(The “nuclear option” weakened the filibuster when applied to some presidential appointments, but not to legislation.) Its history is long and labyrinthian, but, in the form it has assumed over the last 30 years or so, a supermajority of 60 votes is required for passage of any and all legislation. In the Senate, the culprit is the filibuster. But the core problem in getting legislation through the House and the Senate are procedural rules adopted by both bodies over the last century. So too is the plutocratic character of our political culture in what has become, in effect, a second Gilded Age. Gerrymandering and primary election politicking are surely part of the problem.

PHOTO ESSAY: 5 Senate women to watch in 2014 (And ought not be.) Besides - and here I feel an obligation to defend the legacy of the founders - the current gridlock in Congress is not a function of anything in the language of the Constitution. Fifty-five white males gathered in Philadelphia, imposed complete censorship over the deliberations, regarded slavery as the ghost at the banquet (it could not be openly debated), and then had the audacity to send the document to the states under the rhetorical mantle “We, the people.” If our modern values of inclusiveness, transparency and diversity were imposed on the founders, the Constitution would never have happened.īut, seriously, a second Constitutional Convention? It could never succeed, chiefly because the secrecy, elitism and the rest of 1787 reality could never be duplicated in our time. Moreover, canonizing and capitalizing the Founding Fathers is more hagiography than history.įor example, once you understand how the Constitution was created, all rosy myths evaporate. My standard response to all such comments is to warn the audience that making historical comparisons in such a straightforward then-and-now fashion is misguided, and that bringing the founders into the present is like trying to plant cut flowers. As one commentator put it, “Once you compare then and now, you’ve got to believe that Darwin got it exactly backward.” There seems to be an unspoken but widely shared assumption that the most prominent members of the founding generation represent the gold standard in political leadership, and our contemporary politicians are the epitome of debased currency.

When I appear at book festivals or give readings, lots of folks want to know what the Founding Fathers would do or say about our currently dysfunctional Congress.

Founding fathers ellis