Filibusters Prevent Rushed Activism
After 50 Republicans blocked S.1 (For The Peoples Act), Tim Kaine (D-VA) made the progressive case against the filibuster, “Do we want to accomplish a lot over the next couple of years or don’t we?” His sense of emergency stems from three facts: (1) ten Republicans won’t vote to end cloture, (2) two Democrats won’t kill the filibuster, and (3) his party will lose the House in a “couple of years.” He’s desperate to squash new election-integrity laws in swing states before 2022.
In order to protect America’s producers (farmers, makers and sellers), the framers of the constitution opposed rapid activism. As Senator Sinema (D-AZ) reasoned, it is hard enough tending to one’s family, livelihood and property without the rule of law “ricocheting widely” every two years. She rightly defends the Senate and its rules, which Madison told Jefferson were an “anchor” to slow the “fickleness and passion” that is routine in the House.
In Madison’s binary view of democracy; self-reliant individuals are pitted against government-reliant activists. The former want predictability and slow change, and the latter want rapid disruption of the status quo. The founding fathers rightly guessed American dynamism and exceptionalism needed self-reliant pioneers to populate a continent, self-confident imagineers to grow an economy, and self-regulating volunteers to ensure national safety. Himself and herself matters!
In a sharp-elbowed world, the US needs opportunity-seeking immigrants (not welfare cases), small business start-ups (not urban looters), and F-18 pilots (not topple-a-statue malcontents). Sadly, the activists get the spotlight, and the producers get the shaft. The activist is on camera, calling for police-defunding. The producer is on the telephone, calling 911 to protect his shop from arson and looting. Shouldn’t the shopkeeper have predictable law and order?
By the way, slow change is not some alt-right ideal. I’m no fan of the Affordable Care Act, but I respect how Democrats (and John McCain) used Senate rules to keep that law from “ricocheting widely” in 2017. I am a fan of Florida’s new election-integrity law, and I don’t respect how Democrats (through Biden’s DOJ and Pelosi’s H.R.1) are trying to overturn it. The threat of filibuster is making the 2022 Florida elections more predictable (some Democrat’s dead grandma won’t cancel my vote).
Americans Shouldn’t Trust Rushed Activism
The Wall Street Journal recently recited big progressive legislation enacted because a consensus existed: “Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and a minimum wage, all of which were passed when the cloture vote requirement was two-thirds, as compared to today’s three-fifths.” The Journal rightly concludes, “the movement to end the filibuster is less about a Senate that doesn’t work than it is about a socialist agenda that doesn’t sell.”
We the people should not trust progressive activism or, at least, want slow and steady disruption to how we tend to our families, livelihoods and property. It is fair to call out the Democrat Party’s hypocrisy. To wit, Chuck Schumer loved the filibuster to block Donald Trump from killing Obamacare or nominating Barrett to the Supreme Court, but he now calls the GOP filibuster of S1, “ridiculous and awful.” You can’t have it both ways, Chuck!
If the 2020 elections were anything, they were examples of rushed activism. Democrat lawyers used COVID fears to disrupt voting norms, turning red states (like Georgia) into swing states. Red states know what happened and reacted accordingly: pass election integrity laws to increase transparency (absentee-ballot boxes at secure and visible sites) and reduce subjectivity (verify ballots by government-provided numbers).
According to Monmouth, 81% of America supports voter-ID laws, and an AJC poll found 75% of Georgia wants “additional verification of voters who cast absentee ballots.” When Georgia’s legislature complied, progressive activist Stacey Abrams asked corporate America to punish Georgia workers (backfired), and the Biden DOJ sued Georgia for violating the Voting Rights Act (won’t succeed). Got it? Progressive Democrats alone hate voter-ID laws, filibusters, and Chick-fil-A.
President Biden’s got to be at the top of the Do-Not-Trust list, especially after his April proposal of a $2 trillion infrastructure plan that re-defined “infrastructure” to mean in-home care ($400 billion), affordable housing ($213 billion), and electric vehicle incentives ($174 billion). Biden announced a $1.2 trillion deal Thursday (“none of us got all we wanted”), angering Senate progressives Blumenthal (“paltry, pathetic”) and Warren (“we have to have the WHOLE thing”).
A dishonest aura hovers over the Biden machine that injected socialist ideas into an infrastructure plan and dropped accountability from welfare programs. In-home care might be progress, but it’s NOT infrastructure. And, did you know abusive parents and drug addicts no longer have to deal with a social worker to get their welfare check? Is Team Biden crooked, dumb or both? In such times, the filibuster might be the only thing between we the people and lots of really bad laws.
