Posted on 05/04/2017 6:38:21 AM PDT by Kaslin
2nd Amendment would go bye-bye, you are not alone in this thought, at the same time nothing is getting done. Now remove the Filibuster and repeal the 17th? I have no problem with that. A 50/50 Senate w/ VP Pence breaking the tie? Sure, MA would send 2 Prog-Senators and TX would balance them out. Let the ( one term only ) Senators sent up by their State Legislators fight it out mano-e-mano on the floor, and if they really want to Filibuster, bring back the old fashioned one, not this no-show jobber, make them talk for 23 hrs straight...
Can you help a novice understand how the filibuster works? So if say in September we get a good spending bill, but only 51 votes, the Democrats can filibuster. But what does that mean? They can hold up the bill for how long? Forever?
https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Filibuster_Cloture.htm
Ending the legislative filibuster would force Republicans to either deliver legislation in accordance with the principles that they claim to have or acknowledge that they don’t actually have those principles.
The senate is part of the original format for government as laid out by the framers.
As a conservative constitutionalist I say no dice on eliminating the senate.
“As a conservative constitutionalist I say no dice on eliminating the senate.”
If you were a conservative constitutionalist you would understand that the Senate has not existed for 100 years.
We also need to consider what happens the next time the Dems have the majorities and the President.
After their little RAT sing-song tirade yesterday threatening Republicans, I would suggest doing it just out of spite of these traitorous communist bassturds.
They serve no useful purpose in government so just change the rules such that they might as well just go home to their communist enclaves and sulk.
To me it seems that the “senate rule” is there so that the senators will not be inconvenienced, kind of like the “symbolic” hunger strike that was held recently by the college kids who were allowed to eat if they got hungry.
Wasn’t the original intent of the filibuster to make the senators so uncomfortable that they would use it as a last resort? I know nobody wants to talk for hours and hours on end, and nobody wants to listen to it, but if they forced a real one, instead of this symbolic b.s., I don’t think we would see it bantered about so often. Also, in the case of a real one, the senators could just wait until the person talking had to go to the bathroom or passed out from exhaustion and immediately call a vote.
It seems to me that this is “senate rule” is just a snow job on the American people so that nobody has to own uncomfortable legislation, and so that each side can use these issues as a way to raise money. They can exempt themselves and we continue to suffer.
I agree. It’s just a snow job, imo
If all the Senators are elected by “mob rule”, then heck no.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.