Skip to main content

Congress Deadlock and McConnell

Congress found itself once again in gridlock this summer. A number of election security bills were passed by the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives only to die before reaching the floor of the Senate. The Constitution was specifically designed to prevent fast change according to the whims of the majority, with the Senate acting as the ‘cooling saucer’ to counteract the hot-headed House of Representatives. The separation of powers and numerous checks and balances outlined in the Constitution by the framers do command institutional paralysis.[1]However, the system is now proving inefficient. The paralysis of the Senate has affected the entire US government for years causing gridlock and a lack of political progress.

Despite numerous testimonies from current and former government officials claiming that Russian interference was prevalent in the 2016 elections, comprehensive election security bills have failed in the Senate. For example, FBI Director Christopher Wray testified that foreign targeting of election infrastructure to ‘obtain personal information, disrupt elections and undermine voter confidence’ is also expected in next year’s election.[2]

Still, Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell has blocked comprehensive election security bills from receiving any vote in the Senate. The bills included the Deter Act, The Voting System Cybersecurity Act and the Honest Ads Act. One of the bills would require voting machines to produce a paper back-up ballot to protect against foreign interference in election results.[3]McConnell blocked the advancement of the legislation only hours after former special counsel Robert Mueller also voiced his belief that the Russians are actively attempting to interfere in the 2020 election.

The actions by McConnell has led to him being dubbed ‘Moscow Mitch’ by Democrats. 
One of the strongest critiques has come from Hillary Clinton who spoke out against the Senate Majority Leader. Clinton accused McConnell and the President of ‘abdicating their responsibility’ and threatening the democratic integrity of the United States political system.[4]
Critics argue that McConnell’s blocking of the legislation more serves the purpose of preventing the Russian hacking claims from gaining legitimacy. If Congress were to pass legislation to protect against foreign interference, the Russians’ alleged involvement in President Trump’s election victory would again gain attention. More crucially legislation could imply validity to the claims. McConnell has denounced critics claiming that further federal interference in election standards would infringe upon state rights. He additionally claimed that the bills were too partisan, insisting that the administration has already acted to secure national elections. 

So, for a number of reasons, Mitch McConnell is acting as a ‘one-man roadblock’ to the numerous election security bills. By blocking a vote in the Senate, the legislation is not passing through the proper process as outlined in the Constitution. McConnell’s blockage of the election security bills demonstrates how a tiny minority can hold significant and hugely disproportional influence in Congress. 

This is already entrenched in the make-up of the Senate chamber, where citizens of smaller states have disproportional influence over federal legislation. The founding father’s decision to preserve state power in the Senate chamber already raises a number of democratic questions from critiques.[5]The hugely disproportional influence of smaller states is not fully democratic. It seems unlikely that the founding fathers intended one individual to have such power in either of the chambers.  that they can prevent a vote from even taking place on legislation already passed by the other chamber. Party floor leadership evolved out of necessity in the Senate, but is arguably being abused to alter legislation single-handedly by McConnell. In this case of election security bills, Mitch McConnell is using powers not specified in the Constitution in his role of majority leader of the Senate. 

Some, such as Mark Levin, argue that the Constitution has been violated in a number of ways and has been diverted from the founder’s original intentions.[6]The rules of the Senate are arguably causing most of deadlock in Congress. Famously, the filibuster has killed many bills and means that sixty votes are often required. This has allowed even comprehensive, sensible bills from being stuck in gridlock in Congress, and prevents the Senate from performing its function. The chamber rules are causing paralysis in Congress and increasingly preventing the full democratic process from playing out. Whilst the constitution was designed to protect the minority faction, Congress seems to be controlled by the tyranny of the minority.[7]This increasingly seems to be negatively affecting the common good, as common-sense legislation is killed without sufficient debate. Continued paralysis will continue to call into question Congress’ effectiveness and a change to the rules of the chambers may become more likely. 

[1]Jeffery Toobin, ‘Our Broken Constitution’, The New Yorker, online at: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/12/09/our-broken-constitution, (Dec 2013)
[2]Chris Gagin, ‘Mitch McConnell must get the Senate to secure our elections’, The Hill, online at: https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/460273-mitch-mcconnell-must-get-the-senate-to-secure-our-elections  (Sept 2019)
[3]Kathryn Watson, ‘Mitch McConnell blocks election security legislation’, CBS News, online at: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mitch-mcconnell-blocks-election-security-bill/, (July 2019)
[4]John Wagner,‘Hillary Clinton accuses Trump, McConnell of ‘abdicating their responsibility’ on election security’,The Washington Post, online at: https://www.washingtonpost.com, (Sept 2019)
[5]Jeffery Toobin, ‘Our Broken Constitution’, The New Yorker, online at: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/12/09/our-broken-constitution , (Dec 2013)
[6]Ibid

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gun Control in Colorado

Due to the prevalence of mass shootings in the United States, many states have adapted gun legislation to target the issue. Colorado is no exception. The House Bill 1177 or more commonly known as “the red flag bill” was passed this previous legislative session (Aguilar). The bill allows the court to seize firearms from individuals who are deemed a threat to themselves or to others (Aguilar). This considerable gun legislation is significant for Democrats who have advocated for gun control for years. More importantly, the passing of this bill may once again demonstrate which party has been gaining momentum in Colorado these past few years. Colorado’s legislature has generally sided to the left in recent times (Strayer 141). This is a significant shift from the more Republican leaning legislature that Colorado was previously used to (Strayer 141). Furthermore, Colorado’s House Bill 1177 is in no way addressing the issue in a very unique way. Figure 1 below demonstrates nationwide...
6 comments
Read more

Insulin cap in Colorado

In the United States, the topic of medication prices has increased substantially, specifically insulin. Insulin is a medication used to treat type one Diabetes which typically costs a thousand dollars or more depending on how much you need, and how much your insurance is willing to pay. Colorado changed this with a bill designed to put a cap on the copay for insulin. The bill HB19-1216 was signed into law by Governor Jared Polis in May of 2019. This bill states that “a carrier that provides coverage for prescription insulin drugs pursuant to the terms of a health coverage plan the carrier offers shall cap the total amount that a covered person is required to pay for a covered prescription insulin drug at an amount not to exceed one hundred dollars per thirty-day supply of insulin, regardless of the amount of type of insulin needed to fill the covered person’s prescription.” This bill will go into effect on January 1st, 2020 and will be overseen by the department of law who will investi...
7 comments
Read more

TABOR and Colorado Politics Post-CC

       One of the more contentious topics within Colorado politics is budgeting and funding for projects, education, and revenue intake. This came to a head in this year's election with Proposition CC. Despite failing at the ballot box, the Democratic Party is pushing ahead with the 2020 legislative agenda that includes drafts to eliminate the Tax Payer's Bill of Rights or amend it to ensure more accessible revenue for the party's policy objectives. What is critical to the debate is the increasing partisan divide within Colorado, the historical shift from Republican control to Democrat trifectas in state government, and the institutional mechanisms that have hampered strategy for the dominant party. Also, in the mix are interest groups that influence local politics which can help uncover party strategy from another perspective.        The Colorado Fiscal Institute (CFI) a left-leaning think tank, is a key player in this battle, authoring s everal...
6 comments
Read more