Current Events        vs.       Founding Documents

Entry 24S                                               Submitted by: Mark Musselman

Current Event

As reported by ABC News.com February 24, 2010 (full article available on-lin)

At the National Press Club on April 26, 2005, then-Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was asked about a move being discussed by Senate Republicans, then in control, to change the Senate rules so as to require a mere majority vote rather than the 60 votes necessary to end a potential filibuster.

“You know, the Founders designed this system, as frustrating it is, to make sure that there’s a broad consensus before the country moves forward,” then-Sen. Obama told the audience.

His remarks have garnered some attention in recent days given the current likelihood that Senate Democrats will next week use “reconciliation” rules, which require only a 51-vote majority, to pass health care reform legislation, bypassing the current Senate rules of requiring 60 votes to cut off a potential filibuster and proceed to a final vote.
………………………………………

“And what I worry about would be you essentially have still two chambers — the House and the Senate — but you have simply majoritarian absolute power on either side, and that’s just not what the founders intended,” Obama said.
==============================================

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (full article available on-line)

“Reconciliation is a legislative process in the United States Senate intended to allow consideration of a contentious budget bill without the threat of filibuster. …………………………………………..
Under the original design of the Budget Act, reconciliation had a fairly narrow purpose. It was expected to be used together with the second resolution adopted in the fall, and was to apply to a single fiscal year and be directed primarily at spending and revenue legislation acted on between the adoption of the first and second budget resolutions. But Congress has used the procedure to enact far-reaching omnibus budget bills, first in 1981.
The Byrd Rule (described below) was adopted in 1985 and amended in 1990. Its main effect is that reconciliation cannot be used for provisions that would increase the deficit beyond 10 years after the reconciliation measure.

Congress used reconciliation to enact President Bill Clinton’s 1993 (fiscal year 1994) budget. Clinton wanted to use reconciliation to pass his 1993 health care plan, but Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) insisted that the health care plan was out of bounds for a process that is theoretically about budgets.”
…………………………………….
======================================================

According to THE HILL.com on – 02/24/10

Sen. Robert Byrd warned Democratic colleagues against changing filibuster rules in order to advance their legislative priorities.

“I am sympathetic to frustrations about the Senate’s rules, but those frustrations are nothing new,” Byrd wrote. “However, I believe that efforts to change or reinterpret the rules in order to facilitate expeditious action by a simple majority, while popular, are grossly misguided.”

Some liberal Democrats have called for a change in the Senate’s filibuster rules, which require 60 votes to end debate on an issue. In recent years, the mere threat of a filibuster on a matter before the Senate has meant a de facto requirement that most votes in the Senate have to have 60 votes.
…………………………..

VS

The Tenth amendment and Senate rules vs “Some liberal Democrats”

Founding Document
US Constitution, Tenth Amendment:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

US Constitution, Article I, Section 5:
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.

In 1975, the two thirds rule was changed to three fifths.

We the People:

Consider what type of person would participate in a violation of Senate rules in order to vote for something that violates the tenth amendment, and which most Americans oppose.  They call them US Senators from Wisconsin.  More should just call them.