by Andrew Majeske
We learn in James Madison’s Federalist 51 and Alexis de Tocqueville Democracy in America, that a great danger in a democracy like ours is tyranny by the majority over a minority. From comments made on January 18th, Senator Joe Manchin makes clear that his most fundamental concern in protecting the Senate filibuster rules, is protecting minorities against tyranny by the majority.
But what Manchin really is protecting is the ability of Democratic senators to resist the looming Republican majority in the Senate beginning with the start of the 118th Congress, in January 2023.
His concern is legitimate in this respect; the Republicans will likely win back the Senate in the November 2022 election, and Manchin and the remaining Democratic senators will once again be in the 
minority.
But Manchin’s cure may well be worse than the disease. The US Senate was designed from the outset to be a check against tyranny by the majority. By giving equal representation to each state, a minority of the US populace could in theory resist what it considered to be tyrannical legislation favored by a majority. Thus, Wyoming, with a population of about 580,000, is on an equal footing with California, with a population of nearly 40 million; that is, the weight of Wyoming’s proportionate senate representation is nearly 70 times greater than California’s.
From this we can see that the existing Constitutional system adequately takes care of the concerns regarding tyranny by the majority. What is alarming now is the possibility of tyranny by the minority. The Senate filibuster amplifies this already incredibly large proportional power of the less populous states, with potentially disastrous consequences for everyone.
What Manchin refuses to recognize is that the Republican party, as presently constituted, will promptly get rid of the filibuster when they regain control next year. The Republicans will be able to do so because they can be confident of maintaining Senate control going forward due to their ongoing efforts to manipulate voting rights and access in more than 20 states.
Joe Manchin should worry more about the tyranny by the minority we will all face if he, and his fellow senator Kyrsen Sinema, continue their opposition to ending the Senate filibuster rules.
Andrew Majeske is a Davis resident
I doubt this will happen. After all it was Harry Reid, not the GOP, who changed the filibuster rules for judicial nominees.
“In 2013, Reid ended the filibuster — the rule that requires 60 votes to prevent a lone senator from speaking at length to block approval — for executive branch and judicial nominees other than those for the Supreme Court.”
That’s exactly what the Democrats are trying to do now. They know they’re going to lose big in the midterms so they’re trying to “fix” the rules in order to try and stay in power.
Senate Democrats who supported the filibuster now oppose it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANT3JsLjx4A
I see Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema as true American heroes for their persistence in standing up against the backlash from fellow Democrats regarding keeping the filibuster.
Filibuster is dead. This just prolongs it. It’s only a matter of time until a ruling majority pulls the trigger.
You are probably right, but it won’t be the GOP who ends it.
Democrats/progressives/liberals had better beware of what they hope for.
The Reid Rule certainly came back to smack them in their arses.
Reid ended the fillibuster for non-Supreme Court judges but McConnell in 2017 did it for Supreme Court judges. So it’s a game of brinksmanship.
“The Reid Rule certainly came back to smack them in their arses.”
Couldn’t disagree more. (A) from a principle of democracy, 41 people should not be able to block the will of 59. (B) In a democracy you win some, you lose some. Just because I don’t like the results of the 2016 election or you don’t of the 2020 doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have elections. (C) Obama was able to appoint his judges finally, Trump was able to appoint his judges, Biden has been able to appoint his judges – that’s how it SHOULD work.
Reid opened the door.
Actually the door was open a decade earlier. Once the proposal for a nuclear option came forward, I predicted it was only a matter of time. That has proven correct. And again, that’s how it should be. Filibuster is an anti-democratic artifact of the Senate, it should die.
