I don't care the motivation. The SC shouldn't be doing congress' job. Congress got burned because they've been complacent.
RvW has always stood on tenuous footing. We've known this. Congress has literally had decades to do something and they chose instead to keep the status quo. Why? Because the republican threat helps democrat voter turnout. Same reason nothing is being done about the failed drug war.
I agree, but the person I was responding to seemed to think that I was somehow blaming Congress in general rather than the Republicans, which is reading something into my comment that simply wasn't there.
I'd argue that Congress has not done a good job of anything (at least not anything that the majority of Americans would care about) because our motivations are not aligned. That's the point of this campaign - to remove the motivation for Congress to act in ways that our not in the best interest of the general public, by removing the financial incentives for them to do so.
The current Congress can't get anything done because one of the political parties has decided that it isn't in their interest to get anything done, to keep the other party from getting credit for it.
I don't mean to call out the Republicans for being uniquely unpleasant in this regard -- there have been periods when the Democrats have been just as calculatingly obstructive.
Another note - wasting senate time on a bill that cannot pass is not necessary and there’s no point in doing it - for either party - beyond a desire to grandstand. Everyone in congress has a political agenda.
Congress wants to pretend the other guy is the problem, gerrymandered their own districts and really only care about re-elected. Have a for life appointee in the courts do all the work for them is ideal cover for their more extreme ideals.
You could easily make the argument that's the reason Congress is set up as it is.. when one party controls the senate, and another the house, and another the presidency, you know damn sure nothing is going to get done unless there is broad consensus.
Having one party control everything leads to shenanigans. Trust me, you do not want an agile and fast government.
Just about the only thing Congress has been doing for the last 6 years is preventing the president from doing anything. Seriously, that's it. So if that's your criteria for congressional success, mission accomplished.
However, pushing back against the president is only one of many things Congress is designed to do. Other things include governing the country and dealing with its problems. These are the tasks they have been useless at. Long on obstruction, short on governance. It's what their supporters elected them to do, so in some sense they are doing the will of the constituents, but it doesn't make it any more adult or responsible or constructive.
As you note, when congress sees an urgent problem worth solving, they move quickly.
When I read, "congress is abdicating its responsibility", it seems to me people are just upset a law they like wasn't passed.
In other words, people want a dictator they agree with, rather than taking the time and effort to change the minds of their fellow citizens on any given issue.
Besides, inaction is often the best path to take, particularly when there isn't a clear winning idea.
Part of this problem is that Congress has simply stopped functioning for the past ten years or so. They're pretty much just keeping the lights on while social conservatives refuse to compromise with anyone else. When's the last time you remember high-profile federal legislation being passed with the intention of protecting or aiding constituents?
The only people who can really hold congress accountable are the voters. Right now it appears that the voters care more about who is “woke” and who isn’t, than about anything else.
I don't care the motivation. The SC shouldn't be doing congress' job. Congress got burned because they've been complacent.
RvW has always stood on tenuous footing. We've known this. Congress has literally had decades to do something and they chose instead to keep the status quo. Why? Because the republican threat helps democrat voter turnout. Same reason nothing is being done about the failed drug war.
reply