Minority Veto verses Majority Rule--by Hank Foresman

Almost a weeks ago, before the nation was glued to the television sets with all things the Boston manhunt, we watched as the United States Senate, voted not to allow closure on debate effectively killing the Manchin-Toomey amendment.

The defeat came not on a simple majority of Senators, but rather was accomplished through parliamentary procedures that require 60 votes to end debate and proceed on the question.  The measure failed by a vote of fifty-six for ending closure to forty-six against closure ensuring the legislation would fail because a minority of senators voted no.

 I do not know whether the Manchin-Toomey background checks legislation was a good or whether it would be effective.  Certainly requiring a universal background check, one, which is the same in each state, may be a good idea.  Background checks are effective for law-abiding citizens; they are a feel good solution, which allows society to feel protected.  They do not stop gun violence. 

 They will not automatically lead to a national gun registry if the federal government is not allowed to maintain serial numbers of weapons but then again individual states, such as New York are free to do so.  Today as it has been through most of our history the real threat to liberty comes not from the central government but from state and local governments abridge the right of their citizens.

Two hundred years ago Mr. Madison, in Federalists 10, reminded us, that one of the ills of society, which our constitution was designed to prevent, was the power of faction be it majority or minority.  The United States Senate, has allowed a parliamentary procedure ending a filibuster which requires 60 votes to thwart legislation and preventing the United States Senate from taking an up or down vote where the majority prevails. This is not how the system should work; this does not make for good governance. 

While this legislation may have passed the Senate, although doubtful; it never would pass the House of Representatives.  There are factions in this country who fear that anything but an absolute reading of the Second Amendment is the road to perdition; yet these same groups are more than willing to throw their weight around so as to stifle debate in the United States Senate.  Go figure, are they afraid they will loose or that the majority of Americans will see their views as extreme.

Before anyone accuses me of being a typical East Coast educated elitist (which I plead guilty to the charge) they should also know that I am a gun owner, owning somewhere in the neighborhood of twenty weapons, and that I enjoy shooting.  I am also a civil-libertarian and I believe that all the Bill of Rights are important, but that as history has shown us none of the Bill of Rights are absolute, I repeat none are absolute.  There are exceptions to each of the Bill of Rights.  I have grave reservations about many aspects of gun control; as I feel we are trying to punish law abiding citizen for the actions of a few; but having said that our nation needs to have a robust debate about guns and gun control.  We should not allow the minority to thwart that public debate.

Comments

[Edward Amame]

You could have a system where the name of the buyer is not submitted to the gov't but is held privately by the seller unless the firearm sold is used to commit a crime.

This is the syystem in Illinois, according to the NRA's website:

"The seller must retain for 10 years a record of the transfer, including a description of the firearm (including serial number), the identity of the buyer, and the buyer’s FOID number."

"A federally licensed dealer must contact the Department of State Police for a background check, for which there is a $2.00 fee. Any sales at gun shows, including dealers and private parties, must contact the state police for a background check."

"Private parties selling firearms at gun shows must ensure the buyer has a FOID card and the buyer must undergo a background check. It is unlawful to sell or give any handgun to a person under 18, or any firearm to a person who is not eligible to obtain a FOID."

[turcopolier]

Laura Wilson

Hank Foresman's point and yours about the threat to our institutions from a congress that ignores national polls would be a propos if the country were a unitary state like France but it is not. Until you can figure out a way to make this stop being a federal republic you will never have what you want on this issue of "governance." pl

[Tyler]

With Chicago beating past deaths in Afghanistan for gun violence, explain to me again why we should replicate anything from Illinois considering what a dismal failure 'gun control' has been for them.

Or is this more 'do something...to do something!"

[William R. Cumming]

PL agree with your comment. So would you argue Senate stalemate could mean civil war again?

