Ending The Electoral College

[Rifler]

Like they have in the Senate, especially since it was changed to an elected position?

Yes, the Senate was an attempt to lend support for the Republic.

 

[Jerome Silberman]

Eliminating the Senate is a non-starter,.. Increasing House members makes sense.

That seems backwards if you're worried about entire states getting crushed under the legislative process.

An inside track to the veto pen is far less effective than the constant ability to build a coalition in the legislature.

 

[Jerome Silberman]

Yes, the Senate was an attempt to lend support for the Republic.

So two stones on the side of empty land and a legal limit on represention on the side of human beings, and that seems fair?

 

[Rifler]

That seems backwards if you're worried about entire states getting crushed under the legislative process.

An inside track to the veto pen is far less effective than the constant ability to build a coalition in the legislature.

 

[Rifler]

So two stones on the side of empty land and a legal limit on represention on the side of human beings, and that seems fair?

"Republic" is the operational term....

 

[Jerome Silberman]

"Republic" is the operational term....

What does that word mean to you?

 

[Rifler]

What does that word mean to you?

In general terms,... Relative equality among citizens within any given state,... Relative equality among states within the Republic.

 

[Jerome Silberman]

In general terms,... Relative equality among citizens within any given state,... Relative equality among states within the Republic.

You should look it up, and try to find the courage to be critical of yourself.

 

[Rifler]

You should look it up, and try to find the courage to be critical of yourself.

You asked for my definition,.. I gave it to you.

 

[Jerome Silberman]

You asked for my definition,.. I gave it to you.

And I responded. What's your problem?

 

[Moral]

You asked for my definition,.. I gave it to you.

Not a great definition.

 

[Rifler]

And I responded. What's your problem?

I have zero problems at the moment,... How are you doing?

 

[Jerome Silberman]

I have zero problems at the moment,... How are you doing?

I wouldn't call it a problem, more of a curiosity about why you communicate the way you do as I choose to take you at your word while also knowing that you're being intentionally obtuse or slippery.

That is way more interesting to me than any real beliefs you may accidentally reveal.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

The Senate doesn’t really do anything distinct?

What about ratifying treaties? What about conducting impeachment trials? What about confirming judicial appointees and cabinet secretary nominees?

The House would take over those responsibilities. Not a problem. We don't need a second body to do those things.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Sigh. Not in terms of roles or assigned responsibilities. In terms of its institutional dynamic. It's just another a popularly elected body. The only thing that really distinguishes its operational dynamic is the filibuster, which is a borderline extraconstitutional power. (I say borderline because it's 'technically' constitutional since the constitution gives each house the power to set its internal rules of operation).

I'm reminded of years ago, when a senior inhouse counsel, who was a brilliant but quirky ex-literature professor, was interviewing a candidate for a position. The candidate had a very similar background , and he provided gushing reviews of the candidate up the chain. His boss's reaction was, "yes, but we already have one of you."

The Senate is an anti-democratic power base. From blatantly umequal representation to the filibuster, it's a travesty of entrenched power.

It needs to go away.