Now the Constitution is the problem?
Today’s Washington Post contains an opinion piece by what appears to be a complete moron by the name of Alec MacGillis entitled “The Gangs of DC”. The subtitle asks the question “In the Senate, Small States Wield Outsize Power. Is This What the Founders Had in Mind?” He plows right into the problem with his solution;
Kent Conrad, Democrat from North Dakota (pop. 641,481, third smallest), chairman of the Budget Committee and one of the Gang of Six, does not see any problem. Asked whether it is appropriate that his vote counts as much as those of senators from states 20 times as large, he was flummoxed. “One would hope that people would support the Constitution of the United States,” said Conrad, who was reelected with 150,000 votes in 2006, when Virginia’s Jim Webb needed 1.2 million votes to win. “This was the grand bargain that was struck when the Founding Fathers determined the structure and form of the United States Congress.” He added: “Are you proposing changing the Constitution?”
Well, maybe.
Why? States don’t have their individual interests? Since we are the United STATES of America, don’t you think our form of government should reflect the importance of States in that governance process? Even though the importance of the process has been diluted significantly by the 17th Amendment.
MacGillis is concerned because uninsured Americans tend to live in larger States, he says, so smaller States, which would have to pay for the beneficiaries of the President’s healthcare plan have an equal vote. MacGillis leans towards the tyranny of the majority. Something the Constitution was written to prevent.
Every time the Left can’t get what they want because of Constitutional restrictions, they want to change the Constitution. Remember the drive to do away with the Electoral College after the 2000 election? They haven’t made a move to do that, though.
Unfortunately for MacGillis, if he wants to change the Constitution to get rid of the Senate, it takes a vote by State – and each State gets an equal vote.
Category: Politics
MacGillis is indeed a moron. He hasn’t bothered to read Article V of the Constitution, which among other things states “no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.” Not even an amendment can do what MacGillis wants.
I agree, MacGillis is a moron. But he writes for the WaPo, but I repeat myself. The WaPo, is 99% populated by morons. Here’s just a hint, as Alo said, read the Constitution. Then read John Stuart Mill’s “Essay on Liberty”.
The Constitution is not the problem. The problem is people, from both parties, who ignore the Constitution. We wouldn’t be arguing about whether or not it is right for states like Kansas to have as much of a say in the Senate as states like California if the federal government would stay in its lane and only deal with its enumerated Constitutional powers. Our problem is assclown Constitutional “scholars” like Obama who think that the interstate commerce clause negates the rest of the Constitution and permits the federal government to regulate everything, and that the general welfare clause permits the federal government to buy everything.
So the real question isn’t, “Is it appropriate for your podunk state to have as much of a say as New York or California?” The question is, “Is it appropriate for pseudo-intellectuals cloistered in overcrowded metropolises to tell everyone else what to do through the mechanism of a federal government that oversteps its rightfully limited powers?”
This is where we’ve gone…down the rabbit hole of fucking stupidity. Anyone with any casual knowledge of the founding of this nation knows that the House of Representative is just that…the representation of the PEOPLE, where are the Senate was the voice of the STATES. This is what happens when people are taught that we’re a democracy and not a republic. God help us.
Fortunately for Mr MacGillis, an even smaller minority — nine black robed judges on the US Supreme Court — has rendered those Senators from small states virtually powerless.
With a stroke of a pen those nine justices have removed rights clearly spelled out in the US Constitution [Kelo v City of New London] while seeing in that same document rights that were never written or spelled out [Roe v Wage].
“This is what happens when people are taught that we’re a democracy and not a republic. God help us.”
Yup & Presidential appointed “Czars” don’t help much either keepin’ those powers separated!
Last time I looked, that was why we had both a house AND a senate. That is exactly what our Founding Fathers intended.
Preach it, Claymore, Preach it!
yeah, Claymore…YOU HIT IT!!!
And to add to what Claymore said, until the 8th of April, 1913 the people had NO SAY in who was their Senator.
That is when the constitution was amended to allow the people to elect these ‘tards into office term after term after term.
“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, (chosen by the Legislature thereof,) (The preceding words in parentheses superseded by 17th Amendment, section 1.) for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.”
Maybe he was asleep this day in school also.
“In order to balance the concerns of smaller but more populated states against those of larger but more sparsely populated ones, the framers of the Constitution formed two disparate chambers. The Senate has 100 members, with each state allowed two representatives, regardless of size or population. The House of Representatives currently has 435 members, with each state’s representation dependent upon its population. Each member of the House represents a specific geographic district within the state, while senators represent their whole state.”