Would you support a constitutional change desoling the Senate?

[Matt J]

Yes or No and any thoughts.

 

[scooterbug44]

1) Which Senate?

2) Why?

 

[BeachSiO2]

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.

 

[30ashopper]

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

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

 

[scooterbug44]

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

 

[Matt J]

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

41 Senators = 17% of US population

 

[scooterbug44]

So what?

That's an important check IMO.

 

[Alicia Leonard]

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

 

[Matt J]

So what?

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%?

 

[scooterbug44]

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%.