Is the U.S. Senate broken?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**d-usa**

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57544861/is-the-u.s-senate-broken/

On Tuesday, voters will elect a new Congress, replacing the one that's had the lowest public approval ratings in the history of political polling. Thirty-three seats are up for grabs in the U.S. Senate, which used to be known as the world's greatest deliberative body, a place where difficult issues were carefully considered, and debated until a consensus or a compromise was reached.

60 Minutes Overtime
An exasperating interview »
Today it's known more for deadlock, dysfunction, and political gamesmanship; a body unwilling or unable to resolve the major issues of the day: jobs, deficits, taxes and how to allocate $1.2 trillion in automatic budget cuts set to go into effect January 1st. A number of respected senators have thrown up their hands and quit, and others are speaking out against an institution many think is broken. One powerful senator had this advice for the voters.

Tom Coburn: The best thing that could happen is all of us lose and send some people up here who care more about the country than they do their political party or their position in politics.

Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma is one of the most influential and conservative members of the Senate. He's blocked hundreds of pieces of legislation that he thinks are a waste of money, but he is also one of the few Republicans, or Democrats for that matter, willing to cross party lines to help break the political gridlock that's kept the Senate from dealing not just with big issues but with basic Senate business.

Tom Coburn: This is the first time in 51 years the Senate has not passed a defense authorization bill, which directs where the defense spending going to go, and in terms of the priorities. Our commanders need that.

Steve Kroft: What about a budget?

Tom Coburn: Same thing. We haven't done that in four years.
......

Lots more at the link.

**kronk**

Get rid of the Call-In Filibuster.

You want to block a bill, get your ass on the Senate floor for 2 days!

**Frazzled**

kronk wrote:
Get rid of the Call-In Filibuster.

You want to block a bill, get your ass on the Senate floor for 2 days!

Agreed.

**d-usa**

Frazzled wrote:
kronk wrote:
Get rid of the Call-In Filibuster.

You want to block a bill, get your ass on the Senate floor for 2 days!

Agreed.

Same here.

I think our job here is done, the thread can be locked.

**kronk**

See. We can fix all of life's problems in 3 posts!

Next up, Counterfeit GW Models!

**Jihadin**

Are they cheaper?

**WarOne**

kronk wrote:
See. We can fix all of life's problems in 3 posts!

Next up, Counterfeit GW Models!

Hire Frazzled to go to China and clean up the mess.

Also, a budget for Weiner Dog messes.

**SPARKEYG**

My biggest issues w/ the Senate would be fixed by repealing the 17th amendment. The senate is not a popularity contest and should represent the states not the people. State interests should balance out the winds of popular interest that is the House. This and campaign finance reform would go a long way, IMHO, to fixing politics in DC.

The fuax-filibuster needs to go. Man up and start talking if you want to do something.

**chaos0xomega**

Yes, the Senate is broken, and so is the House (which is becoming increasingly less representative due to the artificial cap placed on its membership in the early part of the last century), the main problem though is lack of leadership from the top. This is hardly the first time partisanship and political gridlock has arisen there, if Obama was a stronger more experienced leader he would have figured out how to handle it by now like so many others before him have.

**labmouse42**

kronk wrote:
Get rid of the Call-In Filibuster.

You want to block a bill, get your ass on the Senate floor for 2 days!

That would solve a lot of the problem.
When you saw a senator standing up on the podium reading the phone book to block a bill to benifit vets, that would get TV coverage.
People would see what an ass the senator was being, and he would have less of a chance of being re-elected.

Ergo, senators would be more frugal with the filibuster.

**Ouze**

Indeed, this thread was over by the second post, and I mean that in a positive way.

**WarOne**

Ouze wrote:
Indeed, this thread was over by the second post, and I mean that in a positive way.

We have to fix that!

We need a final solution to make this thread last longer!

**KalashnikovMarine**

No! WarOne now we're becoming what we've come here to fix! XD

But yeah break the fillibuster chain and kick campaign finance reform in the balls, maybe add some extremely stiff penalties if you're caught with your hand in the cookie jar.

I'd also say congress needs their benefits reduced and a pay cut.

**Frazzled**

WarOne wrote:
kronk wrote:
See. We can fix all of life's problems in 3 posts!

Next up, Counterfeit GW Models!

Hire Frazzled to go to China and clean up the mess.

Also, a budget for Weiner Dog messes.

I'm sorry, you appear to be reproducing minis without a license. Here hold this chew toy. Don't squirm it will just hurt more.

**azazel the cat**

chaos0xomega wrote:Yes, the Senate is broken, and so is the House (which is becoming increasingly less representative due to the artificial cap placed on its membership in the early part of the last century), the main problem though is lack of leadership from the top. This is hardly the first time partisanship and political gridlock has arisen there, if Obama was a stronger more experienced leader he would have figured out how to handle it by now like so many others before him have.

Congratulations, you have now managed to become a living avatar of irony! Somehow, you managed to take an objective discussion of the partisan gridlock plagueing the Senate and House, and proceeded to blame Obama for it.

