by John Galt » Tue Jun 08, 2021 9:26 am
he says he will vote against legislation that he cosponsored in 2019 because GOP is against it
he was aghast that the gop did not vote with 10 of them in favor of the commission. even though 6 did in the senate, apparently that's not enough bipartisanship. why not make it 100%? what's the bloody point
the senate, as an institution, is fundamentally broken. the founders never thought one state would have literally 70x the population of another state. they also built a senate as being subservant to the state legislatures not the people directly. consequently, the senate currently has zero suffrage from the states so the part of article V that states that all states need to agree to changes in the senate is moot unless it involves given the senate back to control of the states. i'm saying it desperately needs changes. my preferred approach is fibonacci * 1 million, so 0-1 million=1 senator, 1-2=2, 2-3=3, 3-5=4, 5-8=5 etc and would have a senate of 208. Still smaller body, still favors small states, but also improves the voice of larger states. also the filibuster needs to go of course. or perhaps at least the idea that you can just not vote and it counts as a NAY. the commission failed with 60% majority voting for it, but because so many just didn't vote (including 2 dems) it failed. plus the idea that things are just not brought to the floor is ridiculous. if ya'll aren't there, if you go home because you're a kitty, and the majority passes it while they have a quorum of half its members, some of which voted against it but not half of the members present, well, that's on you. you want to be a senator? fine, but do your job.
Americans learn only from catastrophe and not from experience. -- Theodore Roosevelt
My life has become a single, ongoing revelation that I haven’t been cynical enough.