The New York Times recently published an op-ed titled, “Abolish the Senate. End the Electoral College. Pack the Court.” This article calls for “a new Constitution” that would change the very fabric of the Founding Fathers’ vision for America, akin to how the 1619 Project tried to rewrite America’s history. Glenn Beck explains how our governmental system works and why it’s a much better option than direct democracy.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: All right. This is such an amazing story. That is coming now, from the left. And the New York Times. On let's -- let's change the Constitution.

Let's change. You want to give me a quick. I just lost the story. Can you give me a quick update on this one?

JASON: The title of this. Well, kind of like you hinted. Speaks for itself.

The title is this: Abolish the Senate in the electoral college, and pack the court. It's a discussion on what -- I mean, it's almost like they're doing a 1619 Project.

GLENN: No.

STU: But instead of focusing on that, now they're trying to change the history of why the Founders created our government the way they did.

And it's a complete abomination. I mean, the Founders pretty much saw government as an evil. A necessary evil. But they did everything in their power to limit it as much as they could.

Now, this -- this article, this opinion.

Whatever it is. Seems to argue, exactly the opposite.

What's really amazing to me, they actually have the balls, to mention things like the Federalist papers.

And then turn around and then title this thing, in the electoral college.

I mean, it's argued specifically, not only the need for an electoral college.

But why!

GLENN: So you know, what's amazing to me, they make several points in this article, where they are like -- the electoral college.

Trying to say, it's only a democracy, if we have no electoral college.

Well, we're not -- we're not a democracy.

We are a republic.

And democracies fail every single time.

There is no such thing as a true democracy.

Where everybody is voting on every -- you know, on every item.

They fail every time!

You have a democracy. And the reason why the left likes it.

Is because you can convince. Look at New York.

You can convince people of something like communism. And then that's the last election, that you will have, in country after country. That's what happens.

The people are voting -- you know, they vote in. And they're like, you know what, this is the answer to all of our problems.

This is the answer to cancer.

And then you don't have another vote again. You don't -- you don't have it.

You don't have the republic. First of all, you can't vote on every single thing!

You can't.

Because you don't know all the ins and outs of everything.

So you have to elect somebody, that is as close to you, as possible.

And you elect them, first, in the House.

Of representatives.

The House of Representatives. The reason why there's only a two-year term on those guys, is because that's the closest to you. The Congress is the one that is supposed to control the purse strings.

But that's not try anymore.

You want to know why our spending is out of control?

Because Congress no longer does its job.

Congress no longer controls the purse strings.

So they've given that up, because they haven't done a budget or anything else. And nobody is holding anybody responsible for the spending. What you're supposed to do is every two years, when they get out of control on spending, you can vote them out with, and say, nope. Don't want any of that. It's the closest to the people. That's why they have to run every two years.

Then the Senate, which the progressives have already changed, and he makes a case in here, again, in the New York Times' editorial, that we're not -- we haven't done enough to the Senate. In 1913, the -- the progressives, under Wilson, they decide, they're going to change the Senate from the way it was originally, in the Constitution.

The way the Founders did it, was remember, they want the people.

But they also were really concerned about the federal government.

So they wanted the states to make sure the states were represented.

So no -- everyone knew that no -- Texas is not going to vote for something, because New York wants it, and it's not good for Texas.

If Texans are elected by the state, they only represent the state. Right now, you have Chuck Schumer. Why does he raise money in California?

Why does he -- why are these people running around, even on our side, all around the country? Why do we care? Here's why we care: Because they no longer represent the state. It's just another higher level, I guess, of Congress.

We already have that body. Now we're supposed to have something that protects the individual states.

Well, the progressives didn't like that.

Because they need a democracy.

And they want an all-powerful federal government. And so, they abolish that from the Constitution. And the 17th amendment changed the way that we vote for senators.

So they've already screwed it up once. This is what progressives always do. They'll fix health care. And then they'll say, and it's so broken. Now it's even worse. So let's fix it again.

No, you guys should be left out of it. Okay?

You guys should not be fixing anything. Because you don't know your butt from your elbow. So they're already changing that. Now they're saying, that that has to be changed even more. Because it's not representative.

Well, no. Because it's supposed to equalize.

The reason why we have 400 -- what is it? 434 representative, it's more than that now. That number changes, as our population grows.

So the population grows. You get in your area, you'll get more Congress people. Because it represents the people.

The Senate only has two senators, from Delaware, or California.

And this article is saying, that's not fair. Because there's more people in California, than there are in Delaware.

Well, if you do that, then you completely erase the states. Then Delaware, Wyoming, Idaho.

All of these other states that have small populations, the only ones that matter, will be California, Texas, New York, Florida.

That's it. They'll make all the decisions. Now, you in Nebraska, do you want New York and California and even Texas, making all the decisions for you?

Of course not.

Of course not.

That's why the Senate has two senators.

Not 50 senators for California.

Two, the same as your state. They've already undercut the -- the state power, one time.
Now they want to cut it, completely! And make it into another representative body of the people.

That's not what it was for. They knew that Congress would react quickly. The House of representatives would be so connected to the people, that they would act quickly.

