Why can’t the Senate just end the shutdown?

Many casual observers don’t understand why the federal government shutdown is dragging on — now, the longest in history. The answer lies with our Founders’ genius in how our federal government was designed.

The U.S. House of Representatives — often called “the people’s House” — elected directly by popular vote apportioned among the states by population — was designed to directly and quickly represent the voice of the people. That includes the passions of public opinion, which is frequently shifting and quite varied.

The U.S. Senate, on the other hand, was designed to be the more deliberative body. It represents the states, in these United States of America, with each state electing two senators, regardless of population. It also moves slower, much to the consternation of a modern society so used to immediacy (think social media, 10-second sound bites and the fast-paced world we live in).

Frustrating, at times, for those who would like immediate action? Of course. Yet the deliberative, thoughtful, slow movement of the U.S. Senate is also an important cog in the wheels of our federal government.

The filibuster rule requires that the Senate obtain the concurrence of 60 of its 100 members in order to move such a measure forward. Seldom does either party enjoy that large a majority so that usually means compromise across the aisle is needed. Some lament the tradition, which slows things down. The rule has been somewhat diminished since former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) eliminated it for judicial confirmations (exercising what’s often called “the nuclear option”).

Some, including the President, are now encouraging its elimination for this, as well (or are at least flirting with the idea) but many who actually hold the power to make such decisions, including North Dakota Senators John Hoeven and Kevin Cramer, have openly opposed such an idea, noting the benefits of the Senate’s tradition in the nation’s governance.

Legend holds that George Washington likened the Senate to a saucer — in place too cool the passions in the hot tea cup of the House. Perhaps, but the metaphor is helpful in understanding and appreciating the contrasts between the two chambers which make up the U.S. Congress.

They’re different — complimentary at times, juxtaposed at others. 

The government shutdown is a case in point. The House, requiring a simple majority vote, simply passed a bill increasing the congressional spending limit, as had been done numerous times before (see our commentary about the wisdom — or lack thereof — of that practice). 

That’s its function. 

The hand-wringing about the House being out of town while the Senate wrangles is misplaced. Its actions are rooted in its responsibility and role (the House has the “power of the purse” and it had done its job, pertaining to the issue at hand and the function or standstill of the government) and that matter has been in the Senate’s hands since. 

That’s our system.

Because of the filibuster rule, there must (and will) be a meeting of the minds, sometime; somewhere. Many believe that will happen very soon.

Senate Republicans have voted many times to simply pass what the House sent them — a “clean CR (continuing resolution)” which keeps the government open — or, in this case, reopens it — and have hoped that those across the aisle would join them, as has been the congressional tradition. As things have dragged on, the “hope” has turned to urging, which gave way to chiding, which led to attacking.

Senate Democrats, meanwhile, have seized upon the moment to flex what little muscle a minority party has in a Congress controlled by the other. They’ve insisted upon adding policy to spending, in one bill, either because they believe they couldn’t get the policy passed any other way (something Senate Republicans deny, while indicating their willingness to negotiate on the issue, as soon as the bill reopening the government is passed), or to glean media attention with a looming — though comparatively small — election on Nov. 4. That’s given them the opportunity to attempt to attack Republicans for not caring about what their proposal offers or the people it affects.

At this writing, the battle wages on. If predictions are realized, the shutdown will end soon.

In the meantime, Americans are treated to the political theater and the fallout. 

An understanding of and appreciation for the process may help them endure it.