(05-02-2021, 06:43 AM)The Real Marty Wrote:

(05-01-2021, 06:29 PM)mikesez Wrote: Yes, that's true, the founders originally empowered the state legislatures to select senators.
They also empowered the state legislatures to change the Constitution, and the state legislatures decided to give away that power of selecting senators, because everyone agreed that that aspect was not working well.

You think you're a conservative but you're not. You're a reactionary. A conservative lives with the decisions of the past. A conservative trusts the folks that made those decisions, and trusts that they would have made the same choices had they been in power at the time. A reactionary is always trying to revisit and relitigate the past.

---

A majority of 100 is 51.
The filibuster requires 60.
If there is something that the citizens of 29 out of 50 states want, that is a majority of states, but it may not be enough to get 60 senators and break a filibuster.
Pro tip, binary boy, check your math next time you make a numerical claim. Spock frowns on your shenanigans.

And before you assume I'm saying this just because I'm supposedly a liberal, I've thought the filibuster should end since Bush was president

The problem with ending the filibuster and making it easier to pass legislation is that it also makes it easier to repeal legislation.  So if one party gets major legislation passed with 51 votes, and then loses just two seats, the other party comes in and repeals everything the first party did.  We'd go swinging wildly back and forth with no predictability as to what our national policy is and businesses would be crippled when they are unable to plan for the future because major legislation that affects them keeps swinging wildly back and forth.  

What the filibuster does with its 60 vote requirement is ensure that if legislation is passed, it is likely to remain in place for the future.  That is very important.

2017 showed us that you can effectively repeal legislation with just 51 votes already. They disguised their Obamacare repeal as a budget resolution and the Senate parliamentarian allowed it. The Senate almost got there to repeal Obamacare, but did not have the will to actually do it. 
I think this concern is overstated because to repeal something you would not only need 51 dedicated Senators but you need to change the White House too. I think that's sufficiently difficult.

---