Category: 
by C. William Chattin
Hector,
Procedural rules are often designed with substantive purposes; and the procedures of the Constitution quite clearly protect substantive rights.
For example, the Quorum requirement (Art. I, Section 5) prevents a tiny fraction of the legislature from passing laws affecting the entire populace. Similarly, “bicameralism and presentment” — the process requiring all laws to be passed by both Houses of Congress and then signed by the President — is really a three-prong safeguard against legislative abuse.
The amendment I propose is another such safeguard, preventing like-minded (or even corrupt) legislators from railroading through laws that haven’t even been read, much less analyzed and reflected upon. In support of this proposal, I would submit that the Founders never really contemplated the type of bill-making procedure we know have, and certainly would have never countenanced a yeay vote on a 1,500-page bill that not only had never been read, but which wasn’t even made available for members to read.
In short, the Constitution is full of safeguards to protect individual rights from the tyranny of the majority. Some are express, such as the Bill of Rights; while others are implied through process, such as the bicameralism and Houses of Congress being accorded the right to decide their own rules (and thus permitting the filibuster in the Senate).
