On the recordApril 15, 1996
Let me interrupt the gentleman on this point as well, because I think it really bears looking at some concrete examples. As the gentleman has pointed out, a piece of legislation could pass the House, the body that directly represents people in this country, by an overwhelming majority, unlikely in the case of a tax bill because they are so difficult to pass, but let us say for the sake of example, and then be held hostage by 34 Senators even though 66 Senators might also agree that it is in the national interest. Or in a close case in the House, 146 of our colleagues here could stand in the way of the will expressed by 289 of our colleagues in the House, the one-third plus one that the gentleman points out. Now is that really the kind of dramatic shift away from the fundamental principle of free government that Madison wrote about so persuasively over 200 years ago that is in the national interest? I fail to see the point.
Source
govinfo.gov
