Deadlock

If there were ever a good example of the failures of our present government, the current deadlock between House Republicans and Senate Democrats is it. Ezra Klein in the current Newsweek has a column in which he suggests that we are in a lose-lose situation, where neither side is able to win. Economically we need the government to stimulate the economy, but the Republicans are determined to cut no matter what, even if it requires a government shutdown. They are being colossally irresponsible and stupid, but they have the power, and are willing to have a shutdown if necessary. Such an impasses in the government should not happen, and would not if it had been better designed. The Republicans are in the majority in the House, and no matter how stupid they are, they should be able to see their programs enacted. The existence of the Senate if the problem.

Wisconsin politics

To be brief, it strikes me as silly that the Democrats in Wisconsin have been protesting against the actions of the Governor and the Republican controlled legislature. It makes great theatre, but is not good government. The Democrats are unfortunately in the minority, and they should accept this status and move on. The pretense that they can affect the Wisconsin state government through protest is a consequence only of the existence of a bicameral system--and in the states there is even less excuse for having two separate chambers. It serves only to shift the focus to bickering between the chambers, and between the parties, from the real business, that of developing a platform, recruiting members, and persuading the electorate that the party has the best program. The Democrats should be working to get themselves elected in the next election, on the basis of their program for the state, not wasting everyone's time whining about the inevitable. The Republicans are threatening the power of labor and the middle class to participate in the political process. If this is not enough of a campaign issue for the next election, I don't know what is.

A movement

I have been away for a while, for those who are interested, but I have been thinking about what more to say. My book is now published as an ebook, but it has been completely ignored so far. It will soon be a POD book as well, and then maybe I can do some more marketing. I have been thinking of expanding the book into what could be several books on more particular topics, as I do more reading. What really needs to happen, though, is to start a movement to promote the kind of change I think is necessary. I have essentially concluded that the Senate needs to change. To abolish the Senate would require a constitutional amendment, making it practically impossible. On the other hand, reforming the procedures within the Senate, with regard to the filibuster, for example, for me do not go far enough. Even without the filibuster the Senate can still block legislation. There has to be more substantial change than changes in Senatorial procedures. My suggestion, as I have said before, is to change the procedures of the House that would strip the power of the Senate to prevent legislation passed by the House from going forward without its approval.

This would be a direct confrontation with the Senate and its traditional powers, but it is not a constitutional issue. The Senate asserted its power to block legislation in 1806: it was not in the constitution. As such it can be taken away by a simple rule change. To do so would require a popular movement to explain the change, and to pressure the House to make the change. I am not a likely leader of a movement, but this is what would have to happen to make the changes I think are needed. It would require that the built-in bias against majority rule be overcome. Even the Tea Party members, for all their talk of popular revolt against the government, are at the same time against the removal of the Senate as a block to their view of the popular will.