The House leadership battle was democracy in action
Victor Schwartz
Video Embed
“Democracy” has, unfortunately, become a political buzzword. However, as many readers know, the United States is not a democracy but a republic. Obviously, if we were a democracy, we would not have a Senate in which each state, no matter how small, has two senators.
Indeed, the Founding Fathers were somewhat skeptical of democracy as a potential threat to the rights of people and political minorities. As James Madison put it in Federalist 55, “had every Athenian citizen been a Socrates, every Athenian assembly would still have been a mob.”
HOUSE GOP’S VOTE AGAINST IRS WAS WISE, BUT STILL NOT SUFFICIENT
The closest thing to democracy in the Constitution is the House of Representatives. While criticized by many, scorned by others, and made fun of on nighttime television, the Republican battle over House leadership was a display of democracy in action.
Democracy is both treasured and respected by many people, but as shown in the 15-round vote for a House speaker, democracy can be messy at times.
As Winston Churchill observed, “it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government, except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” Apart from the obvious imperfections in the House’s 15-round battle for leadership (the same number of rounds as a championship fight), it was not, as some media have reported, solely over right-wing ideology or for that handful of members seeking personal positions of power on House committees but over procedural changes in how the House is run that fostered democracy. For example, there will now be more single-subject bills on key issues instead of pork-filled telephone-book-length bills.
It is also a no-brainer to allow House members 72 hours to actually read bills before they are voted upon. This is democracy — providing time for the public to understand legislation before it passes. It’s not so crazy — it is democratic, even — to imagine a House where decisions are made on the House floor, in public, instead of in smoke-filled backrooms.
Further, much of the package of procedural reforms will serve as a launch pad for the Republican leadership to challenge anti-democratic executive orders, which have been used by both Republican and Democratic presidents to circumvent the legitimate function of the legislative branch of government.
In sum, the extensive debate over the speakership had its thorns, but there were democratic roses among that long-winded bunch.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Victor Schwartz is a practicing lawyer and former law dean and professor of law.