Thanks to Mitch McConnell — the usual suspects have win-win-win-win scenarios through 2024

• Big government RINO’s, Democrats and their Chamber of Commerce sponsors are on track to sustain the Obamanation through 2024
  
• Ending the filibuster will not hurt constitutional government or conservative prospects long-term, doing so will help.
• Endless blathering and calling it debate is ridiculous.  Allowing it is just as ridiculous. Allowing it to thwart restoration of the Republic is deceitful.

The Problem

Republican Senate Majority Leader McConnell has “ruled out” a push for rules to end the ability of minority Democrats to essentially control the Senate at their whim through the filibuster.  We conclude that he does not take the fundamental transformations and damage to the Constitution under Obama seriously or his promises to undo them. The only other conclusion is that he is loath to go head to head with Obama, in which case he should resign not only his leadership position but also from his senate seat.

McConnell’s inaction under the guise of “regular order,” his term for the artifice of the filibuster, helps protect all manner of big government programs initiated under Obama — programs that will fundamentally transform America as Obama set out to do, and the last vestiges of its nature as a constitutional republic.

The grandiose claims that the filibuster protects minority opinion and enshrines debate are phony, probably invented to put a facade over manipulations instead of being forthright.  As practiced by Democrats the filibuster is an off-hand way to insulate the President and grandstand for certain constituencies, it is not about debate or consensus building amendments or protecting minority opinion.

The Constitution provides that the President can veto legislation and Democrats can sustain any vetoes as they have enough numbers to do so.*  The Constitution also allows each House to determine the rules of its proceedings which is how the filibuster came to be in the Senate. However the Constitution generally presumes that majorities are all that is necessary to pass legislation or conduct its affairs (including making rule changes) except in those limited provisions specified in the text (overcoming a presidential veto, expelling a member and conviction after impeachment).

But under the Constitution the rules in either House can be changed by majority vote in that House and at anytime because otherwise one congress can bind another congress with rules not set in the Constitution.  Indeed the rule providing for the filibuster (a 1935 artifice) was not bound by the previous Senates rule where it did not exist.

The Constitution provides for the ability to change the rules by majority vote including rules about making rules, and making those rules, and on and on. Nothing more than a simple majority can ultimately control rule changes because nothing in the Constitution provides otherwise. No deference is owed under the Constitution to a rule that showed no deference for previous rules.   If this were not the case then the Constitution would also allow for rules being adopted by majority vote that essentially could never be changed.

Majority rule as regards making rules, or changing them for the conduct of business, is what allowed Harry Reid Democrats to alter the filibuster “rule” when it was felt  expedient. Furthermore, simple majority rule, the only one sustained by the Constitution in such matters, allowed  Reid to manipulate reconciliation “rules” to obtain the government takeover of one seventh of the economy – healthcare. It was within Democrats  power to do so** an Reid pushed then to do so.

There is a 100% probability that Reid or Dick Durban as Senate Majority leader would pull out any stop in the way of protecting or advancing legislation they found crucial. They have demonstrated their willingness to do so. There is no good reason for McConnell not to. He cannot be serious about his supposed word to restore “regular order” in the face of how he allows Democrats to basically phone in their filibusters and not take the floor and debate. *** Besides that, as we have already seen , McConnell is comfortable with breaking pledges or misleading and bamboozling Republican voters or throwing up his hands and saying force majeure. Well this is force majeure.  Not doing so sustains the Obamanation in the following ways:

The win win win win scenarios for big government types now though 2024

Assumptions:

Republican control of the House of Representatives continues after 2016, a big assumption but not necessarily required to make our point that decisive action is required now. **** Also assume that Republican leadership there remains feckless, which is not so big an assumption.

Given the Senate seats that are up in 2016, and it being a presidential election year with high Democrat turn-out, we assume it is very unlikely that Republicans will pick up six seats.  That amount is necessary under McConnell’s “regular order,” Democrat protecting rules, to bring Republican strength to a filibuster-proof 60%. It is probably more likely that Republicans could lose some seats rather than pick up six. Obtaining the thirteen seats required to bring Republican strength to a veto proof 67% is more unlikely.

Those are the minimum seats necessary if one assumes that Republicans are unified as are Democrats.  But Democrats are more likely to be unified as regards opposing any Republican changes to government-run healthcare, immigration laxity, welfare abuses, spending, progressive income taxes, abortion on demand, wacko environmental regulations and more.  Republicans will need more than those gains as some are more likely to vote with Democrats

We also assume that a president elected once has a better than fifty-fifty chance of being reelected.

Resultant scenarios via McConnell’s rules for Republicans

A Senate Republican minority with a Democrat President:  The Obamnation transformations  are protected.  The Democrat majority will not allow a minority to stop  implementation and further fundamental change.  The Democrats will change the rules regarding the filibuster, ending it to preserve and advance “fundamental change.”

A Senate Republican majority with a Democrat President: The situation we have now. McConnell’s “regular orders” keeps the ability to filibuster intact and allows Democrats to thwart major change more effectively by not presenting the Democrat President with any must sign legislation or that squarely identifies who the recalcitrant is.  The Obamanation transformations  are protected.  The Senate/ Congress shares the blame for not compromising among themselves. Republicans look worthless. Their base is demoralized. Independents are not inspired to increase Republican numbers.  The only thing presented to the Democrat president is already compromised legislation that Republicans surrender to.  A Democrat president will maneuver further compromise from Republicans, further protecting Democrat achievements.  Essentially the situation we have now.

A Senate Republican minority with a Republican President  Democrats with majority control of Senate will not allow Republicans to filibuster in order to overturn their achievements. They will end the ability to filibuster.

A Senate Republican majority with a Republican President Again nothing will reach the President’s desk.  No reversal of Obama’s policies. Minority Democrats will filibuster in the Senate and Republicans under McConnell will allow it.

Losing America

And that faithful readers is how Republicans under Mitch McConnell will protect Obama’s policies through 2024

*  However that should not prevent a Republican led Congress from refusing to fund whatever should rightfully be opposed.  But that is not a likely scenario under Boehner and McConnell.

**   We are not referring to the ultimate Constitutionality of the legislation or other aspects of how it came to be.

*** McConnell criticizes the Democrats filibustering by trying to goad them into offering amendments which would break the filibuster or other wise expose them.  They know that and have not broken ranks.  As long as action proceeds normally on other matters, selective filibustering at one or another stage imparts a super-majority requirement whenever the other party wants to inflict it on a particular matter. McConnell does not even require Democrats to take the blame for “shutting down government.”

**** There is a critical point where legislation cannot effectively be “walked back,”  at least by current Republican leadership who have proved they are incapable. Dependencies ensue.

R Mall

0

0