The “Another View” editorial, “Mend the filibuster, don’t scrap it,” (April 3), by the Bloomberg Opinion editorial board seems to me to be another conservative viewpoint that seeks to continue a status quo that the majority of the public – as seen in numerous polls on the issues – is not interested in maintaining, but that the two major parties are all too happy to retain.
The first paragraph words “strenuously opposed by Republican lawmakers” tells all about partisanship. The opinion makes no mention of the nascent role of the filibuster in the protection of slavery in the mid-19th century and future continuation of anti-civil rights legislation.
The article fails to mention that President Trump’s big tax cut of 2017 was also passed with an up or down vote, strenuously opposed by Democrats. The opinion gets one thing right: The filibuster is anti-democratic. The opinion may imply that the Senate should impose “deeper deliberation,” but it doesn’t because of deep partisanship and election of lawmakers who follow their party leaders’ platforms. The opinion leaves out that the Senate is already set up to give the minority a voice in deliberations through having two senators for each state. That means a Republican stronghold state like Wyoming, with a minuscule population, has the same representation in the Senate as California, the most populous state.
Republican representation in the Senate, by population, is significantly less than Democratic representation although the number of senators is currently the same. Scrap it, don’t tweak it.
Stuart Rose
North Yarmouth
Send questions/comments to the editors.
