Show of HandsShow of Hands

DoctorWasdarb April 11th, 2016 8:50pm

Should we abolish the senate? (Not the House of Representatives)

6 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

Charlemagne Monarchist
04/14/16 8:51 pm

If we have to stick with representative democracy, I'd say repeal the 17th amendment, add a third senator to every state, abolish the office of Vice President (the House can elect their own speaker so why can't the senate do the same?), and remove the 435 cap in the House so that the House can be more representative of the people.

But to answer the question, I'd say keep the senate. Even in its post 17th amendment form, it's still better than not having it at all.

ladyniner81 I need chocolate
04/13/16 8:43 pm

termlimitstermlimitstermlimitstermlimitstermlimitstermlimitstermlimits

lcamino Florida and Georgia
04/12/16 12:47 pm

No. That would give more power to states like California. The Senate makes representation more equal throughout the country.

evoecon nearest binary system
04/12/16 12:32 pm

The 17th amendment essentially gutted the purpose of the Senate. We should repeal the 17th.

Reply
geoag02 Dallas, TX
04/12/16 8:11 am

No, but change the way they are selected.

I would like to see them appointed by the legislature of the state that they are from for an unspecified amount of time not to exceed 12 years. Their home state legislature can vote to remove and replace them with as little as 1 hour of notice.

Reply
professorwho Madness and Genius
04/12/16 8:03 am

That's what keeps the big and small states on an equal playing field

Reply
EarthMunkey The Golden Rule. Always.
04/12/16 2:33 am

I'd be for removing the president before the Senate.

Reply
Romzy sic semper tyrannus
04/11/16 7:46 pm

Do you people agreeing with this know anything about the US political system????

Reply
Pres55555 Gone.
04/12/16 8:08 am

Doc, I'm asking this just to see from your perspective: Why?

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
04/12/16 8:24 am

The senate gives extra representation to smaller states.

lcamino Florida and Georgia
04/12/16 12:40 pm

Representation is equal in all states so that large population states don't dictate to smaller states. I think it is a good system.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
04/13/16 5:58 am

Why are people in Rhode Island more important than people in California?

lcamino Florida and Georgia
04/13/16 8:47 am

They aren't more important, they are equally important. The more populous states are well represented in the House. The Senate representation assures that smaller states have their interests represented. Otherwise, one populous state would have too much power in proportion to the remainder of the country. The US wasn't meant for one state to have sway over the rest of the country.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
04/13/16 9:12 am

Why should the will of the people in California be subverted because people in Wyoming want something different? There are more people who live in California.

lcamino Florida and Georgia
04/13/16 11:49 am

The people of California are fully represented in Congress.

jvc1133 61535
04/11/16 6:30 pm

Limit Potus to one term, poor performance , impeach

Pres55555 Gone.
04/13/16 3:06 pm

I will create a grand empire that will last for TEN THOUSAND YEARSSSSS

skinner Jersey City
04/11/16 5:03 pm

No, repeal the seventeenth amendment

Reply
liam2013 iowa
04/11/16 3:06 pm

I would keep the Senate. Senators don't have to be constantly running for office and raising money like a house member does . All the states are represented equally. It forces a bill to have greater all-around support in order become a law since it must deal with both chambers. It was the way the founding fathers set it up originally.

Reply
gow488 Korea
04/11/16 2:34 pm

Absolutely. It gives small states a disproportionally large amount of power.

MediaBlackout Carry on, Carry on.
04/11/16 2:59 pm

The House of Representatives balances that power.

susanr Colorado
04/11/16 2:33 pm

No. I'm fine with having one part of Congress having equal representation for each state, and one part having representation based on population.

Reply
badattitude no place like home
04/11/16 2:49 pm

Susan is right on here.

LibArtie SW Connecticut
04/11/16 3:41 pm

Why Susan? What's fair about that?

susanr Colorado
04/11/16 3:44 pm

States have individual identities as entities. If all representation were based on population, smaller-pop states would get lost...

It's not that I can't see some validity in having it based solely on population, but I do value the individual identities of states, as somehow separate. Not sure I'm explaining that very well, though.

suppressedID suck it Kyle
04/11/16 2:14 pm

Well, it's not like they're DOING anything anyway.

Reply
LibArtie SW Connecticut
04/11/16 2:01 pm

Yes. It's absurd that Wyoming and California has the same representation.

Romzy sic semper tyrannus
04/11/16 2:08 pm

That's what the house is for. If we didn't, then the bigger states would eat the little ones up

LibArtie SW Connecticut
04/11/16 2:11 pm

The house is worse, much worse because of redistricting. Our entire political system needs an overhaul.

Romzy sic semper tyrannus
04/11/16 4:11 pm

Well, there's about two hundred other countries you could move too if you don't like our system.