US politics circa 2011

That is what the Founding Fathers intended. As originally conceived, the senate’s job was to inhibit whimsical, sudden change and allow time for proper consideration. The 17th Amendment, while well intentioned, has had unintended consequences. It should now be repealed to reestablish true federalism. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

(17th amendment established Senate elections by the populace) Nah, the electoral college already screws things up; last thing we need is another part of the Federal government that isn't completely elected by popular vote.

From NYT: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/04/us...ef=todayspaper

Excerpt from today's paper, along with the education question. Are you in favor of reducing support for education? Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

In a word -- yes. Primary education should be funded locally -- it is not a Federal matter -- they have fucked things up bad enough with all of their rules.

Secondly, they need to scale back money going to colleges and universities. There is ample evidence that we are devaluing degrees by trying to give them to too many people. There is a looming education bubble that is worse than housing. Too many people have gotten advanced degrees that will never earn enough to pay for it. Colleges have taken the government money and raised prices -- the result is more debt for graduates. Supply and demand baby!

Lastly, there is no evidence that increased spending improves quality.

In a word -- yes. Primary education should be funded locally -- it is not a Federal matter -- they have fucked things up bad enough with all of their rules. Originally Posted by pjorourke

In that case they ALSO need to get rid of their rules (I'm not objecting to it). Repeal No-children Left Behind and all the other mandates. Can't do one without the other and I'm not hearing that they are going after the rules.

Too precious: discussing the new rules Republicans are putting in place for the House about budget and deficit.

"A big exception will be the bill to repeal the health care repeal that House Republicans plan to bring up next week. That bill will not be subject to amendments, nor will Republicans have to abide by their own new rules that compels them to offset the cost of new bills that add to the deficit; the health care repeal and tax cuts are not subject to this new rule. "

Tooooooooooooooo funny

In that case they ALSO need to get rid of their rules (I'm not objecting to it). Repeal No-children Left Behind and all the other mandates. Can't do one without the other and I'm not hearing that they are going after the rules. Originally Posted by discreetgent

Works for me. Its not like any of that shit helps anything.

...the Republicans have come right out & said that their top 3 goals are:

1. Repealing previously enacted legislation
2. Cutting spending (without saying what they will cut)
3. Limiting the opposing party's President to a single-term.

God Bless them for dropping all pretext. And, I suppose that most them genuinely believe accomplishing those three things will actually be in everyone's best interest. But, it sure seems awful cynical from where I sit.

I can't BELIEVE I wasted 4 years of my life studying Political Science. What the hell was I thincking????

I can't BELIEVE I wasted 4 years of my life studying Political Science. What the hell was I thincking???? Originally Posted by Sisyphus

It's really just cheap entertainment for the masses, right?

If only it didn't take hundreds of millions of dollars to get elected to provide cheap entertainment.

1. Repealing previously enacted legislation Originally Posted by Sisyphus

How does this surprise anyone. Obamacare was a cram down. A blatant balls to the wall political deal that the Dems had to use every parliamentary edge they could think of to get it pushed through. Even with control of the WH and both sides of Congress. And it surprises you that the other team doesn't let it lie?

That ain't the way this country works. We don't enact major legislation without some sense of concensus. Obamacare was a swansong for the tired lefties of the 60's. It won't last.

Has there ever been a major piece of legislation that Congress tried to completely repeal?

(17th amendment established Senate elections by the populace) Nah, the electoral college already screws things up; last thing we need is another part of the Federal government that isn't completely elected by popular vote. Originally Posted by discreetgent

Let the legislators (not governors) in each state choose the Senators they want to represent the state’s interest in Congress. Leave it to the voters to hold the state legislators accountable if they make bad choices. I agree, the Electoral College has outlived its purpose. At one time, the voters voted for the electors who were themselves known and popular men from the community. Now these people—the electors—are merely unknown functionaries fulfilling an obsolete requirement in our electoral process.

Has there ever been a major piece of legislation that Congress tried to completely repeal? Originally Posted by discreetgent

When was the last bill, of the magnitude of this POS, that got crammed down with no votes from the opposing team?

Let the legislators (not governors) in each state choose the Senators they want to represent the state’s interest in Congress. Leave it to the voters to hold the state legislators accountable if they make bad choices. I agree, the Electoral College has outlived its purpose. At one time, the voters voted for the electors who were themselves known and popular men from the community. Now these people—the electors—are merely unknown functionaries fulfilling an obsolete requirement in our electoral process. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

i don't think the EC itself serves any purpose (i.e., the functionaries.) But I do think electing a President through electoral votes (rather than direct election) is a key part of our democracy.

Has there ever been a major piece of legislation that Congress tried to completely repeal? Originally Posted by discreetgent

Congress proposed the Twenty-first Amendment on February 20, 1933; it repealed the 18th Amendment.

Just saying. It may not be the most recent, but it was successful.

i don't think the EC itself serves any purpose (i.e., the functionaries.) But I do think electing a President through electoral votes (rather than direct election) is a key part of our democracy. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Yes, I guess it did make a difference in the 2000 election.