[Fred]

There is no constitutional requirement for an up or down vote on any legislation. This ‘parlimentary’ tactic has been in place for years. Don’t you remember Bush’s unmet demands for an ‘up or down vote”:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/17/filibuster.fight/

“During Bush's first term, Senate Democrats used filibusters to block 10 of his 218 court nominees. Bush renominated seven of them this year, and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is threatening to force a confrontation over the issue this week. The filibuster, a form of extended debate that dates to the 1850s, …”
Then there was the Senate depriving an up or down vote on John Bolton:

http://progressivepatriots.com/up-or-down-vote-fantasyland-whine-by-bush.html

I'm an engaged citizen and what I want is not to be dictated to by the Senior Senator from New York (or those from California) but represented by the two Senators from Michigan and the Congressman from the district I reside in.

[Laura Wilson]

Sir, you are correct. It is also true that our governance is made more complex by the small state-big state issues in the Senate, seniority, etc. However, the current situation in the Senate with the 60 vote threshold is a serious problem....every school kid knows that if you put your case forward and cannot persuade your opponents, you will lose the vote. We have a situation where persuasion isn't even on the agenda. I don't see how the Founders would have viewed that as a positive tactic in the long run. It is a serious issue of governance...and I really wish that Harry Reid had pushed to deny that tactic. Sure, the Dems might want to use it sometime--but they shouldn't. It isn't that the Senate ignores polls--it is that they ignore anything that isn't directly connected to campaign war chests. I really can't think of a term that indicates how morally bereft and unhinged from governance they are acting. You are an excellent wordsmith---maybe you can come up with something pithy!

[Tyler]

I'd say at this point, barring a change of the tide in the country, a velvet divorce is the best case scenario.

[The Twisted Genius]

I seriously doubt there will be a civil war or a velvet divorce. Political stagnation will become worse with both sides openly and proudly declaring their legislative goal of insuring the other side fails. What will keep the Union together as both sides become more fearful, hateful and distrustful of the other? Greed on both the corporate and individual levels. Never let principles stand in the way of profit. Hell, Virginia will keep taking in NYC's trash just to make a few bucks.

[Tyler]

Bloomberg says the Constitution may be 'reinterpreted' due to security, our ivory tower elites express sympathy for the Chechen terrorist (google Amanda Palmer's 'Poem for Dzhokar'), and blames everything on white flyover America while salivating for the next Tim McVeigh. Meanwhile, both sides are in love with 'invade the world, invite the world, in hoc to the world'.

I don't know TTG, you've obviously seen a bit more of the world than me, and maybe its my callous youth and hot blood, but I don't see things simply settling in deadlock and staying there.

[turcopolier]

TTG

I don't think business interests prevent political crises. I can cite numerous examples. i.e., In VN any number of US military and civilian officials assured me at the height of the war in 1968-69 that we would never leave VN because too many American individuals and companies were making money off the war. Well, not correct. We left. similarly the Germans invaded the USSR in the midst of a booming trade between the two countries. I think Tyler is right. A house this divided against itself will not stand in the same form. pl

[turcopolier]

TTG

How much NY trash are we still taking in? pl

[Fred]

Michigan is still stuck with Ontario's trash so you are probably right, though I do have a fantasy of sorting out all the toxic crap that is illegally shipped in and having our shipping it back, but apparently the anti-dumping crowd has moved on to other things.

[The Twisted Genius]

We still take in around 5.5 million tons from NY, D.C., Maryland and even North Carolina. Only Pennsylvania takes in more foreign trash than us. Waste Management has stopped every effort in Richmond to stem or even regulate the flow. I see a steady stream of full and fragrant trash trucks traveling south on 95. Only empty trucks travel north. I still remember Giuliani telling us we ought to be grateful for NYC trash... the arrogant NYC bastard.

[Fred]

Yes, as my local democrats point out, with an 8.5% (official) unemployment rate we need more immigration:

http://006.housedems.com/news/article/michigan-lawmakers-introduce-bills-for-aspiring-citizens

Apparently these folks are more concerned with pandering to foreigners than taking care of the 500,000+ unemployed citizens in this state. Not to mention the non-existant funding for this great idea.

[steve g]

"A house divided against itself
will not stand in the same form"

IMO this process has been going
on for the last 30 years at an
accelerating pace. Tip O'Neill
begrudgingly passed most of Reagan's
legislation with compromises and
trade-offs. Reagan restructured after
the 82 congressional losses. Business
as usual, by and large, until Clinton.
The hardline Repubs took over and it
has been their sworn duty to block
most and now all Dem proposals. Bill
Kristol said their main focus was to
undermine Clinton and get him out of
office. That set the template. Both
sides have done this. It has been
absolutely verboten to compromise on
anything. With all the disparate fact-
tionalism that has become America, would
not a parlimentarian system work more
effectively?

