Eliminate the Senate? Constitutional Folly

To see a list of all commentaries, click the above picture.

SCOTUS: Revisiting Birthright Citizenship

Democratic Socialism: The Agenda

Dr. Fauci: A Taste of Totalitarianism?

Packing the Court - A Political Pipe Dream

Congressional Design

The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) have an aggressive agenda. In a nutshell, the goal is to undo the United States of America. That is not an overstatement by any stretch. The group speaks openly about eliminating the U.S. Senate. In fact, the Senate is a primary target for the DSA as they believe it does not fairly represent the U.S. population. According to the DSA, having two Senators from each state represent their constituents in the nation’s capital gives an unfair advantage to states with much smaller populations.

The Senate is established in Article I, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. While the House of Representatives, designed in Article I, Section 2, provides for population-based representation, it is important to recognize that the United States is not a union of people, but of states. It is important to remember that the U.S. Constitution was ratified, not by a popular vote of the people, but by the elected representatives of the states, and there is a reason for this. While the United States was founded on democratic principles, it was not formed as a democracy. Rather, the U.S. is a representative republic.

The founding fathers saw wisdom in a dual system of representation for the citizenry, and individual states are a critical part of that structure. The idea was that states should be self-governing and the federal government should serve as a facilitator, providing a harmonic social setting that would serve to keep that nation united. While it could be argued that the federal government has, at times, intruded upon states’ self-governance, certainly the strategy behind the development of a dual legislative body was grounded in the states’ independence. The idea was that if a bill was passed by both congressional chambers, it could be recognized as having been passed by both the representatives of the populace in general as well as the representatives of the states.

Political Oblivion

Some may wonder why the DSA would seek to eliminate the Senate, but the reasoning is easy enough to understand. Members of the DSA wish to unravel the current political structure of the nation, and that begins with undoing the independence of the individual states. According to the DSA, the nation and the people would be better served if primary decision-making rested in the federal government. Under the DSA, the role of state governments would be quite limited and, since the distinct role of the Senate is to represent the states, it would serve little purpose under a regime of Democratic Socialists. DSA co-chair Ashik Siddique was recently quoted as saying:

The Senate represents its two senators per state, and it’s very undemocratic at a basic level because a state with a small population gets the same representation as a state with 40 million people, like California, New York, Texas, or Florida. We believe government should be proportional to the population. The House of Representatives is more democratic in that way, and we just don’t see the point of the Senate.

This statement by Ashik Siddique demonstrates a serious lack of political acuity. The Senate was designed specifically to offset the lack of states’ representation in the House of Representatives by providing equal state representation in the Senate. Without that offset, states with smaller populations would have no input into the running of the country and would be swallowed up by states with larger populations. Still, Siddique’s argument makes sense if the plan is to simply eliminate the idea of individual states, which is exactly what would happen without a Senate to balance the populace representation in the House of Representatives.

A Matter of Delusion

It seems that the goal of eliminating the Senate and re-structuring the federal government is more a pipe dream than a serious proposal. Any attempt to remove the Senate would face considerable constitutional hurdles. First, it would require revoking Article I, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. Article V establishes the procedures by which the U.S. Constitution may be amended, and the method is onerous. An amendment would need to be approved by two-thirds of both chambers of Congress and ratified by thirty-eight states. In the current political climate, it is difficult to imagine two-thirds of either legislative chamber agreeing on anything beyond going home for a vacation. If it would not be possible to reach agreement in Congress, imagine the challenge of persuading thirty-eight states to ratify an amendment to abolish the Senate. This is particularly true of states with smaller populations who would lose any serious representation in Washington were they to agree.

Since it would not be possible to remove the Senate through the amendment process, it seems the only options for the DSA would be to 1) gain sufficient support in Washington to eliminate the Senate via some kind of decree or 2) remove the Senate and revoke the Constitution via force (military or otherwise). Unfortunately for the DSA, even some staunch supporters of the movement see this proposal as a non-starter. Here are some quotes from Democrat politicians, some of whom have supported much of the agenda of the DSA.

Granted, the fact that these three respondents currently serve as senators could influence their perspective, but it may also be argued that they recognize the absurdity of the proposal. The DSA, it can be said unequivocally, has introduced some outlandish socialist schemes for the future of the United States. However, given the constitutional challenges involved in accomplishing those goals and the lack of backing from Democrat elected officials, it seems the Senate will be around at least for a while.

Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, who is not necessarily a supporter of the DSA, but is a Democrat, stated, “It’s in the Constitution, and it is a critical component of the United States government to pass legislation with the House. In my view, that is not a serious recommendation.”

Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts responded, “I don’t even know what they mean by that. I don’t have any idea…”

When asked about the possibility of abolishing the Senate, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who is a supporter of the DSA and, it could be argued, the primary voice providing energy for the movement over the past decade, answered with a simple, “No!”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------If you enjoyed this article, please encourage your friends to visit us here at constitutionmatters.net where the Constitution really does matter. Also, if you appreciate the articles and insights provided here, feel free to contribute to the cause by clicking below.

This book will truly enhance your understanding of the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution. Click the button below to check it out.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Feel free to visit restoretheword.com

Contact

Questions? Reach out anytime.

Email:

contact@constitutionmatters.net

© 2025. All rights reserved.