The Senate

Like Mr. Graham, I too found the analysis of the US Senate to be the most interesting article, and I also concede that it effectively "restricts expression," thereby giving us an institutionalized majority will. However, I am reminded of an episode of the West Wing where President Bartlett is asked whether he wants to adopt a new and probably more accurate standard of determining poverty. In response the fictional president asks, "Does it give us more poor people?" Upon hearing an affirmative answer he wisely decides to keep to the old standard.

Prof. King's "postmodern" postulate there is no majority will outside our institutional methods of determining it is quite true, but this highly legalistic statement does not take away from Rosenfeld's argument. Certainly, as Prof. King pointed out property qualifications or disenfranchising certain racial categories would also meet this standard. While the true majority, if it exists at all, cannot be reliably expressed under any system, best approximating it is still an imperative. The Senate's continued reliance on the juridical equality of the states is outmoded as the historical bases for the current structure have evaporated. Since, it ignores the "one man, one vote" rule it can never account for changing populations and demographics. Nothing speaks louder to this point than the fact that the smallest states control a majority of the seats in the Senate. It's no surprise then that the Senate is such a slow, deliberative body. Cloture rules aside, it's quite possible, as Rosenfeld points out, for a minority view to prevail over the majority in terms of sheer numbers. This is the most frustrating part of the American system. It's in large measure why President Reagan was never able to create the spending reductions he wanted and that were part of the agenda he was elected to achieve, and why American liberal administrations have had to fight laboriously over decades for a greater role for government.

Onerous restrictions on expression of preferences creates the situation Prof. King left us with in class on Wednesday where it seems like poor "Player Three" is never going to get his or her way. While the Senate does not create a scenario as extreme as the aforementioned hypothetical it does create huge frustrations with the pace of government. It should come as no surprise that the two major presidential candidates say they can "take on the special interests" or "bring change to Washington." The lack of progress drives Americans to desire some "post-partisan" or apolitical governmental process. Restrictions on expression do not always produce a more efficient or positive process.