I looked at it.
I have no problem with it.
It’s completely separate from this issue.
It has no bearing on the filibuster.
Goresuch is a fantastic appointee to the Supreme Court.
There’s no way in hell I’m going to let the Left pull a Judge Bork with this guy. We need him on the court for decades to come.
If you think allowing the Left to get away with that, would help strengthen the nation, you’ve gone down a path I’m not following you on.
If you read through the thread, if you bothered to read any of my posting histories on this subject, you will know I was one of the first here to extol Gorsuch’s nomination.
My purpose here is to educate people about the history of the filibuster and why it has been useful to conservatives in the past.
I’ve also endeavored to educate those that know the filibuster has had in its history a legitimate history in the face of a simple majority or tie.
That said, the amendment in #129 is not a separate issue. It is part and parcel to returning power to voters and state legislatures so that filibusters are defanged as a weapon of obstructionists.
You might look at the number of state legislatures presently in control by conservatives and republicans. In 98 partisan state chambers, republicans hold 67 (68%).
I guarantee you if state legislatures elected their US Senators, there would be a supermajority of GOP US Senators today, and the filibuster would be totally a non-issue.
Now do you see the connection?
So read the amendment illustrated again in #129 and contact your state COS/AOS rep or ALEC local legislator https://www.alec.org and get involved.
You will never have access to a US Senator who is controlled and paid for by lobbyists than you will have when they are influenced by your state legislator. The former can send you a form letter of nonsense. The latter may invite you over for a barbecue. Both are equally as intelligent and competent. But the former is highly susceptible to corruption whereas the latter may be a local neighbor.