06-01-2021, 02:02 PM
(06-01-2021, 01:45 PM)hollodero Wrote: It's tough to condemn either party for using the tools that are available, even if said party would advocate for these tools to be removed.
Imho it's similar to things like gerrymandering etc. - you can be earnestly against it, but you can't earnestly forgo using it to your advantage as long as it exists. Every alleged moral victory coming from such a principled, noble stance would correlate with a real-life loss of influence.
That's pretty much where I'm at as well.
(06-01-2021, 01:48 PM)Nately120 Wrote: To use another football metaphor, it's like people complaining about the "pussified nature" of the NFL and the rules but then cheering their asses off when that 15 yard penalty flag flies in there and turns 4th and 28 into 1st and 10. I'm biased as hell too...I'm not saying I"m above it.
Completely agreed.
(06-01-2021, 01:54 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: When I refer to this concept, I refer to scenarios where a minority of voters control a political structure over a majority of voters. It could be 3m more voters losing the Electoral College or a majority of Senators representing a minority of voters. Senate GOP hasn't represented a majority of US voters since 1996 but controlled the Senate for 16 out of 24 years from 1997 to 2020. If population figures remain, we may likely get to a point where 1/3 of the population controls 2/3 of the Senate.
Using procedural tricks to prolong the legislative process is a different concept to me and it varies based on the tool used. A majority of Senators wanting to vote for something but unable to end the threat of a filibuster from a minority can only be addressed by changing the rules. A majority of legislators wanting to vote for something but not having a quorum hours before their session expired can be fixed with the governor calling a special session.
I'd also compare the causes. You're filibustering the civil rights act? That's shitty. You're walking out because the ruling party wants to end fair voting practices used by minorities that vote for a different party? All the power to you.
In Texas the party representing the minority of voters deliberately sabotaged the working of government. This is absolutely no different than the Senate blocking legislation through the fillibuster. Forgive me if I'm incorrect, but your last paragraph seems to suggest the ends justify the means. The problem with that is you're using a subjective criteria to approve of the tactic in some cases and not in others.
