
Originally Posted by
Suppressed Poet
On your first point of eliminating the filibuster would indeed allow for a high probability of drastic legislative and policy changes, the public would feel those immediate ramifications, and a likely result would be each party would be more accountable to the voting public and more carefully consider their positions…. I see your point and actually agree with you on those things happening if the filibuster ended. I am not, however, willing to be subjected to those radically different changes instituted by each party. Each party would each absolutely make sweeping changes when they gained power until they learned to play the long game, and that would be a painful experience for you & I (mass American public) both.
I don’t discount that we’re essentially a less effective / efficient federal government as a result of having the filibuster. I accept that inefficiency because quite frankly our federal government fucks things up ALL the time. Why do they deserve more power given our history?
If we boil down our fundamental political differences…. You are liberal or left leaning in the traditional American definition of that word because you believe the federal government is an instrument for solving many of the problems we face today. I’m conservative or right leaning in the American definition of that word because I believe the federal government should be small / mostly limited to foreign policy / defense / etc. and that decentralized local government & communities are a better instrument to solving many of the problems we face today. I’m not going to change you, you won’t change me…but I think there is still a lot that both sides can find middle ground on.