Dear Mr. Johnson,
Thank you for your recent press release in which you called on Senate Democrats to cease blocking a bill you favor. In the press release your organization, the national right to life committee said:
In the Senate, a parental notification bill (S. 8/S. 403), sponsored by Sen. John Ensign (R-Nv.), has 38 sponsors (37 of them Republicans). This bill has been listed among the "top ten" priorities by the Senate Republican leadership, but the Senate Democratic Leadership has erected procedural obstacles that have prevented its early consideration.
"It is outrageous that the Senate Democratic caucus has thrown up procedural obstacles to block parental notification legislation, despite numerous polls showing 75 percent or more of the public supports requiring parental notification,” commented NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson.
Doug, allow me to introduce you to the workings of the American political system. Although several authors have written on this subject, I especially liked the summary composed by the family research council's senior writer seven years ago when his organization, and I assume yours, were opposing President Clinton's nominees and initiatives. The Family Research Council's senior writer, Steven Schwalm, appeared on National Public Radio at the time and explained the value, even the necessity, of the filibuster.
"The Senate," he said, "is not a majoritarian institution, like the House of Representatives is. It is a deliberative body, and it's got a number of checks and balances built into our government. The filibuster is one of those checks in which a majority cannot just sheerly force its will, even if they have a majority of votes in some cases. That's why there are things like filibusters, and other things that give minorities in the Senate some power to slow things up, to hold things up, and let things be aired properly."
So, there you have it.
Thank you for playing.
Jay B. Bulworth