It will remain so as long as it clings to two anachronistic and undemocratic rules: the filibuster and the hold.
Both “privileges” shatter any pretense that America is a democracy. The prating about “the greatest deliberative body in the world” is absurd.
The filibuster Rule 22 requires 60 votes to end debate and allow a vote on bills. Just 41 senators from conservative states can thwart the democratic will of the vast majority of people.
It has happened time and time again on progressive legislation in general and on union measures in particular.
The 60-vote rule killed labor reform bills in 1978 and 1994. A Republican filibuster killed the Employee Free Choice Act in 2007. It will doubtless do so again with EFCA this year.
EFCA would allow workers to organize and bargain collectively if the majority of employees in a unit signs a card approving a union. Such a law would partly ease the disgrace of America having the most repressive labor laws in the industrialized world.
Wal-Mart and McDonalds prohibit their workers from unionizing, flouting international law, decency and morality. And why? Union members average nearly $200 a week in higher pay.
This is a gross injustice. But it is ratified by a pro-corporation Congress, a Congress which is supposed to represent the people.
The virulent anti-unionism of corporations saps much of the time and energy of unions fighting for what should be a human right.
Companies argue ingenuously that card-signing authorization denies the precious right to vote.
No, what card-signing authorization really means is the end of union-busting, the end of hiring by companies of odious union-busting firms, the end of interminable court cases and the end of harassment and threats to workers.
It means that workers cannot be fired for having the “effrontery” to organize unions. It softens the obvious fact that companies have all the power and workers have none.
Mike Elk, writing for the online Truthout, declares that “one in five workers are fired from their jobs in the leadup to an NLRB certification election.”
As for the other archaic Senate rule, the hold, it is woefully undemocratic.
Any one of 100 senators can place a hold on a judicial or executive nomination, sometimes even anonymously. And, yes, Virginia, it takes 60 votes to break the hold.
Sen. Michael Enzi of Wyoming, representing all of 600,000 constituents in a country of 320 million, placed a hold on the nomination of Patricia Smith as Labor Department solicitor.
Her crime? Ms. Smith, as New York state labor commissioner, is prolabor. What a shameful thing! A labor commissioner who fights for the rights of workers.
Even the president of the New York state Business Council, Kenneth Adams, says Ms. Smith has been “thorough, fair and judicious” in enforcing labor laws. Moreover, he notes that Ms. Smith was “open, honest, candid and frequent” in her communications with the Business Council.
Meanwhile, President Obama’s judicial appointments are left in limbo by holds.
Such a one is U.S. District Judge David Hamilton of Indiana whose sin is being a centerist in a right-wing age. He has been labeled “personally obnoxious” to some senators.
Eric Naing wrote in The Nation magazine that Hamilton has been attacked “for a litany of bizarre reasons from his supposed court ruling against Jesus to the month he spent after college going door-to-door for ACORN.”
Lieberman the worst
Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut is the most despicable member of Congress.
Other reactionaries like Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma are cretins. Lieberman is not. But he betrays the voters of his liberal constituency.
He vows he will filibuster any health bill that contains a public option. In other words, he urges not one dime for national health while demanding trillions for foolish wars.
Riches await
“They never go back to Pocatello” is a wise old saying about former members of Congress.
Rather than return to the dreary life of the district or state they come from, many retired politicians prefer the glamour — and power — of Washington where they join distinguished law firms or become wealthy lobbyists.
Making the crass link between mammon and influence is Dick Gephardt, perhaps the biggest political sellout in U.S. history.
Gephardt, a Democrat from Missouri, once held the powerful post of House majority leader. There he championed such progressive measures as universal health care.
Now he fights against everything he once advocated, betraying every principle he once held dear. He has reaped riches while raping the American people.
Jake Highton teaches journalism at the University of Nevada, Reno. You can reach him at jake@unr.edu.
(Did you know that the original 13 colonies still control 32% of the power in the Senate? I will leave this for you to figure out. Let's see if you can.)