RangerDave wrote:
Rorinthas wrote:
The harder it is to pass federal legislation (the larger a consensus needed) the better off the people are, not matter what animal has the majority.
Do you feel the same way about the difficulty with repealing existing legislation, cutting spending, etc.? Because procedural hurdles go both ways.
Yes.
1) Because those things never happen anyway.
2) Because legislative stagnation of any type is better for the people at large
RD wrote:
Rorinthas wrote:
If you're having trouble with the senate it's because your agenda is too much against the consensus of the people.
Or it's because our political system is designed to slow down change by creating multiple veto points and enabling a committed minority to prevent even a clear majority from doing much. So, you can easily have a situation where 59 Senators, representing roughly two-thirds of the American people, want to do X, but 41 Senators, representing only one-third of the people, can stop them.
Yes, yes it is. This is good.
And therefore, people should quit ***** about how it works just because they want their pet project to go through. "This damn system that exists to protect the population from change, tyranny, and mob rule needs to go, it's blatant obstructionism!"