Should the Senate be abolished?

[AGA]

It grants equal power to each state regardless of population. I know that it is meant to give small states more power relative to large states, but is it really necessary? It allows one party to control the Senate while winning a lot fewer votes than the opposing party.

[NeverAgain]

Yup. Especially when they don't do their constitutional obligations, like the Republicans have this session. I think I can speak for most of us when I say, it's time for the guillotines.

[Cashew]

Yes. There is nothing inherently sacred in giving states with smaller population more of a voice in government. Remember that the constitution was not something unanimously agreed upon, but just a series of compromises so that the country could be held together when it was weaker. If they could have gotten away with some changes, many of them would.


Frankly that fact the people of California are so complacent about this outrageous situation is really disappointing to me.

[Blue3]

Yes, in combination with an end to a gerrymandered Congress. Nonpartisan commissions for redistricting.


Abolish the Electoral College, replacing it with an IRV popular vote, while we're at it too... and have public financing of campaigns, and universal voter registration, and a tax credit to vote. Find a way to protect free speech while encouraging more balanced media coverage. Require an engaging, in-depth civics and current events education throughout all of middle and high school.

[Hammy]

Voted yes, but don't think it should be abolished entirely--just apportion the number of Senators based on the national popular vote similar to parliamentary systems, having half of the seats up for election in midterm years and half in presidential.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

the senate should be less powerful - stripped of the right to initiate  legislation and made subordinate to the House.

[Enduro]

No, but the state legislators should appoint the senators.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

yes if the house is democratised, no otherwise (normal)

[Kingpoleon]

Yup. Especially when they don't do their constitutional obligations, like the Republicans have this session. I think I can speak for most of us when I say, it's time for the guillotines.

Will exempt Tammy Baldwin.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Yes, and the House of Representatives should be elected via proportional representation. Frankly, I wouldn't be opposed to replacing Congress with a federal parliament; it would be much more productive and a hell of a lot more representative than the current government.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Yup. Especially when they don't do their constitutional obligations, like the Republicans have this session. I think I can speak for most of us when I say, it's time for the guillotines.

wtf?

[buritobr]

I think it is good to have a house in the congress in which the term is longer, in which there are members elected in previous elections.
So that a short term opinion wave doesn't make the legislative branch too extremist.

[Sopranos Republican]

Literally the only hope we have right about now.