Abolishing the right to filibuster as the author proposes would truly make our democracy "two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner".<p>Sorry Mr. Nutting, but there's no "tyranny of the minority"...<p>Tyranny: "A government in which a single ruler (a tyrant) has absolute power"<p>The minority can't enforce their wishes on anyone directly - they simply have the power, if they are a highly significant minority, to stop certain wishes of the majority being forced upon them ("tyranny" of the majority). Minorities having some power to block actions of the majority is a great check on government power, and we're fortunate to have it.
I'm sorry, this is a bit dumb. The senate was not founded because "we cannot trust the people" but because in the senate EACH STATE has equal power, regardless of size, while in the congress each state has power proportinal to the population. This ensures that small states with 0.2% of the population are not entirely ignored in all politial matters because they might literally have the ability to break ties, no more. It might wind up being that ruling NY + NJ + FL + TX + CA would give you enough power to outvote every single other state.<p>The senate is critical and not to be abolished.