[The Twisted Genius]

Tyler and PL,

I think it would take some kind of catastrophic event to trigger full revolution or secession in this country. Economic collapse would have to go far beyond people losing their McMansions and having to go to food pantries. It would take children and grandparents starving on a regular basis. Another "catastrophe" would be complete dominance by one side or the other in Washington and the near full implementation of the victor's agenda. I see the former as more of a possibility than the latter.

I agree that we live in a house divided, but I think we'll continue to live under the same roof. We'll just stop talking to each other like some sad couple too greedy to leave the fancy house and go their separate ways. I think the "keep your government hands off my Medicare" attitude mirrors this situation.

[William R. Cumming]

Okay Red and Blue States! Better RED than dead Blue States? Better Blue than dead RED States?

Predict that the 2016 campaign for President [Bush v. Clinton?]will not be one of national reconciliation and working together for a better USA!

[The Twisted Genius]

We take in around 5.5 million tons of trash from NY, D.C., Maryland and even North Carolina. Waste Management has stopped every effort in Richmond to slow or regulate this industry. I see the full and fragrant trash trucks (or garbage scows as my son says) flying down the highway every time I drive on I-95. Only empty trucks go north. I still remember Giuliani telling us we should be grateful for the opportunity to take NYC trash... the arrogant NYC bastard.

[Tyler]

Let's see. We've got:

- A legislature & 'elite' pretty much separated from the struggles of those they're supposed to represent
- An executive dandy with a very imperial interpretation of the law
- Both of which are more interested in appeasing foreign interests than worrying about its own country
- Finally, a vocal minority deadset on ramrodding through 'acceptance & tolerance' legislatively of practices that a large portion of the populace at large finds distasteful or abhorrent.

So, am I describing America today or the UK before the Glorious Revolution?

[Tyler]

So if the Republicans would just lay down and let us get invaded by 30 million foreign nationals because America is a hotel, not a country, everything would be hunky dory?

[Tyler]

I don't know boss, I think we are going through a catastrophic event, its just that the cracks are being papered over even as they get wider. How many tens of billions can you print each month without having negative side effects? How long can you massage unemployment numbers while your mouthpieces scream about 'wars on women' and other such trivialities? How you can talk about more employment visas while real unemployment is probably close to 20%?

Nearly 50 million people are on food stamps in the US. About half is on some form of government aid. The government doesn't even have to break down with those numbers - all it has to do is trip.

An overreach? Well, we've got a President that claims he has a right to assassinate US citizens, make illgal aliens citizens via imperial fiat, and ignore portions of law he doesn't like via his 'discretion'. Hubris goeth before a fall.

[Tyler]

Sir,

The fantasy island moralizers of today would have fit right in with those who had never been to the South, never seen how its society worked, but felt so secure in their self righteousness of demanding a war.

[The Twisted Genius]

Tyler,

I've seen catastrophe and I'm pretty sure you have, too. What we have now in the U.S. is not catastrophe. 20% unemployment is unhealthy but bearable especially if food stamps and other government aid keep flowing. Now if all that government largesse stops including, perhaps, my retirement payments and your income, we will see that catastrophic event.

As far as presidential overreach goes, the desire is there but the ability to carry through is still stymied by gridlock and legislative resistance. That's plenty of fodder for grumbling, but not for revolution.

For your entertainment I'd like to recommend the blaxploitation film "The Spook Who Sat by the Door." It came out in 1973. I saw it in Troy, NY with my new girlfriend (now my wife) in an inner city theater. It was an interesting couple of hours. The FBI soon got the film pulled from circulation. It wasn't released on DVD until 2004. It's no Academy Award winner, but it was fun entertainment with a provocative premise for the times and for today. I think you'll get a kick and a smile out of it.

[SAC Brat]

It's on Youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbrG6B_XBxM

Enjoy droogs. It's a good homework assignment.

[Fred]

Parts of it sound like America circa 1775.