To the editor:

These are a few of the lessons I learned in school: American government was established with divided powers, “checks and balances.” The Founding Fathers feared simple majority rule. An unfettered majority was likely to trample on the rights and interests of a minority.

The Bill of Rights was added to further restrict the power of a dominating government bent on unjustly aggrandizing its interests. After a few more years, the Senate instituted the filibuster, a “dialogue” that could only be stopped by a super-majority vote. This protects minority interests against a headstrong majority.

Now, with the presidency, the House of Representatives and the Senate all in the hands of the neo-cons, they’re demanding that ALL of their judicial nominees be confirmed. Confirmation of two-thirds last year doesn’t satisfy them. They want 100 percent agreement for their choice of judges. They threaten to do away with the 200-year-old check on the power of an oppressive majority in the Senate — the filibuster.

This smacks of a kind of self-righteous ideological uniformity, a belief that they, the neo-cons, have 100 percent of the truth. This isn’t the form of government this nation started with. I hope Kansas senators have enough common sense and courage to recognize this difference, and stand fast.

Mark Larson,

Lawrence