Mar
10
Byron York echoes yours truly
March 10, 2009 | 2 Comments
I like to quote James Madison from Federalist 63 whenever the subject of government activity comes up. So I have but no choice but to approvingly link to Byron York and his Examiner column from today.
First, the ever-prescient comments from our Nations’ greatest political philosopher:
“There are particular moments in public affairs when the people, stimulated by some irregular passion, or some illicit advantage, or misled by the artful misrepresentations of interested men, may call for measures which they themselves will afterwards be the most ready to lament and condemn. In these critical moments, how salutary will be the interference of some temperate and respectable body of citizens, in order to check the misguided career, and to suspend the blow meditated by the people against themselves, until reason, justice, and truth can regain their authority over the public mind?”
As York notes, Madison was arguing that the Senate would be a salutary check on the impulsive and populist House of Representatives. Of course, that’s before the 17th Amendment screwed things up. Still, as York argues, there is an opportunity for the Senate to heed Madison’s words today.
Now is the time for the salutary interference of temperate and respectable citizens, otherwise known as the 41 Republicans in the United States Senate. It is their job to help the president in areas where there is widespread agreement that he should be helped, and hold the line on everything else.
Of course the economy is in crisis. But if Obama had his way, everything would be treated as if it were a crisis. Health care is a crisis. The environment is a crisis. Education is a crisis. In truth, those other areas are not crises, and the Senate’s job is to delay action on them until Obama’s power to stir popular passions fades. Then, whatever legislation is truly needed on health care, etc., can be undertaken in a more reasoned and measured way.
York notes that the populace will get behind aggressive government action on an issue or two, but is reluctant to get bhind the sort of frenzy that President Obama has initiated. He concludes:
In our current situation, the people elected Barack Obama and large Democratic majorities in Congress. They didn’t elect them to do nothing. When action is needed to deal with the economic crisis — it would be nice to have a financial stabilization plan, Mr. President — they will support it.
But they didn’t elect Obama to change everything, either. With Pelosi eager to go along with the president’s every wish, it’s up to temperate and respectable citizens to distinguish the crisis from the non-crisis, and act accordingly.
In other words, it’s up to the Senate to slow things down. Just like Madison planned.
Indeed.
No TagComments
2 Comments so far
Great article.
I still don’t quite understand why there was such a push for the 17th Amendement, yet the allowance for the Electoral College to remain intact.
There’s an idea for Mr. Steele: push to repeal the 17th; push to repeal the 16th; etc. Push to bring the Nation back in line with what it was founded to be and limit government by making it harder to choose governing a career choice as you note below in one of yesterday’s posts.
There has been and continues to be a push for an elimination of the electoral college. I shudder to think of what would happen if it were eliminated. Sadly, I think there’s a greater chance for the elimination of the EC than for a repeal of the 17th Amendment.