As soon as news broke of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s passing, progressives became surprisingly frank about their radical plans for next year. It isn’t often that those on the Left tell us with such clarity their intention to smash our political institutions and reject the Constitution and well-established tradition all at once.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, when asked over the weekend if she was “ruling anything out,” responded, “When we weigh the equities, protecting our democracy requires us to use every arrow in our quiver.”
This is classic Orwellian-speak. Progressives often talk about “protecting our democracy” as they detail their plans to tear apart the fabric of our republic.
Over in the Senate, a similar warning message can be heard. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is reported to have told the Senate Democrat Caucus on a Saturday conference call that “Nothing is off the table for next year.” Nothing?
As we consider what the progressives mean when they say “nothing” is off the table, we should examine exactly what they have placed on the table for consideration.
Court-packing is one such initiative on the table now for progressives. The idea of court-packing is nothing new, of course. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt advanced the concept of court-packing back in the late 1930’s when the Supreme Court had ruled parts of the New Deal legislation unconstitutional. Roosevelt’s scheme was met with bipartisan opposition and widespread outrage – and it is no more popular today than it was when he was pushing for it.
Despite its unpopularity, progressives are openly discussing court-packing, with several prominent Democrat members of Congress voicing their support.
Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts, for one, expressed his support for court-packing in a tweet on Friday. “…[W]e must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court,” he opined.
Besides court-packing, Markey’s tweet also betrays another high-priority initiative for the Left – abolishing the filibuster in the Senate.
The filibuster, a long-observed tool in the Senate, exists to protect minority viewpoints, and is one of the distinguishing features between the House and the Senate. In the House, the minority can rarely change the course that the House Speaker charts, but over in the Senate, the minority has a powerful voice, thanks to the filibuster, which requires that 60 senators vote to stop debate before proceeding to the vote at hand.
The filibuster is not mentioned in the Constitution, but it buttresses many key constitutional concepts, from preserving the distinction between the House and Senate to protecting against mob rule (a big fear our founders shared). No wonder the progressives are so passionate about jettisoning the practice.
Even more alarming than the progressives’ desire to do away with the filibuster is the fervor dedicated to abolishing the Electoral College. The founders wisely included the Electoral College as the mechanism for electing the president to ensure that smaller states’ voices would not be swallowed up by the larger states’ votes.
Another pet project for progressives is making Washington, DC a state. Calls for DC statehood have increased over the past few days since Justice Ginsburg passed away because progressives correctly see DC statehood as a way to change the makeup of the Senate. Adding two permanent Democrat senators would make it increasingly difficult for Republicans to gain a majority in that body.
The Constitution defines Washington, DC as a federal district – significantly, not a state – for the simple reason that our nation’s capital is the seat of the federal government. Placing the federal government within the borders of a state would clearly distort the design for federalism, the delicate balance between the states and the federal government.
In my new book, Capitol of Freedom: Restoring American Greatness, I explore each of these progressive attacks on individual liberty and the Constitution, and explain how we can fight against their arguments surrounding these issues. The simple truth is: Progressives cannot win with their radical and unpopular agenda if they play by the rules. That’s why they are so intent on ripping up the Constitution (our nation’s “rulebook,” so to speak) and why they want to dismantle the vital institutions that bolster individual liberty.
When Progressives say nothing is off the table for consideration, believe them. From their perspective, nothing is off limits from being destroyed or dismantled. And that includes the Constitution.
Ken Buck is a member of Congress from Colorado. He serves on the House Judiciary Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member