Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

procon

(15,805 posts)
5. I agree, but with a shorter time.
Sat Dec 5, 2020, 01:38 PM
Dec 2020

Same thing should apply to any pending legislation and the filibuster.

These politicians were elected by American citizens to make the federal government work for them, to improve their lives and offer more opportunities to find success. We did not elect them to be paperweights or to put their Party interests and corporate sonar lists above their constituents.

Likewise, the Senate is there to advise and consent, not demand and deny. The president is entitled to choose the members of his administration with the goal of advancing his agenda and completing his campaign promises. He had no obligation to include the opposition's agenda.

I'd cut the time way down Bayard Dec 2020 #1
That is a great idea that should be applied to bills passed in the house as well Under The Radar Dec 2020 #2
So, basically all of trump's acting officials relayerbob Dec 2020 #3
Unfortunately, the problem is harder to solve than that unblock Dec 2020 #4
True. But that would make them go on record as having done something Retrograde Dec 2020 #18
there's some benefit in that, yes, but it's hardly worth a constitutional amendment. unblock Dec 2020 #19
I agree, but with a shorter time. procon Dec 2020 #5
A few days ago someone posted a twitter comment from Lawrence Tribe (I think) who proposed in2herbs Dec 2020 #6
That idea doesn't make the slightest sense at all. onenote Dec 2020 #13
It means that if Mitch does not respond that is to be considered his response and the Pres can in2herbs Dec 2020 #20
Dozens of nominations expire due to Senate inaction every single year. tritsofme Dec 2020 #21
McConnell is not "the Senate" onenote Dec 2020 #22
Some disagree with you. nt in2herbs Dec 2020 #23
Link? onenote Dec 2020 #24
We need a whole raft of amendments, and unfortunately they're almost impossible to get enacted Silent3 Dec 2020 #7
I would go for an elected Supreme Court. roamer65 Dec 2020 #8
Actually, I hate the whole concept of elected judges Silent3 Dec 2020 #9
The nice thing about elections are the term limits. roamer65 Dec 2020 #10
An elected Supreme Court would never had issued a lot of decisions we cherish. onenote Dec 2020 #12
It would have issued more liberal ones. roamer65 Dec 2020 #14
Really.The same electorate that elected Reagan, two Bushes,and Trump would elect judges onenote Dec 2020 #15
I disagree. roamer65 Dec 2020 #17
Changing the makeup of the Senate will not happen. marie999 Dec 2020 #16
What a poorly thought out idea. onenote Dec 2020 #11
Well, I suppose we can conclude the entire Constitution was poorly thought out. NNadir Dec 2020 #26
At the minimum.. denbot Dec 2020 #25
I was thinking... jmowreader Dec 2020 #27
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Proposed Constitutional A...»Reply #5