low-flow toilets clog pipes (a canard, supported only by internet anecdotes, that is contrary studies by the EPA and private testing agencies) in support of his libertarian claim that regulating oil drilling at sea, like regulating light bulbs and toilets, is a violation of his rights. Senate sagacity put him on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee where he can apply his brand of reason to our relationships with other nations.  Then there's Senator Ron Johnson, a Republican Tea Party favorite from Wisconsin...the buffoon who confronted Hillary Clinton with the spurious, gotcha-type partisan claim that the American people were intentionally misled about whether the Benghazi murders were a response to that anti-Islam film of several months ago or were a terrorist attack.  As Clinton responded, what difference does it make, though his diatribe against Clinton demonstrates that he nothing but a party hack.  The wisdom of The Senate put him on that committee as well. In fact, the willingness to subscribe to any preposterous anecdote and to cavil about the most insignificant of things if it ostensibly serves some partisan purpose seems a qualification for leadership in the Republican Party, and thus, folklore and myths will now be the criteria on which the minority party of the moment decides whether to filibuster or not, and thus whether the majority of the American people can have what they sent the majority of senators to Washington to get for them.  Allowing this to continue is not just inefficient, it is destructive, and the Democrats, with the power to stop it in hand, declined to do so, and thus there is no alternative but to suspect their reasons for leaving the filibuster essentially in tact as well.

I don't know about you, but I'm sick of it.  The filibuster serves just one purpose, and that is to obscure the true natures of the Senators who indulge in them by allowing them not to cast votes that would demonstrate their greed, cynicism, irrationality, zealotry or mental deficiency.  It is a shield for the incompetence and pettiness of men and women who claim to be above such things.  So I'm going to take a step to hold their feet to the fire.  This weekend I am going to draft, and next week I am going to send to every senator, a pledge to end the filibuster as we know it...that is, to end the super-majority requirement for cloture of debate.  If Grover Norquist can do it and thus hamstring the entire legislature, it should be easy for me to hamstring a bunch of dolts like Senator John McCain, who aligned himself with Johnson when the Republicans on their committee attempted to verbally enfilade Hillary Clinton, in order to prevent them from hiding their incompetence behind the filibuster in the future.  I am going to call on them to pledge to make the change on the first day of the 114th congress, which will occur in January 2015.  I am going to tell them that if they don't sign, I will make sure that the failure to do so will become an issue in their next attempts at re-election by sending a list of those subscribing to the pledge to the opposition party's campaign headquarters.  If they don't sign now, they will have to explain why they are not on that list during their campaigns.  I am willing to bet that such a threat will motivate them, because the American people are fed up and they want their representatives and senators to go on the record and cast votes so that the people themselves can know how they should vote at the polls.  It is not just ironic that the legislative bodies in what is supposed to be the greatest democracy in the world operates with anti-democratic rules.  In fact, it's not just ironic.  Just like taxation without representation, legislation without representation...that is control of the legislation process by the minority...is tyranny.  It has to stop.

Your friend,

Mike