Given his steady support of Mitch McConnell, it’s a fair guess that Lamar Alexander truly believes that democrats and the people they claim to represent are not entitled to govern. Or, as Corey Robin puts it: “Submission is their first duty, agency, the prerogative of the elite.”

Senate Democrats had an opportunity to get together and make the Senate a working, majority-rule-based chamber. They could have recently used the “Constitutional Option” at the start of this new Congress to rewrite the Senate rules to either eliminate the filibuster outright or at least make staging a filibuster more difficult. Yet, due to a combination of a greedy refusal to give up any individual power, and a pitiful cowardice about a potential future in which the voters reject them, Senate Democrats collectively chose to throw away this opportunity. By doing nothing, they effectively voted to give Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell total veto power over everything.

I know this is often hard for professional politicians and political aides to comprehend, but regular Americans really don’t pay attention to abstract congressional maneuvers. If the Senate Democratic caucus thinks reforming Senate rules is a good thing that would eventually will lead to better policy outcomes, they should implement them. If they don’t think it will, they shouldn’t make the change. But what definitely shouldn’t be part of their decision making process is any concern that slightly modifying the rule could cause a broad political backlash. There simply won’t be any.

On Wednesday, the newly elected Republican majority took power in the House of Representatives. As part of the changeover, the House Republicans adopted a new set of rules based on the principle of majority rule by a majority vote. This is effectively the same thing each new House has done for decades. Amazingly, there was no media outrage about the Republicans again choosing to govern this legislative chamber on the basis of majority rule.

I fail to see how having a bill winning the support of a majority of members elected to the House, then having the same bill win only a majority votes from the elected members of the Senate, then having it not vetoed by the President and finally having it upheld as constitutional by the courts can be seen by anyone as a legislative steamroller.

There is great concern that the Republicans will take control of the House of Representatives and even possibly the Senate in the 2010 elections. While most prognosticators are predicting huge wins for the Republican Party, their current seat deficit is so great that if they do win back the majority in the House, it will likely be by less than a dozen seats. If Democrats do manage to hold on to the House, it will likely also be with a very narrow majority. While I’ve been told with much hand waving to be very scared about the prospect of Speaker John Boehner, what no one in the Democratic party has legitimately explained to me–or the rest of America–is why we should care. . . be it Republicans or Democrats with narrow control of the House.

Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is saying that the Senate has a majority for a public option–in direct contradiction to claims by President Obama.