In recent days, many in the political class and the commentariat have expressed uproarious, injurious, incredulous offence to the notion that the Senate can seemingly have its way with the Trudeau majority government's legislation on assisted dying.'How can an unelected body simply override the will of voters?' seems to be the question on everyone's lips.While recent Senate scandals seem to have de-socialized our political culture to the reality of Canada's very system of government, it's worth level-setting as to why this is simply the wrong question to ask.Think about it in more personal terms – that is, after all, what democracy and politics are – the way we organize and interact with one another in a society. For example, I am of primarily Italian heritage, with several other European nationalities mixed in. As the first person on either side of my family born in this country, I've never felt any less Canadian than the next person. You may be Irish, Somali, Thai, it doesn't matter your heritage. What makes us all Canadian is an agreement on a set of boundary-encapsulating guidelines, organized under the rule of law, and upheld by the Constitution.The Constitution, of course, comprises both codified laws and uncodified traditions.What is not in dispute, but certainly seems to have faded from the memory of many whose modern tastes no longer enjoy its flavour, is the entirely legitimate role outlined for the Senate in Canada's governing system, spelled out in the Constitution itself.On assisted dying, the Senate is simply exercising its constitutional mandate. Sober second thought on a controversial issue. No more, no less. And if not on a bill of this magnitude, then when?The Senate, of course, is currently the object of much public scorn and ridicule, given the high profile recent scandals of its members of all political stripes. But we should not forget its important contributions to public policy formulation in this country over the years. Among them, impressive reports discussing guaranteed minimum income, cannabis, and yes even euthanasia as far back as the 1990s, researched and brought forward in a non-partisan manner, sometimes decades before public opinion could catch up on these heady topics.This is the quality of legislative contribution you get when thoughtful people are freed from the daily traumas of partisan politicking and the lick-your-finger-stick-it-in-the-air drama of pandering in an omnipresent election cycle. MPs simply don't have the freedom to be as thoughtful as Senators, and never will. And that's exactly what the framers of our Constitution intended.Certainly, the freedom from elections that has produced such important work is also the very freedom that has allowed some Senators to behave badly, cheat on expense reports, and otherwise make fools of the institution.But castigating the legitimacy of the entire system is akin to throwing out the baby with the bath water. No serious person would think about it.Matthew Lombardi is a Toronto based public affairs consultant and occasional TV commentator