Is the US really heading for a second civil war?
- Thread starter signalmankenneth
- Start date
I must have missed that, can you please restate?
What power would they get that they don't already have?
McConnell, as minority leader of the Senate, has stalled every major piece of legislation; that stalling is compounding the problems the Senate has abrogated its duty to solve.
So what is the purpose of the Senate? To kill legislation, it seems.
So why keep it around?
BidenPresident
Verified User
Terms for the House are two years and terms for Senate are six. How would long would terms for one chamber be?
Matt Dillon
Semolina comes from wheat
I have to agree with that. All that needs done is to roll back the immunity that the Senate voted for themselves during the Carter and Reagan administrations.
Oh, and Citizen's United, too.
To kill legislation that needs killing.
I think 2 years for everyone in the same chamber makes sense.
Everything is done with majority vote, no special rules or exceptions for anything.
That way, if something is passed that is really bad, then they can repeal it in the next session with ease.
Likewise, if something is passed that is really good, then repealing it out of partisan revenge will not benefit you electorally when you have to defend that choice while campaigning.
That's why I'm always wanting to call the GOP's bluff on that point; we'll pass voting rights legislation and then you can campaign on taking it away from people...we'll pass universal health care and UBI and then you can campaign on taking it away from people.
Were they successful in taking Medicare and Social Security away? No...they paid an electoral price for messing with both.
Good luck to whoever tries.
What immunity are you talking about?
Yeah, definitely end that shit.
I think public campaign financing is the only fair way to do it because that forces politicians to have to compete for votes instead of competing for money.
People are so short sighted. Imagine if you will an extremist political party that owns the White house , has a Supreme court in its hip pocket, and owns the house. They decide to ship all black people back to Africa with a one way ticket or some other crazy shit. Do you think you would like a senate to stop that sort of legislation then?
Matt Dillon
Semolina comes from wheat
Immunity from prosecution for taking lobbyist money and immunity from insider trading laws. Why didn't you know that?
BidenPresident
Verified User
The purpose of the Senate is to slow down the debate, which is why they stay in office for six years. Maybe this is not true, but I think it is a valid position.
Eliminating the filibuster altogether is more practicable than eliminating the Senate.
Haven't read any of this thread but to answer the OP -- No.
You're speaking very generally here, but taking lobbyist money isn't illegal (though I agree it should be).
And I absolutely support Ossoff's bill to ban insider trading...don't you?
Matt Dillon
Semolina comes from wheat
Democrats want an uprising that can be put down with government force. They're actually arming and funding far-left black militant groups for some reason to this end. I can't figure out why, all I know is that they are and it must coincide somehow.
Maybe they want to prop up the far-left black militants as targets and then they get wiped out and then they have an excuse for Martial law or something? And as a bonus,(to them, the party of the KKK) all those blacks are dead.
Just floating ideas. Idk, really.
Nancy Pelosi sure doesnt. NEVER has...
Democrats want an uprising that can be put down with government force. They're actually arming and funding far-left black militant groups for some reason to this end. I can't figure out why, all I know is that they are and it must coincide somehow.
Maybe they want to prop up the far-left black militants as targets and then they get wiped out and then they have an excuse for Martial law or something? And as a bonus,(to them, the party of the KKK) all those blacks are dead.
Just floating ideas. Idk, really.
You are getting warmer. Almost right over the target my friend. Keep digging for the truth. You are just about there. They are no friend of minorities,....never have been.
Matt Dillon
Semolina comes from wheat
I support rolling things back to before when they voted themselves those things.
I suppose I would support that bill. The majority of the Senate probably won't, and that's a problem.
Carter's and Reagan's congresses need hanged for being the traitors they were. They totally corrupted the Senate.
When Rick Scott, who is no stranger to the good ol' boy network and was kinda grafty gets up in the Senate and says "Damn! This thing is broken." That's what the congresses of Carter and Reagan did.
They broke American government and that's a very serious thing and it's been going downhill ever since.
https://www.wtxl.com/news/coronavir...ision-to-vote-against-covid-19-relief-package
Last edited:
Slow down debate to what end and for what purpose?
Can you please provide an example of a debate that was slowed down that resulted in better legislation?
Slowing down debate for the sake of slowing down debate only exacerbates the problems the legislation being debated would solve.
I totally agree...there shouldn't be a filibuster for anything in a chamber where, Constitutionally, you only need a majority to pass legislation.
But the representation problems of the Senate remain, which is why it's a dysfunctional chamber that only magnifies partisanship.
There is no benefit to democracy or the Republic by giving every state, regardless of population and whose borders are arbitrary, the same level of representation in our federal government.