And they could do really stupid things, because when there's a panic, these elected officials want to move, because their constituents are yelling at them!

And it wouldn't necessarily be the right thing. So they wanted to balance that, with the state power!

The state, those senators, were elected by the legislators, in that state.

Which I don't love!

But it might bring things back into play, where we don't care about Chuck Schumer anymore.

Unless you live in New York.

You only care about your senator!

Because they were the balance, from the public saying, we've got to put the Patriot Act in!

No.

The Senate should be able to say, no. That takes power away from the states, and gives an all-consuming federal government, all kinds of power to them. No! And then when those two houses, both the state, and the peoples living in the states, could agree, then it goes to the president. And the president is only supposed to veto when he feels it's unconstitutional.

Not because he doesn't like it. Not because his party tells him. But because it's unconstitutional. You don't have the power to do that. However, Congress can say, Mr. President, I'm sorry. You're wrong. And they can with, three-fourths, they can vote again and pass it in the House, with three-fourths.

Or they can take it to the Supreme Court.

And the Supreme Court is only supposed to decide whether it's constitutional.

Look at the damage that the left and the progressives have done, to this system.

It was brilliant. The powers in the House, with the people. The power -- they always say, when there's a problem: Follow the money, right?

The money is the power. So they've taken that power, to create laws, and given it to the executive branch, the presidential branch. They stopped doing passing a budget. We haven't had a budget since George Bush. They stopped passing a budget.

So they have no real power left in them, anymore. Then they gutted the state, with the -- the Senate. And then, they made the president, they made him into the -- the veto power into whatever his party says.

They've completely revamped this thing.

Already!

And it's not working. Why?

Because they've bastardized it.

If the president -- they can't get it done in the House. They can't get it done in the Senate. And have and they can't get it done by the president.

Then they've expanded the power of the Supreme Court.

And now the Supreme Court can legislate from the bench.

They can say, well, you know what, I think what they meant was this!

No. That's not your job.

That's not your job.

Your job is to say, this is constitutional. This is not constitutional.

To give you an idea of how weak the Supreme Court was supposed to be, when the designers of the Capitol put together the three branches of government, they -- they didn't include a space for the Supreme Court.

You know where the Supreme Court, until FDR.

The Supreme Court used to meet in the basement of the Capitol! They didn't have any space. They had the basement of the Capitol.

But FDR wanted to make sure that the Supreme Court could rule the country. And if he couldn't get it passed in the House and the Senate, he'd get it through the Supreme Court. That's why he put them on a pedestal. And that's why he tried, exactly what this article is saying, to do. Pack the Supreme Court!

What does that mean? That means: What we're going to do here is, we're just going to load up on Supreme Court justices. We have nine Supreme Court justices. That's not in the Constitution.

You can have seven. You can have 12. It's not in the Constitution.

But our tradition is, there has been nine Supreme Court justices.

So we all accept that. When you start -- imagine, lefties, how would you feel if Donald Trump said, we're going to pack the Supreme Court? I'm going to add five more Supreme Court justices right now.

What would you do? What would you do? You would lose your mind!

Why? Because you know he would pack it with the people that would just agree with him!

That's not what the Supreme Court is supposed to do.

That's why, if Donald Trump said he was going to pack the Supreme Court, I would be against it, and I would be a leading opposition voice of Donald Trump, on that. If that's what he wanted to do.

But you're suggesting that, as something that would be good for the country.

It would not be good for the country!

And, by the way, once you have packed the Supreme Court, you get up -- there's some countries that have 47 Supreme Court justices.

They just keep putting them in. Until they can absolutely control it.

Once you pack a Supreme Court, you destroy the country.

That is the last gasp of a republic. Or of a country.

You pack the Supreme Court.

So they've changed absolutely everything. And in this op-ed, he's also suggesting, that, you know. Another thing we should do is we should just add states.

Let me just add states.

We'll just keep adding states. Again, packing the Senate. What? What? When you say, we want to -- what is the thing, they want to reimagine America? Refound America.

You're not refounding it. You're working on something completely different. That's not America.

JASON: Yeah, the other headline on the main headline is why the left can't win.

I'm adding my own ellipses here. Dot, dot, dot, without a new Constitution. That's how radically they're thinking on this. Just insane.

GLENN: I mean, it -- but it's true!

They don't like the outcome. They don't like the fact that they almost had us. They almost had us. They have -- they have taken and twisted education. They took and twisted the media. They made the -- all -- just groups that are marching at their orders.

Teaching, and using propaganda. And brainwashing techniques. To teach these twisted views. And then reinforce them in the media.

They had that. It wasn't enough!

Before, they had music. They had the movies.

It wasn't enough.

They just keep gobbling and gobbling and gobbling.

And the reason why they're out at this point, is because we're on to them.

They figured it out. The people will always -- you know, we -- we will always be late, but we'll always figure it out. And then we'll do the right thing.

They're trying to take away all of the escape doors. All of the exit doors. They're trying to lock them all down, so you can't get out of this nightmare hell house, that they're building for us.