It makes perfect sense. The issue I have is not so much that I fear the bill will not be supported by a single senator. It is the fact that I have to submit my bill to a senator, wait for them to read it, wait for a response from them to see if they like it and then wait for them to introduce it. Then, if I realize I made a slight mistake or forgot something just after it's introduced, I then have to contact the senator again, tell them my amendment, and then wait for them to amend that post. This change is a step toward better political expediency, not merely a way to lord it over the Senate.
So in other words, the problem here is impatience. Apparently you're too good to wait to have your bill introduced like everyone else, when that isn't even the job you were elected to do. You may as well change your title to "Nationwide Senator."
The fact is, everyone goes through this process; none of the constituents who have written bills for me have ever told me that they should just be able to propose it themselves, because - this may come as a surprise - they weren't elected to propose bills.
And if a Senator takes a while to review a bill you want introduced, consider it a good thing- they're going to eventually vote on the bill, anyway. You'll never vote on it, just sign it assuming it passes.
If it turns out that no senator would support the bill in the first place, then obviously that would mean the bill would fail, and I would hardly be in a position to complain about it. Therefore, the balance of power would remain firmly in place.
Well, yes; a bill introduced without the help of anyone who would actually vote on the bill's passage does not look too good in the Senate. Anyway, as learned from above, your intention in doing this is impatience and expansion of presidential powers, not introducing bills that nobody in the Senate will support. I apologize for misjudging your intentions.
I realize this might seem just a little unfair, and therefore I've been working on a compromise idea. While senators' legislation is guaranteed one of four spots on the Senate floor, as is now, presidential legislation would be given a fifth spot as and when it is introduced (subject to a similar queue). This does not change the order of business as far as senators are concerned, and presidential legislation is therefore treated as 'additional' to Senate business.
Ah, excellent; finally, a loophole to take advantage of. Say, Mr. President, I've got a great bill but I don't think it should wait its turn. Mind introducing it for me?
I'm not defending the suppression of civil rights here. I'm defending a procedural amendment, the effect of which is being vastly overstated by yourself.
I'm not overstating anything. You want to:
1. Change how the Senate does its business;
2. Change what you are elected to do;
3. Allow bills introduced by one person to go to the floor immediately, regardless of their urgency.
I was not comparing this bill to violations of civil rights, just your defense of it. "It's a mere procedural formality; this won't be abused; all the checks and balances remain in place," etc. Sounds like someone defending the PATRIOT Act, that's all.
