• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • The Rules Simply Don't Apply to Liberals

    In the wake of the Massachusetts election on Tuesday night, liberals in Congress have once again embarked on a course to change the rules to fit their needs.  Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) intends to introduce a bill that would eliminate the 60 vote threshold to end debate in the U.S. Senate. Ironically, the timing of their newest rule-changing efforts is a direct result of a previous rule-change merry-go-round that they themselves are to blame for.  In 2004, Senator John Kerry (D-MA) was running for President, and the Governor of Massachusetts was Republican Mitt Romney. Former Senator Ted Kennedy prodded state legislators in Massachusetts to change the appointment rules in Massachusetts so the Governor was no longer in a position to name a sitting senator if John Kerry won.

    Of course, John Kerry did not win.  As Senator Kennedy’s health deteriorated, he then requested that the state of Massachusetts change the rules…again.  Now, Senator Kennedy wanted the Governor to make an appointment.  Conveniently, Massachusetts now had a Democratic Governor in place, Deval Patrick. Kennedy was worried that the 145 day gap between his eventual passing and a special election would hurt the liberal chances of Obamacare passing immediately.  So, once again the Massachusetts legislature changed the rules to suit the political needs of liberals in Washington by mandating a temporary appointment quickly followed by a special election.  There was only one thing they didn’t account for…those pesky voters in Massachusetts electing a Republican. Now what? Change the rules again! Only this time, they’ll have to change federal rules, since they’ve run out of options in Massachusetts.

    After campaigning as the 41st vote in Washington, Scott Brown won a decisive victory as someone who would offer a careful check and balance to the one-party rule in Washington.  Voters overwhelmingly flocked to this message.  Unfortunately for Democrats wishing to get Obamacare hurriedly passed with or without public support, Brown’s victory meant that once again they would have to change the rules, otherwise the bill was dead.

    So now today, ironically because of the election results in Massachusetts, Democratic Senator Tom Harkin is trying to eliminate the filibuster so that unpopular legislation can get rammed through Congress without a fight.  Don’t forget, the Democratic caucus has 59 votes.  They only need to be bipartisan enough to convince one moderate Republican to support them, and this a moot point. But why aim for the minimum level of bipartisanship, when instead you can aim for the minimum level of public support?

    The filibuster isn’t just some Senate procedure that comes and goes with the tide.  Our founding fathers were convinced that the Senate not simply be a smaller carbon-copy version of the House, where simple majorities rule.  It was to be a deliberative body that exercised greater control over decisions of import.  But that argument is beside the point.

    The point is that Democrats were hypocritically incensed when Republicans even debated changing the rules during the George W. Bush administration when liberals refused to allow the President’s judicial nominees to even receive an up or down vote. Liberals were tying up nominees in committee, paralyzing the judiciary and using the filibuster as a permanent way to prevent conservatives from being seated in the nation’s courts. Yet, they demanded that right on appointments, a process much simpler than passing comprehensive health care reform. Now — with health care legislation that affects nearly every American alive — is not the time to reverse course and change the Senate rules, so that not even an entire party agrees on the “change” to our nation’s health and livelihood.

    Instead of subverting the rules, once again, liberals should scrap the health care bills in the House and the Senate and start over crafting a bill that can attract 60 votes in the Senate and a majority vote in the House.  If there is one lesson to be learned this week, it is that Senate Democrats may be willing to change the rules to pass this bill, but if the voters reject their ideas in November, you can be sure they’ll change the rules right back.  Ironically, if Ted Kennedy had never changed the rules in the first place, this whole argument would be moot.  Deval Patrick would have appointed Kennedy’s successor and the 6o votes would have been secure.  Yes, democracy can be so ironic.

    Posted in Obamacare, Ongoing Priorities [slideshow_deploy]

    19 Responses to The Rules Simply Don't Apply to Liberals

    1. David - Jacksonville says:

      Great article. The Libs won't like it though – there is too much truth told here.

    2. JR says:

      Sen. Harkin was among those who opposed eliminating the filibuster during the Bush years. He's a hypocrite.

    3. David - Naples says:

      What's New? Not a darn thing but thank you for exposing them. The LibDemocrats are highly skilled at hypocrisy and Double Standards. As for the rest of us, we have had enough of their "special rights for special people" mentality.