**LordofHats**

I'd also add that I wish we'd go back to Senators not being directly elected. It was very useful having a legislative step not completely subject to the whims of the people.

**whembly**

LordofHats wrote:
I'd also add that I wish we'd go back to Senators not being directly elected. It was very useful having a legislative step not completely subject to the whims of the people.

THIS! (repeal the 17th amendment).

Funny thing... we have embassy for international government... the Senate was supposed to be the embassy for state's interests... now, not so much.

**Frazzled**

LordofHats wrote:
I'd also add that I wish we'd go back to Senators not being directly elected. It was very useful having a legislative step not completely subject to the whims of the people.

but then they're subject to the whims of state houses. If there's anything worse than the US Congress, its the Texas State Congress. I feel nauseus.

**whembly**

Frazzled wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
I'd also add that I wish we'd go back to Senators not being directly elected. It was very useful having a legislative step not completely subject to the whims of the people.

but then they're subject to the whims of state houses. If there's anything worse than the US Congress, its the Texas State Congress. I feel nauseus.

What's wrong with Texa's Congress... don't they work like 6 months out of 24 month cycle?

**Frazzled**

whembly wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
I'd also add that I wish we'd go back to Senators not being directly elected. It was very useful having a legislative step not completely subject to the whims of the people.

but then they're subject to the whims of state houses. If there's anything worse than the US Congress, its the Texas State Congress. I feel nauseus.

What's wrong with Texa's Congress... don't they work like 6 months out of 24 month cycle?

If you saw their work product..you'd say "wait you took six months for this? Did you just copy a soup label and put it into law?"

**kronk**

whembly wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
I'd also add that I wish we'd go back to Senators not being directly elected. It was very useful having a legislative step not completely subject to the whims of the people.

but then they're subject to the whims of state houses. If there's anything worse than the US Congress, its the Texas State Congress. I feel nauseus.

What's wrong with Texa's Congress... don't they work like 6 months out of 24 month cycle?

That's about 5 months too many. Ugh... They sometimes make me want to move back to Louisiana. At least they're honest crooks, there.

**whembly**

Well... isn't that true with all politicians??

**LordofHats**

Frazzled wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
I'd also add that I wish we'd go back to Senators not being directly elected. It was very useful having a legislative step not completely subject to the whims of the people.

but then they're subject to the whims of state houses. If there's anything worse than the US Congress, its the Texas State Congress. I feel nauseus.

A state congress may not be likeable, but an appointed official is less swayed by the mob than an elected official. And of course, they won't spend the tenure in the senate campaigning for reelection quite so much.

Oh and new lobbying rules would be really nice. Whatever ones we have right now just aren't working for me.

**whembly**

LordofHats wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
I'd also add that I wish we'd go back to Senators not being directly elected. It was very useful having a legislative step not completely subject to the whims of the people.

but then they're subject to the whims of state houses. If there's anything worse than the US Congress, its the Texas State Congress. I feel nauseus.

A state congress may not be likeable, but an appointed official is less swayed by the mob than an elected official. And of course, they won't spend the tenure in the senate campaigning for reelection quite so much.

Oh and new lobbying rules would be really nice. Whatever ones we have right now just aren't working for me.

Also... if the public *knew* that their state's government elects the US Senates, then they'd pay more attention to their local offices...

**LordofHats**

Let just do what Rome did and get ourselves an Emperor. That worked for them for a couple decades

**Easy E**

[quote=chaos0xomega 487135 4947276 nullObama was a stronger more experienced leader he would have figured out how to handle it by now like so many others before him have.

**wana10**

kronk wrote:
Get rid of the Call-In Filibuster.

You want to block a bill, get your ass on the Senate floor for 2 days!

Agreed. It's gotten to the point where even if a bill has majority they don't even try unless they've got 2/3rds, and with all the party line bs right now nothing ever has two thirds. Make them actually perform the filibuster so that the American people can see what idiots their senators are and then maybe things will change.

**d-usa**

Even better:

Mandate that all filibusters have to be broadcast through the Emergency Alert System on all TV and radio channels. Let the senators feel the wrath of the people when they miss Game of Thrones or some Lifetime movie.

**Monster Rain**

LordofHats wrote:
Let just do what Rome did and get ourselves an Emperor.

Already got one, thanks!

**sebster**

The problem isn't the filibuster. While the political theatre of making some guy stand there talking nonsense for two days is fun, it is only functionally different to the current system if you pretend that there would be any lack of people willing to stand there talking to hold up a bill until the adults in the room have realised they better let him get his way so the senate can clear out the backlog of other bills that need to be passed.

The problem with the senate, simply, is that it has a set of rules written under the assumption that its members are individuals, and not strictly following party lines. Changing the rules for the senate to account for this will basically produce something indistinguishable from the house of represenatives, at which you'd basically be better off just having a house of reps and the presidency.

So what's much better would be an improvement in the culture in the senate and in the political expectations of senators. You need a return to individual senators acting on their own conscience and by the needs of the specific state they represent. Crossing the floor to vote for a bill shouldn't be political suicide, but instead steadfastly only voting only party lines should cause people to start questioning the value of their senator.