Nukes on Hold. The Senate has compromised on the "nuclear option" of ending the right of a minority to filibuster judicial nominations, permitting cutoff of debate for some of President Bush's judicial nominations in exchange for preserving the right to employ the filibuster in other cases (as in the biggest matter, nominations for the Supreme Court).
+
The problem is at least twofold: (1) in a democracy, should the minority ever have the right to block the majority? and (2) should unelected judges have lifetime appointments?
+
As to (1), I'm tempted to say "No. Majority rules." But, despite the best efforts of the Framers of the Constitution to protect minority rights, Congress and other legislatures regularly act to violate even the most basic rights of minorities, and only the courts protect us from dictatorship.
+
If a militant majority packs the courts, there are no protections left to minorities, and we risk total dictatorship by the majority. Republicans think that's just fine, right now, because they are temporarily in the majority. But Democrats have been the majority before and will be the majority again, especially if we bring in more states (e.g., Puerto Rico, Central America, various parts of Canada), since pretty much nowhere else on Earth is as backward as the present-day South. Will Republicans then be so eager to see the majority trample them underfoot? I suspect they will not, but will want the ability to filibuster to prevent being stomped half-dead.
+
As for (2), nobody is happy with the courts of this country, and we need to rework the Constitution as regards courts.
+
(a) All judges should be elected, in partisan contests in which the two major parties are required to name different candidates, as would give voters a real choice.
+
(b) No judge should hold office for life, but only for a limited term, at most 10 or 12 years. 12 years was the term limit that conservatives said they wanted to impose on Congress in Newt Gingrich's "Contract with America" in 1994, but now that that period is almost expired, some are backtracking.
+
Still, 12 years might be an appropriate term limit for Supreme Court judges. Lesser judges might have shorter terms, which would provide another layer of protection to our liberties, in giving lesser courts and the Supreme Court different perspectives. District courts might have 8-year terms, with 1/4 being elected each two years. Circuit Courts of Appeals could have 10-year terms, with 1/5 being elected each two years.
+
(c) Any decision of any court should be overrideable by a supermajority of the legislature, acting with or without the executive, be it a state legislature and governor, or Congress and the President acting by 2/3 vote or the state legislature or Congress acting alone, without the governor's or President's assent, by 3/4 vote. The courts are the only organ of government that cannot presently be overruled, a very serious hole in our system of "checks and balances" that must be filled.
+
Until such corrections to the court system are made to the Constitution, however, it is incumbent upon Congress to exercise caution and show good faith and respect to the minority, whichever minority that might be.
+
I seem to recall that a very large proportion of the people who now dominate Congress are from states that were once a minority that felt so threatened that they attempted to secede from the Union, and which started an open war against the Federal Government. The majority did not consent to have traitors defy the laws and make war against the Nation, but retaliated and held the Union together thru massive force, dealing a crushing blow to large portions of the very region that today, if temporarily, dominates Congress.
+
Now, oddly, many of the same states that tried to secede in the 1860s seem adamant on forcing different states to contemplate secession.
+
Let's make them rethink their position.
+
I propose that progressive forces in Congress create a "mock Congress" of the "Blue States of America", to meet "in exile" in Washington but outside the Capitol or outside Washington altogether, say, in my city, Newark, New Jersey. In that mock legislature, the Representatives and Senators of the Blue States would propose, debate, and pass long-delayed, desperately needed legislation to provide universal healthcare, outlaw usury, restore humane bankruptcy protection, protect the environment, and on and on across the progressive agenda. Media covering these sessions could show the public what this country might look like if progressives were in charge.
+
The mock Congress could also issue publications to outline the resources left to the rump-United States if the Blue States of America actually seceded, or even just coordinated a tax boycott. Could the South and Midwestern Bible Belt keep this country running on their own money? or are they able to pursue their extravagant politics only because Blue States keep pouring money into parasitical Red States?
+
What if the Democrats and other progressives just left town one day and didn't come back? Would the rightwing Republicans be able to raise a quorum (50% plus one) and conduct business as tho they were the whole Congress? If so, the Democrats could disown everything the Republicans do as not the Nation's will, and urge defiance at every level, from withholding tax payments to withdrawing state militias (the National Guard) from the federal military structure, to outrite secession.
+
The Constitution says that less than a majority of each House could "compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide" (Article I, Section 5). But what if all the progressives left the country for, say, a mock Congress in Toronto? How are the Republican rightwingers still in Washington going to compel attendance of people outside U.S. jurisdiction? And if they expel all absent members as one of the "Penalties as each House may provide", surely they risk an actual secessionary movement.
+
Moreover, what if the "Government-in-Exile, Blue States of America", in Toronto, starts discussing actual secession and merger with Canada into a new country, say, the "United States of Canada"? There has been talk to this effect on the Internet. See, e.g., from the Blue side: http://www.democraticwings.com/democraticwings/archives/politics/001171.php and http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/archive/index.php/t-3599.html. From the Red side: http://www.bestwriters.com/good/ and http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=5652. There's even a map: http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/04/11/images/04new_map.jpg.
+
But there's been no discussion of how this would all start. A Mock Congress and withdrawal for a time of Democrats and other progressives from Congress could shake people up and make them realize that without the Blue States, the U.S. would be a backward, poverty-ridden hellhole scarcely better than the Third World.
+
Nothing else seems able to stop the extremist talk and behavior of neo-Confederates in Washington and Southern state legislatures. Let's out-Confederate them and start talking Northern secession, so they might appreciate how dangerous the disaffection in the Blue States is.
+
If the Democrats can't do anything to stop the rightwing juggernaut, why should they continue to sit in Congress and share the blame?
+
If you can't stop their program, don't share the room. Get out, so the Nation can see that the Republicans are solely responsible for everything. If they do a good job, they should be happy to take all the credit. If, however, the Nation goes into profound division, disruption, depression, etc., as unwise and unfair laws take effect, the Democrats will be able to say "We had nothing to do with it. This is what you get for electing Republicans. If you're not happy with the results, vote Democratic next time."
+
The Bible Belt thinks itself all-powerful and entitled by God to crush all opposition. The Republican Right thinks the liberal/progressive forces in this country are too weak and gutless to do a thing about it. Maybe if the Democrats and independent or moderate Republicans leave town for a month of debates in Newark or Toronto, the remnants of the national government will understand how dangerous the path they have set us upon really is.
+
(I have wanted to talk about the relative cost of American and British elections for several days now, but more urgent matters keep arising. In due course.)
+
(The current U.S. military death toll in Iraq, according to the website "Iraq Coalition Casualties", is 1,645.)
- posted by L. Craig Schoonmaker @ 5:37 PM