Our undemocratic Senate

The U.S. Senate is an outdated and undemocratic roadblock to progress that should be eliminated.

Originally intended as a mere check on the whims of the House of Representatives (much like the upper house of Parliament is in nearly every other country), the Senate has become arguably the most powerful upper house in any legislature around the globe.   

The Senate presents an unnecessary step in the legislative process. Nearly every other nation has either no upper house in their legislature or one that is incredibly impotent.

Countless states operate in a system that either has no upper house or effectively has no upper house, which lends significant proof that the Senate is entirely unnecessary.
The U.S. House of Representatives is perfectly capable of legislating entirely on its own without the approval of the Senate.

In addition to being unnecessary, the Senate is inherently undemocratic.
The Senate was originally intended to represent the interest of the state governments at the national level. Instead, because of an amendment to the Constitution in the early 20th century, all U.S. senators are elected and represent the people of their respective states.

While at first this seems to be more democratic, it actually gives undue disproportionate influence to states with very small populations. Wyoming, with a population of significantly less than 1 million, has the exact same theoretical influence in the Senate as California, with a population substantially larger than many countries.
The Senate has also proven to be an incredibly successful roadblock to progress because of archaic rules that effectively require a two-thirds majority on any bill in order for it to pass. This has proven time and time again throughout our country’s history to be a major stumbling block for legislation.

Recent examples of this include watering down both the cap-and-trade and health care reform bills.

The House often has to tamper down any reforms that it wants to pass in anticipation of having to muster a two-thirds majority in the Senate, significantly slowing the rate of progress.

It is perfectly possible for a coalition of Senators representing no more than 19 percent of the population to successfully, and perfectly legally under the existing rules, block a piece of legislation from passing.

It is often argued that these obsolete rules help to protect the opinions of the minority of the population.

This is true. It goes so far as to give the minority undue influence over the legislative process. The place for protecting minority rights is in the courts through the system of judicial review. Our legal system is perfectly capable of handling challenges to laws that have gone too far, as has been proven in the past.

If countless other democratic nations are capable of operating with a very weak or nonexistent upper house of their legislatures, it is perfectly possible for the United States to do so as well.

Eliminating the Senate would quicken the legislative process, increase the progressive nature of the U.S. political environment and more accurately represent the opinions and interest of citizens.