So you think the Senate filibuster is bad for democracy and that all Democrats are working against promoting minority rule as their form of government. Well, think again!
We have all been frustrated by the inability of the Senate to get anything done when it takes 60+ members to pass anything. In California, where it takes a 2/3 vote to appropriate revenue and pass a budget, such a restriction would be welcomed as a vast improvement. While California’s voters blame the legislature for the state’s severe revenue shortage, the state’s budget and revenue system is actually being governed by a 37% Republican minority dedicated to the Grover Norquist goal of shrinking the government until it can be drowned in the bath tub...it’s the Senate problem taken to its ultimate level of democratic absurdity.
In response to this stranglehold on real democracy in California, George Lakoff has proposed an initiative called The California Democracy Act which simply states that "All legislative actions on revenue and budget must be determined by a majority vote," thus eliminating the 2/3 wording in the existing law.
Now, one would think that this is a no-brainer. And polling of the exact language of the initiative showed a 73-to-22 percent margin of approval for this measure. But when the initiative got into the California Democratic Leadership’s hands and was rephrased by the Democratic Attorney General (Jerry Brown) in terms of "increasing taxes," it polled a 56-to38 percent margin against the measure...a 69% swing in support of exactly the same measure worded in two different fashions!
Such a dramatic shift in support due to simple wording changes has provided Lakoff with real scientific proof that Democrats have been bamboozled by the right wing into using conservative frames to measure and promote progressive actions, leaving the Democrats holding the bag every time. Lakoff’s article in Truthout http://www.truthout.org/... is a must see by anyone really interested in understanding the importance of political framing.
I’m not going to spend a lot of time summarizing Lakoff’s article (it should be read to be appreciated) but I will get to the bottom line of his analysis. In California there are about 40-to-45 percent who support the measure and 35-to-40 percent who oppose the measure--no matter how the wording--but there is a critical 18% block of voters who can be easily swayed by the wording of the measure into a pro or con attitude. This is a huge block of voters who are ignored at our peril (think of Massachusetts!). Additionally, it appears that any attempt to move issues to the right in an attempt to appease these voters only promotes the conservative view and assures their opposition! This information is too important to ignore and Lakoff finally has the perfect vehicle to prove it. Let’s hope that the California Democratic Leadership listens!