Avoiding tyranny

President Joe Biden’s “Build Back Better” bill appears to have failed—for now—mainly because it lacks the support of just one U.S. senator from the president’s own party: Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Manchin’s role as spoiler will likely renew opposition to the composition and nature of the U.S. Senate.

Many on the political left criticize the Senate as “anti-democratic,” but why? After all, the role of the Senate was determined by the framers of the Constitution, and the smaller states required the equality of representation in the upper chamber as the price of their ratification of the Constitution.

But detractors of the makeup of the Senate would point out that the country’s most populous state, California, and West Virginia, which ranks 40th, both have two senators. On the other side of the Capitol, the House of Representatives depends almost entirely upon population to determine the number of members in a state’s delegation, whereas the Senate treats the states as equals. Without this structure, West Virginia would not figure as much in national affairs as it does right now. We have just seen a senator from a poor, blue-collar state derail a president’s central legislative agenda. The fact that Manchin is a Democrat just adds insult to injury.

As a result, we are likely to hear yet another round of calls to reconsider the grand bargain struck by our founders to gain the assent of less populous states. To do so would be a tremendous mistake.

Many criticize the American approach as antiquated and arcane because they want mass democracy. In short, they want the greatest approximation of direct majority rule that can be achieved. To some, the idea has immense intuitive appeal and is efficient as a method of resolving impasses. So, what’s missing? Our constitutional order is based upon the concept of representative government, not mass democracy.

We might stop to consider the work of Alexis de Tocqueville, the French nobleman who visited the United States and wrote one of the definitive outsider accounts in the 19th century. While he noted the great pride Americans took in their democratic ways, he reminded his readers that there is nothing about being on the side with greater numbers that guarantees righteousness. The mob can be just as oppressive as a dictator.

Tocqueville’s reminder connected with a deeper and older insight heeded by America’s founders. They were readers of both the Christian and classical traditions. One thing that came through very strongly from the classical side was the realization that power, itself, was a problem. Political thinkers classified constitutions according to how they distributed power. Who ruled? The one, the few, or the many? Each method tended to prove itself unstable. Monarchies declined into tyrannies. Aristocracies turned into oligarchies. Democracies transformed into lawless mobs. Each answer would eventually pose a new problem.

The solution was to embrace a mixed constitution. In other words, combine features of the rule of the one, the few, and the many. Our president is a bit like a monarch armed with the veto and command of the military. The Senate resembles the aristocratic element with its strong deliberative role, while the House most closely reflects popular passions. Together, they balance the worst tendencies of each form and prevent politics from operating like an indiscriminate steamroller.

While the result is sometimes frustrating—in our system a party usually doesn’t simply win and gain complete control—it also reflects solid Christian anthropology of human beings. If you believe that human beings are inherently sinful, then it is important to restrain their passions rather than bolstering their will to power. Our mixed system helps to achieve that goal. While the purer forms revolve around the question of who has the power—the one, the few, or the many— the American form of government takes care to limit and frustrate power to avoid tyranny regardless of the source.

Joe Manchin of the not very flashy, rich, or powerful state of West Virginia applied the brakes to the political machine of Washington, D.C., in December. In doing so, he fulfilled an important role in American constitutional democracy.