George Bush’S Great America [EN]: Chapter 173

George W. Bush’s Great America – Episode 172

< Episode 172 >

‘My name is shrouded in extravagance and mystery, and no one will be able to discern what is true and what is false, what is history and what is legend.’

Bush recited, modifying the words with which the Mad Baron of Mongolia [likely referring to Roman von Ungern-Sternberg, a White Russian general known for his eccentric and brutal rule] had summarized his fate to suit his taste. Strangely enough, his own fate was similar.

No one truly knows that Bush is not the Bush they perceive, and more than half of the plans he has set in motion stem from knowledge that could never be obtained through ordinary means. Even he sometimes felt he was pushing the boundaries too far, so it was easy to imagine that others would view his actions as bordering on madness.

In fact, this very situation made him the president subject to the most conspiracy theories during his time in office. The reason conspiracy theories arise is quite simple: they emerge when incomprehensible events occur in matters of national importance. For example, the fighter jet visit incident [likely a reference to a specific event during Bush’s presidency where he landed on an aircraft carrier] must have left many people wondering what it was all about. When information is withheld, conspiracy theories fill the void. This even extends to global conspiracy theories.

Besides, what about the chief of staff who remains constantly by his side, seemingly unwilling to let go? Conspiracy theories don’t materialize out of thin air. They need a foundation. Of course, some individuals may concoct conspiracy theories indiscriminately due to mental instability, but generally, there must be a catalyst. And the current environment was ripe for such theories to flourish.

‘Who cares?’

That’s right. Conspiracy theories aside, today was finally the day to bring that bill to a close.

“I’ve come to end the filibuster today,” Bush muttered to himself, so quietly that no one could hear him, as he stepped onto the podium. Unlike other occasions when he hesitated, improvising a speech on the spot, today he had a prepared address. A speech that had been meticulously reviewed by Bush’s top aides.

“If anyone intends to obstruct the bill to eliminate the filibuster with a filibuster, please come forward and voice your concerns now.”

Of course, that didn’t mean the speech was a conventional one.

“I will listen if there is a valid reason. However, I will only consider arguments where the filibuster, which has hindered America’s progress for so long, is demonstrably more valuable than the progress it obstructs.”

In fact, the original draft contained a threatening phrase, ‘I will turn anyone who opposes it into a vegetable!’, but it was immediately removed due to the potential for serious social backlash and discrimination against people with disabilities. Of course, beyond all else, the mere presence of a threatening phrase in a congressional speech was problematic in itself.

Anyway, while still quite assertive, the final version was a significant improvement over the original threatening letter. Bush recognized this to some extent, which is why he sought assistance from his aides.

However, the senators listening to the speech were more surprised that the president’s address was a ‘normal speech’ at all. Everyone had braced themselves for the same level of insults as before. A very small minority of politicians genuinely felt remorseful about the filibuster.

However, most politicians harbored considerable skepticism about abolishing the filibuster. To explain the filibuster without resorting to complicated political jargon, it was a tactic used to prevent the ‘surprise passage of bills’ by the majority party.

In simpler terms, it’s when the minority party believes a bill is detrimental and engages in endless debate to prevent it from reaching a vote. In essence, anything that obstructs the process can be considered a filibuster, but unlimited debate is the most common form.

The American filibuster, in particular, is somewhat absurd compared to those in other countries. Senators can even read from the Bible or fairy tales. To the uninitiated, this might sound like nonsense, but it was the reality. As long as someone could ramble about something completely unrelated to the agenda for hours, they could potentially speak for 24 hours straight.

In fact, until the 20th century, filibusters were relatively rare. It was at the end of World War I in 1917, amidst the unrestricted submarine warfare, that the Lusitania was sunk, and public opinion in the United States increasingly favored entering the war. The Zimmermann Telegram incident [a secret diplomatic communication issued from the German Foreign Office in January 1917 that proposed a military alliance between Germany and Mexico] finally erupted. Woodrow Wilson, the 28th president at the time, had staunchly opposed the war throughout his term, but the Zimmermann Telegram incident left him with no choice but to address the Senate, requesting participation in World War I.

The problem was that some senators disliked President Wilson, who had just been re-elected. Or perhaps they genuinely believed that war was not the answer, so they initiated a filibuster, and from that point on, they gradually began to recognize the power of the tactic.

Time passed once more, and it was 1957. Senator Strom Thurmond conducted a filibuster against the Civil Rights Act for 24 hours and 18 minutes. He read cookbooks and phone books, setting an example that clearly demonstrated the power of the filibuster.

And since then, senators began to employ filibusters against any bills they opposed, and in the 21st century, under the Bush administration, all major bills became entangled in filibusters.

The filibuster had grown too unwieldy to simply dismiss as a necessary evil. Bills were originally intended to maintain order, but the filibuster was being abused for partisan conflict.

And this was not what Bush wanted. Furthermore, it was even less what the people wanted.

“…Therefore, now is the time for the filibuster to disappear.”

Finally, Bush’s speech concluded. It was nothing short of implicit pressure to ensure the smooth passage of the bill. In fact, Bush’s allies in the Republican Party were determined to legislate, regardless of any debate that might occur. Politics is, at its core, a partisan struggle.

The problem was the debate itself.