Good point, David… had not picked up on the nuance…
The ‘golden rule’: those who have the gold (or ‘power’), make the rules…
The other good point… neither party nor philosophy (liberal/progressive or conservative) have ‘clean hands’… there are no “innocents”…
I also thought of the main thrust of the article (as I read it)… relates to “tyranny by the minority”… mixed thoughts on that… ‘minorities’ need to seek justice and have their voices heard, but if their version of ‘justice’ is to punish the majorities, thwart them, that does not speak well of them, either… and not good for the concept of democracy, nor a democratic republic…
The WY vs CA representation is telling… the author points out that it is a way of mitigating chances for tyranny of the majority… but, in the Senate, those states that have the disproportionate share of votes in the Senate and therefore in the Electoral College, are tellingly, mostly White, and Conservative (capital C is what I intend), and Republicans who at a 75% level believe that Trump won in a “landslide” in 2020, and that he was robbed’… male uncastrated bovine manure to the 10th power…
Those who support the “filibuster rule” are those that either have the “gold”, or expect to, by Jan 2023.
The author of the article did a good job of pointing out that the filibuster is a ‘two-edged sword’…
My opinion.
So David, with the country so evenly divided if one party has one more vote in the House, one more vote in the Senate and holds the presidency they can institute any law or plan that they so desire. At least now it takes 60 votes in the Senate which also shows that one party actually does have a much larger majority.
This comment was directed at David, not meant to feed any trolls.
Pretty much. That’s how it’s supposed to work.
No, that’s not how it’s supposed to work. The Founders intended for the Senate to be set up to be the “cooling saucer,” where the parties were forced to work together. The 60-vote threshold ensures that in order to pass legislation, the majority party has to get some support from the minority.
Kyrsten Sinema said it very well here why the filibuster needs to remain in place:
As to Arizona, John McCain was the true hero… as for West Virginia, it was only one of the two states who ‘seceded’ from Virginia and was admitted as a state during the ‘Civil War’ [contradiction in terms] (the other was Nevada, but it never was an area in the Confederacy)…
As to voting rights (not filibuster, per se) I have to assume you are more like the group that, during ‘Reconstruction’, opposed voting rights for POC’s and women, using poll taxes, gender, race, as excuses/reasons… and, you have allies who wish to require positive proof for identification (some just want ID to vote, but why not positive proof of residency, fingerprints, and/or DNA) in order to vote… I guess signing your name, telling your address, under the penalty of perjury just isn’t enough for some.
And yes, Trump won in 2020, in a “landslide”… and Georgia has two Democratic Senators, where due to election fraud, results certified by the Republican Secretary of State, they should have had two Republican Senators, who “won in a landslide”…
Look at history… what party has used the filibuster most often? Obviously, the party in the minority… but, which party?
There goes BM again projecting what others think or feel.
So is the “Looming republican majority in the Senate” due to anything Joe Manchin has done?
So, “while Rome burns,” the Democrats, and the author of the original post above, fiddle over rules that might be changed if/when Democrats become the Senate minority in January, 2023.
And instead of acknowledging and correcting, the unsuccessful attempt of Biden and his brutes to bully their excessive, leftward agenda through Congress, the Democrat “leaders” (and the author of the original post above) continue to criticize Joe Manchin (and to a lesser extent Sinema) for being conscientious, clear-thinking Senators, rather than blue sheep.
If Senator Manchin has any aspirations for higher office, he should begin planning for his 2024 presidential campaign now. He certainly has more credibility than Biden, Harris or Hilary.
And once he receives the Democratic nomination, he should choose a prominent Republican woman to be his running mate. Yep, Senator Manchin could be our next president, he and his Republican VP could show that Dems & the GOP can work together at the highest levels of government and finally achieve the unity that Biden falsely promised.
Funny you say that Rick, I’ve said the same thing. Joe Manchin would make one Hell of a president.
You got that right…
As long as his opponent isn’t Sinema… progressive, turned ‘moderate’, turned… , leaning Republican
Brilliant minds? Or just realistic observers? Not just a few here, either. Friends and relatives in Midwest and East, Democrats, Republicans and Independents are praising Manchin & Sinema.
And ALL of them are sick and tired of Biden’s false campaign promises about “unify” and “unite.” Biden’s divisiveness makes Trump look like Winnie the Pooh.