John Dingall - Democrat, wants to abolish the entire Senate

[Twilight Hue]

It pretty much speaks for itself.

It makes me wonder what Mr. Dingell would have thought had the Democrats took the Senate and Republicans retained the House.

John Dingell's plan for America? Let's abolish the U.S. Senate

It's a head-scratcher considering his military service, age and experience in government as to why he would come across such a ridiculous notion.

All I can think of is encroaching senility and loss of political vision, being he's been a politician for so long. It's my opinion he obviously lost touch which is why I'm more in favor of term limits as opposed to restructuring of government itself.

Either way, I'm pretty sure it wasn't what the founding fathers would have wanted in terms of a having or promoting a centralized government (which is what I think modern Democrats are shooting for in the first place) which is why we have the House and Senate in the first place I would think.

What are your thoughts about it?

 

[Revoltingest]

It's a head-scratcher considering his military service, age and experience in government as to why he would come across such a ridiculous notion.

Since when have those experiences been associated with superior brain power?

 

[Brickjectivity]

What we could do is every 10 years have a computer redraw all of the district lines using a random algorithm, and it should prefer districts to be as rectangular as possible.

 

[Revoltingest]

What we could do is every 10 years have a computer redraw all of the district lines using a random algorithm, and it should prefer districts to be as rectangular as possible.

Better yet, eliminate all districts.

 

[Woberts]

Either way, I'm pretty sure it wasn't what the founding fathers would have wanted

Why would it matter what the founding fathers would have wanted? They're long dead, and their vision would be woefully inadequate in a modern world.

 

[Sunstone]

I'm all for abolishing the Senate. It's quite a problematic branch of Congress, and I'm not sure it serves much good purpose.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Why would it matter what the founding fathers would have wanted? They're long dead, and their vision would be woefully inadequate in a modern world.

I don't agree. While I think we need to make changes in regards to technology and advancement, I think the basic structure of government still holds true today as it was then in that respect.

History shows what happens when you centralize government which is where my concerns lay.

 

[Revoltingest]

Why would it matter what the founding fathers would have wanted? They're long dead, and their vision would be woefully inadequate in a modern world.

Alls we gots to do is change the Constitution.

 

[Revoltingest]

History shows what happens when you centralize government which is where my concerns lay.

When people suggest such things, ask them to imagine a
powerful centralized government with Trump at the helm.
The Senate serves a useful damping function.
(That's "dampening" to you Limeys.)

 

[Twilight Hue]

When people suggest such things, ask them to imagine a
powerful centralized government with Trump at the helm.

Good point.

 

[Willamena]

You could replace the entire Senate with Beto O'Rourke.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I'm all for abolishing the Senate. It's quite a problematic branch of Congress, and I'm not sure it serves much good purpose.

Do you think that would serve well if for instance your political party was not dominant for the term? It's great if it's your 'team', not so great if it's the other 'team'.

 

[columbus]

, I think the basic structure of government still holds true today as it was then in that respect.

You think the Federal Government is too good to improve?

Without reading more than the few snippets provided I don't really have much of an opinion on Dingell's proposals. But his basic thrust seems to be improving the government by removing mass disenfranchisement of the citizenry.
I understand why the people who benefit from that disenfranchisement would prefer to keep their privilege. But I don't support that.
Tom

 

[columbus]

Do you think that would serve well if for instance your political party was not dominant for the term? It's great if it's your 'team', not so great if it's the other 'team'.

Not everyone sees everything in such starkly partisan ways.
Tom

 

[YmirGF]

Alls we gots to do is change the Constitution.

Fortunately that is near on impossible in today's political climate.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Not everyone sees everything in such starkly partisan ways.
Tom

True. But there are enough people that do.

 

[Revoltingest]

You could replace the entire Senate with Beto O'Rourke.

No, not with a first name like that.
We don't want the country run by people with names like....
Beto
Skipper
Buffy
Gonzo
Muffin
Great names for puppets though.

 

[Revoltingest]

Fortunately that is near on impossible in today's political climate.

I know.
It's wonderful, eh.

 

[Woberts]

History shows what happens when you centralize government

Yeah, it does. And it's great.

 

[columbus]

True. But there are enough people that do.

It's one of the unfortunate side effects of sticking to an antiquated system designed by the liberal elitist politicians of the late 1700s.

One might think the Founding Fathres were sent by God and the Constitution is Holy Writ.
Tom