The Greatest Disappointment
Greg Ordy, June 1999
From time to time, I try to figure out which institution of government has disappointed me the most. Since there are so many disappointments, it's hard to pick. The U.S. Supreme Court always disappoints me when they stray from the black and white words of the U.S. Constitution and invent something that isn't there, or remove something that is. I am certainly disappointed by the current occupant of the White House (1993-2000). But over the years, there really is no competition. The U.S Senate is the greatest disappointment.
The U.S. Senate was not designed to represent the people. If so, the large states are getting a raw deal. That's because there are two Senators per State, regardless of the number of citizens in the State. Little Rhode Island has the same representation as large California. Hardly seems fair.
The answer is that the U.S. Senate represents the States. In fact, until the Seventeenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, ratified on April 8th, 1913, the U.S. Senators were chosen by the individual State Legislatures (not the popular vote, as done today). Although we changed the method of selecting Senators, we did not change their purpose. The House of Representatives, with all districts equal in population, represents the people. The Senate represents the States.
What does it mean to represent the States? What do the States want? A simple answer is their rights. For me, the U.S. Senate should be the guardians of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. That Amendment reads:
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.
Here's the bottom line. Let's say a piece of federal legislation comes along that is a fine and wonderful idea. Two chickens in every pot. Just hard to argue with. The solution, however, proposes a federal program. But the nature of the program has no aspect which requires federal involvement. What do the Senators do? I would hope that the answer would be a 100 - 0 vote against the program. This does not mean that the Senate is against the program - just against the federal program. Let the States adopt the program, each with details and choices to fit the character of the individual State.
Here are just a few of the many areas that I would take away from the federal government on the grounds that they unconstitutionally violate the Tenth Amendment. Education, crime (other than treason and Interstate crime), health care, abortion, and welfare programs.
To make matters worse, the U.S. Senate has been populated by some of the most liberal politicians in the country. They simply lack the restraint to protect their State - they are working directly for the People. In some cases, they even appear to believe that the supposed more statesman-like aura of the Senate gives them a license to worry about all of the people in the country, not just the ones in their state. This is misguided. Their constituency is their State, as an institution.
Copyright (c) 1999, Greg Ordy
Last update: Monday, April 29, 2002 07:39 PM
Back to my Home Page