    4. BillinVegas says:

      Continue shining the light of truth on the escapades of these liberty-hating Liberals and Progressives to show their hypocrisy as well as their utter disdain for the Constitution. Their agenda is the 'total transformation of the United States as Candidate Obama reminded us five days before the election. It is so apparent to anyone with a brain that the programs enacted and proposed, but not yet passed, are directed toward one goal – to destroy Capitalism, and with it, our system of government, in order to re-establish some urworkable Progressive Utopia composed of the ruling Elitists and everyone else. Only one problem with this philosophy – the "Elitists" have completely underestimated the will of the American People. We may have tolerated incremental usurpations of our liberties while we were too busy raising our families, making a living, paying taxes, etc. but the limits of our tolerance have finally been exceeded, and the Scott Brown victory in Massachusetts is reluctantly being recognized. Conservatives have seen it for a long time, but it is finally resonating among the opposition – the spoiled children who manipulated the process using radical agendas, Alinsky's rules, and the strategy espoused by Cloward and Piven are coming to understand the extent of the backlash and the force of the American will, whose desire for freedom and personal Liberty and the pounding principles of our country will no longer tolerate their agenda, and are mobilizing their resources, appealing to every instinct of the American People to resist and refute the course upon which these usurpers of liberty have tried to steer this nation.

    5. Don, Granger, IA says:

      The Senate hasn't been following it's own rules: all bills and amendments must be read by the clerk unless there is a unanimous vote to dispense with the reading. They didn't bother with that when healthcare came to the floor.

    6. Larry - Chicago says:

      Whew – I thought liberals might get the message about the anger and contempt their strong-armed and hypocritical politics have engendered in the American People. I was afraid they'd retreat into their "stealth" moderate mode and recycle their "there's a sucker born every minute – except if we can abort them first" strategy of trying to present themselves as "middle of road" and for the "middle class." With their allies in the liberal market media, there are enough folks who might still be conned into believing whatever new spin the liberals want. But no – it appears they are going to press on and try to ram their concept of "health care reform" and are still so arrogant as to think they can do so by changing the rules to fit their agenda despite overwhelming opposition among the American people. If liberals think the election in MA wasn't a backlash against their politics and didn't have anything to do with health care then LET THEM. It just brings conservatives back into power that much sooner.

    7. Dan Runyon, Texas says:

      Piss on these idiotic liberals. If they even try to change the filibuster rules they should be strung up and whipped. They are doing more to drive a wedge between the people of this country than any foreigner or terrorist could ever do. God help us with any of them in power anywhere.

      If the people of this nation don't wake up soon, very soon, and vote all incumbents of both parties out of congress and adopt a system with more that two parties we are screwed. Also term limits need to be imposed or we will be just as dead. Without term limits the GREED factor takes over and it all hits the fan.

    8. Mikey, Pittsburgh says:

      This liberal is considering voting Republican in the future because if they ever get the majority in the Senate again they will have no problem with doing away with the filibuster. The filibuster is a travesty, and they wouldn't let a minority party stop them from enacting their agenda like the spineless Dems do.

    9. Bobbie Jay says:

      Get these pathetic pieces of puke out!

    10. Walter L. Brown Jr, says:

      It's about time that the Republicans start tying up everything unconstitutional in Washington. Shut it all down. Accept nothing less than Constitutional Amendments to authorize each and every reach. If the Republicans want our support, it's time to do something courageous; support the Constitution like your oaths of office demand. The only thing the congress should be doing in regards to health care is ending federal involvement.

    11. dwa9ine says:

      I am so proud to be an Iowan that is if Harkin would gfo away''''''

    12. dwa9ine says:

      I wish Harkin would go away then I could be a proud Iowan'''''

    13. dwaine Ankeny Ia says:

      to bad harkin doesnt go away then I could be a prpud Iowan

    14. Bobbie Jay says:

      Does anyone remember "the ends justifies the means" line of ignorance from the government? This is illogical on it's face! There has to be the means first, for there to be "ends." THE MEANS JUSTIFIES THE ENDS! Lets get this under common sense or at least sense.,,and get rid of the uneducated members in government, including their BO.

    15. Pingback: Tom Harkin Will Introduce Legislation to End Filibuster | The Lonely Conservative

    16. German A. Vanegas, H says:

      The democrats want to impose mob ruling! 51% will do for them, of course!

    17. Alba, Sarasota FL says:

      It is obvious that the Democrats see the Constitution and the rule of law as an obstacle to their political ends; i.e. the changes made in MA to make sure that they kept their political power. They will do anything to further their progressive agenda. Hopefully, the American People will see through them and send them packing.

      Republicans should refuse to have anything to do with this health care monstrosity, bring their proposals to the floor and to the public and demand that the process starts anew from "0".

    18. Dave, in DFW says:

      JR – right you are! And you're surprised because…? :-)

    19. Don - St. Louis says:

      The senators in question may of been 60 strong but to label them liberals is a far cry from the truth. They are bought and paid for elected officials, just like the minority. I have not forgotten why we are in such poor shape as a country all 100 senators as a group have failed this country. The spin factor is not working on me, try to find a little old lady to confuse. For the record the best thing that has happened in America is the election of the new republican senator. The next best thing the removal of the incumbent Democrats, and right after that wipe out the republican incumbents. Our country is headed in the wrong direction, the corporations and their free speech should in a few short years right the situation.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.