When President James Buchanan declared that the United States Senate is the “world’s greatest deliberative body,” he clearly had not envisioned Sen. Cory Booker (D., N.J.). In yet another tirade on the floor, Sen. Booker attacked not just President Donald Trump but his Democratic colleagues for voting for a bipartisan bill on law enforcement. Behind the “I am Spartacus” theatrics is a more troubling trend in the United States Senate as it devolves into a more populist, impulsive institution.
In 1872, Moncure Daniel Conway published an account of a meeting between Thomas Jefferson and George Washington. Jefferson questioned Washington’s support for the creation of a second or upper house in the form of the Senate. Washington asked:
“Why…did you just now pour that coffee into your saucer, before drinking?”
“To cool it,” answered Jefferson, “my throat is not made of brass.”
“Even so,” rejoined Washington, “we pour our legislation into the senatorial saucer to cool it.”
These days, it seems like legislation goes to the Senate to heat up. The Senate is losing its constitutional and cultural moorings as the cooling saucer for our heated politics. Instead, it is becoming more like . . . well . . . the house.
The role of the Senate is key to the Madisonian design in forcing compromise and deliberation. Senators were given longer, six-year terms to insulate them from the immediate political demands that often motivate the House.
That has changed with the 24-hour media-saturated political environment. It has changed in this age of rage. Cue Corey Booker:
Putting the claims of “secret police” and, once again, the imminent collapse of democracy, Booker was immediately set upon by his colleagues after he moved to block the bipartisan bill by fellow Democratic Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto (Nev.) and Amy Klobuchar (Minn.).
Klobuchar effectively accused Booker of grandstanding and hypocrisy:
“I will note that Sen. Booker objected to my police reauthorization bill, the cops funding, the Clinton cops funding, long before Donald Trump came into office. So this is not just about this. This is a long dispute over this type of funding.”
She also snapped back at Booker saying that he could not make a key hearing on the drafting of the bill because of a conflict, noting “I can’t help it if someone couldn’t change their schedule to be there.”
Cortez Masto struck back at the notion that Democrats should simply refuse to cooperate with the Administration or that working with Republicans is what Booker calls “complicity.”
Booker is clearly manuvering for a possible presidential run and seeking to tap into the rage growing on the far left. He is also the inevitable result of the rising rhetoric of figures like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer in pandering to the far left of his party. Democratic senators are now being denounced as “establishment” as Booker and others tack to the left to lead “the resistance.”
Booker just raised the anger ante for Democrats. They must either join the resistance and the rage or face the ire of their party. In the interim, the constitutional system will suffer. We need the House of Representatives as the “people’s house.” We do not need two Houses of Representatives. The Senate ideally moderates, not magnifies, the pressures and passions in the political system.
Booker’s tirades clearly resonates with some on the far left, but it is likely to come at a cost for the institution itself. As tensions build on the Democratic side, Teddy Roosevelt’s quip seems to be coming true in voting for bipartisan legisation: “When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer ‘Present’ or ‘Not guilty.””
Cory Booker might want to think over this notion: “The emptiest box cars make the most noise!”
Note how often he looks [and hold ] his eyelock on the camera… I get mugging for the camera, but this borders on comical.
While I don’t care for Amy Klobuchar, she did reject his rant, which was good.
Is his being gay helping drive his lame theatrics?
Not sure, but OBVIOUSLY he should never be allowed to posess a lethal weapon!
It seems to me that the fundamental problem is that the Democrats simply can’t accept that the electorate has rejected their policies.
poster boy for Men’s Warehouse.
looks like a pretty nice suit as far as the material (a lightweight wool) and the fit of the suit above the bottoned button. (it’s far better than men’s wearhouse fare). the problem is his body’s shape. when his non bottom button is buttoned (as is seen in the foto), the remainder of the front of his suit below that button does not drape into a closed position but gapes open. either his tailor needs to open up the back of the suit (perhaps just the bottom 18-22 inches so his suit will close properly; or he needs to lose about 20 pounds (a difficult assignment).
But he did not get this suit at men’s wearhouse.
I’d add that we all know now who gets DJT’s old ties. I thought Booker was going to trip over it at one point.
Booker is a deeply embarrassing clown.
The key element in Madison’s Constitutional design for the Senate was that Senators were appointed by state legislatures. That made them responsive to the needs of their state, as the state legislature also could recall them if they failed to represent the state adequately.
In retrospect, the 17th Amendment has had some very unfortunate consequences, especially in today’s money-driven political landscape. it is not uncommon for a candidate for Senate actually raises more money from out-of-state donors than from in-state donors.
Who does that Senator actually represent??
The Senate should pass a motion requiring that C-Span or any other cameras filming pan a 360 every five minutes to show who’s in the Chamber.
Will Rogers quipped that “whenever Congress makes a joke, it’s a law and whenever Congress makes a law it’s a joke”. Mark twain said that “American has no distinct criminal class, save Congress”. There is more truth to these observations than we should like and they become more obviously true with time. The questions are, is this reversible and, if so, how?
I regard the current dysfunction of the Senate as the (near) ultimate conclusion to the structural change to Congress begun by the ratification of the 17th Amendment, which instituted the popular election of Senators. That Amendment, in turn, culminated the wrecking of the balance between Federal and State power as envisioned by Hamilton, Madison, and the other Federalists that was begun by Lincoln.
The 17th Amendment destroyed the Senate.
Yes it did. At least its purpose for existence. It now functions as an over-entitled “House.” We now have a 535 member unicameral Legislative branch that has 100 representatives with 6 year terms.
“The 17th Amendment destroyed the Senate.”
How would state appointment yield senators who are more deliberative and constitution driven?
In New Jersey, you’d still get a Booker; in NY, a Schumer; in CA, a Harris; in VT, a Sanders.
Agree they’d be Democrats, not that they’d be those Democrats.
Doesn’t the Bookster know his job is to be a saucer where hot liquids cool.
So we have the “The Angry Black Dude” running around shouting and giving dirty looks. Fine.
Was this Spartacus torn from his homeland? Nope.
Was he forced into slavery? Nope.
Was he forced into the arena? Nope.
Did he lead a slave rebellion? Nope.
What rhymes with “Nope”? Yup.
“Dope”.
Chill off before you have an actual, modern, heart attack.
“Booker’s tirades . . .” (JT)
“[T]he senatorial trust; which, requiring greater extent of information and *stability of character*, requires, at the same time, that the senator should have reached a period of life most likely to supply these advantages . . .” (Madison, Federalist Papers, 62. Emphasis added)
Throwing fits like a spoiled brat is not what Madison meant by “stability of character.”
Sam, the 17th amendment effectively dissolved the arguments being made by Madison for the character of the Senate in a bicameral system. It’s taken awhile but the Senate has now become a body with the character of the House, but with 6 year terms.
We do not need two Houses of Representatives. The Senate ideally moderates, not magnifies, the pressures and passions in the political system.
This is Civics 101 level stuff. The reason government exists in the first place is to secure the rights of the people…period. Next, the reason that there is a bicameral Legislative branch is to represent the interests and those rights of two different constituencies: 1. The House is for the people. 2. The Senate is for the State.
Of course Senators like Booker take to performative outbursts, they are trying to appeal to a statewide constituency of people that have a narrow set of self-centered interests.
Repealing the 17th Amendment would force candidates for the Senate to appeal to a narrow group of state legislatures that have a broad set of statewide interests.
This is not that difficult.
It is not necessary to repeal 17A. Simply neuter it as Frank Nicely proposed.