The reason unlimited debate is even possible stems from the time when Aaron Burr, the third vice president, was still actively involved in politics. The vice president who was exiled for dueling [a reference to Burr’s duel with Alexander Hamilton]. Originally, there was a rule that debate would end if a majority vote was reached.

Aaron Burr disagreed with this and wanted more debate in the Senate, so he eliminated the rule that ended the debate altogether. This is why time-wasting disguised as unlimited debate is possible in the Senate today, and why no one can impose sanctions even if someone babbles nonsense completely unrelated to the topic for more than 24 hours.

However, opponents preached about how dangerous it would be to eliminate the filibuster entirely. In addition, they expressed concerns about the potential for dictatorship by the majority party. ‘Removing the only means for the minority party to resist the majority party’ was too perilous an undertaking.

Conservative politicians found this argument more persuasive than Bush’s speech. Unfortunately, Bush’s party was conservative, and even some members of the progressive Democratic Party felt this was not right.

At the very least, they managed to reach one point of consensus.

That this situation could not continue.

As a result, the filibuster was not abolished. However, some legal loopholes that had allowed existing disorderly filibusters, such as reciting the Bible or reading phone books, were closed, and the law was amended to limit discussions to be as relevant as possible.

Of course, the overall effect would be similar, but it was the best compromise that could be reached at the moment.

The rule called ’60 votes’ enacted in 1975 was amended to a simple majority vote. In simple terms, it meant lowering the quorum to 51 seats. This was called the ‘nuclear option’, and although they knew that this would not have much effect in preventing or resolving filibusters, a few things had changed.

“Do you think things went somewhat as you intended?”

After everything was over. To be exact, immediately after Congress adjourned, the chief of staff asked.

“Honestly, I wanted to push it a little further, but I’m not satisfied.”

“…Were you really thinking of getting rid of the filibuster altogether?”

“Of course not.”

Bush did something uncharacteristic, plopping down heavily into his office chair and loosening his tie as if utterly exhausted. Politics is truly tiring. Especially when it’s a political arena that’s no different from a devil’s den.

“Didn’t you write the speech itself that way? You even tore up my original draft and rewrote it.”

“The President’s speech was honestly closer to a threatening letter than a speech. Why did you write it that way when you knew that you shouldn’t write it that way in the first place?”

After hearing that, he straightened his tie again.

“I just wanted to do that. It would be great if the world only went according to ideals, but that’s impossible.”

The most ideal scenario would be for the filibuster to truly disappear and for everyone to always engage in ethical politics, but that’s absurd because if everyone lived righteously, politics itself would be unnecessary. So Bush decided to use judo [using an opponent’s strength against them]. To give the impression that the president does not want indiscriminate filibusters.

Of course, it would be sufficient to simply state that.

“Above all, they’re not the kind of bastards who will listen just by talking.”

Putting pressure on them was the most effective approach.

“Aren’t you afraid of history? For the next 100 years or so, you will be remembered as the president who saved the economy but ruined politics.”

“You will be the chief of staff who shook that president.”

“Mr. President?”

Bush laughed as if he was dumbfounded after saying that, but the chief of staff still wore a serious expression. Because his image was genuinely trending in that direction. It was even more pronounced because it was, in reality, somewhat accurate.

“Not really. It’s more important to me to do everything I can while I’m in power than how my name will be remembered in history.”

Who knows how it will be written in history books? Furthermore, he didn’t even care about his legacy. People traditionally mention ‘money, women, and honor’ when discussing power, because these were the most basic desires that could motivate people.

Of course, ‘women’ may become ‘men’ depending on the person’s gender, but what’s important is that if they don’t fall into these three categories, then that person is the most dangerous person and must be paid attention to. They are people who can sacrifice these three things as much as they want for their own purposes.

And that person was George W. Bush. The current president of the United States, and a destroyer.

He held all the keys to move the American political world. The authority to command the US military, the world’s strongest military, as the commander-in-chief, the considerable authority derived from controlling the federal and local police forces, the unwavering and substantial support base cultivated through external activities, and the ability to influence the political landscape according to his will, at least in small ways, within a capitalist society where the economy inevitably takes precedence, and the vast capital brought in from overseas.

“Still, I got a glimpse of it today.”

If he wanted to, he could do something akin to a dictatorship, even if it wasn’t a full-blown dictatorship.

“I think this is dangerous. I have to solve it somehow before handing it over to the next president.”

The approval rating would likely revert to normal once Bush’s term ended and a new person took office, but not the police. Furthermore, the separation of powers system was already somewhat compromised after experiencing world wars. Bush had only further consolidated power by making additional modifications to it.

“What do you think?”

“I won’t say.”

This statement stemmed from a sense of crisis that if he voiced his thoughts here, it would truly become a conspiracy theory like ‘the chief of staff who manipulated the president from behind’. Even though the person he was serving was engaging in politics that were completely unconventional, conspiracy theories about someone pulling the strings were emerging from various sources, not only among the public but even within the political sphere.

Of course, there have been many second-in-commands who have dreamed of this kind of thing since ancient times, but the chief of staff did not want his name to be written that way in history books. ‘A faithful chief of staff who perfectly assisted the president’ That was the legacy the chief of staff aspired to.

“You know you’re quite late, right?”

That day, the chief of staff uttered profanity in front of the president for the first time.