IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New So are constitutional guarantees
I'm not going to disagree about our legislature, but a pure democracy where a 50%+1 vote can do anything they want is also a bad idea.

The filibuster as it stands now doesn't work. But there are two important functions that it does fill. The first is to slow down the process when Congress critters feel they need more time to study, think and negotiate over a particular bill. The second is to make it hard for a small majority to make major changes to the laws of the country.

Jay
New Dude
there's a big difference between 50%+1 permitting any action and 50%+1 subject to the limitations of (here) the Charter of Rights and Freedoms or (there) the Bill of Rights... and once again has little to nothing to do with the supermajority rule to stop a filibuster leading to the possibility that legislation may be stopped by Senators representing a total population of 68,885,356 out of a total US population of 281,421,906, or by 68,885,356/281,421,906, or 24.5% of the population as a whole... and that's a gimme... it takes 41 senators to block legislation, but I counted the population represented by 42.

Yeah, sounds like a small majority to me.

If you want to have a filibuster, why not try something like our constitutional amendment rules, which require ratification by (IIRC) 2/3 of provinces representing at least 50% of the population?
     How to kill the Filibuster with only 51 votes. - (Another Scott) - (5)
         Re: How to kill the Filibuster with only 51 votes. - (boxley)
         It is more a question of replacement - (jay) - (3)
             The filibuster is incredibly anti-democratic - (jake123) - (2)
                 So are constitutional guarantees - (jay) - (1)
                     Dude - (jake123)

That's pretty much epic-scale incomprehension.
32 ms