Would you support a constitutional change desoling the Senate?

1) Which Senate?

2) Why?

I am answering this for the U.S. Senate. In my opinion after working with numerous House and Senate members and staff, and House and Senate Committee staffers on a regular basis, that would be lunacy. They are often the only group that stops to fully weigh the end effect of what a decision may cause. By design and implementation, they are the more deliberative body and it's a good thing while the House is more based on the whims of the electorate. Without the Senate, the bills that would be passed would be ASTRONOMICAL in number, reach, cost, and control.

If you're talking about Florida, I'll let you all duke it out. :lol:

"Would you support a constitutional change desoling the Senate? "

I though this was a pole about taking away their shoes. :lol:

Title is a bit misleading - wondered if he was ranting about them being soulless, then saw he wanted to dissolve the Senate.

Type, the point is that 17% of the represented population on the US Senate side can block legislation.

41 Senators = 17% of US population

So what? :idontno:

That's an important check IMO.

I still think we should take their shoes away until they all start getting some sense in their heads.

So what? :idontno:

That's an important check IMO.

So if 17% of the population does/doesn't want something they should be able to override the other 83%?

I think if 17% of the population is concerned enough, they should be able to temporarily halt something.

There are always ways to override the 17%.

I think if 17% of the population is concerned enough, they should be able to temporarily halt something.

There are always ways to override the 17%.

Do tell Ms. Civics.

3/5 of the senate can override a filibuster by invoking cloture, they can use reconciliation, there's all sorts of dirty tricks.

3/5 of the senate can override a filibuster by invoking cloture, they can use reconciliation, there's all sorts of dirty tricks.

Okay your not getting it. If 17% of the US population, or 41 US Senators, don't want something then you can't get 3/5 needed for a filibuster override.

Because a politician has never changed their vote and is above influence. :roll:

So if 17% of the population does/doesn't want something they should be able to override the other 83%?

You can take up your complaints with the guy who wrote this -

Thus far I have considered the circumstances which point out the necessity of a well-constructed Senate only as they relate to the representatives of the people. To a people as little blinded by prejudice or corrupted by flattery as those whom I address, I shall not scruple to add, that such an institution may be sometimes necessary as a defense to the people against their own temporary errors and delusions. As the cool and deliberate sense of the community ought, in all governments, and actually will, in all free governments, ultimately prevail over the views of its rulers; so there are particular moments in public affairs when the people, stimulated by some irregular passion, or some illicit advantage, or misled by the artful misrepresentations of interested men, may call for measures which they themselves will afterwards be the most ready to lament and condemn. In these critical moments, how salutary will be the interference of some temperate and respectable body of citizens, in order to check the misguided career, and to suspend the blow meditated by the people against themselves, until reason, justice, and truth can regain their authority over the public mind? What bitter anguish would not the people of Athens have often escaped if their government had contained so provident a safeguard against the tyranny of their own passions? Popular liberty might then have escaped the indelible reproach of decreeing to the same citizens the hemlock on one day and statues on the next.