• admiralteal
      link
      fedilink
      2510 months ago

      Only until the instant the Senate takes a simple majority vote to lower it to 50.

      While the Senate has historically been a useful bulwark for pushing back against the creeping fascism of the GOP, it’s also a matter of fact that it is an antidemocratic institution that in the longer term we’re better off minimizing or eliminating. It’s the House of Lords and we do not need a House of Lords in the modern era.

      Though I would like to see proper reapportionment in the House of Reps first, including adding significantly more members.

      • @JoBo@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        1210 months ago

        While the Senate has historically been a useful bulwark for pushing back against the creeping fascism of the GOP

        Has it?

        • admiralteal
          link
          fedilink
          010 months ago

          Maybe. Maybe not. I won’t come to the defense of that, it was more of a hedge.

          • @JoBo@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            110 months ago

            The argument works for the House of Lords, which has often acted as a moderating force (and loses power every time it does), despite its antidemocratic nature.

            I think it’s a non-starter for the Senate. It was deliberately constructed as a conservative brake on Congress, being heavily weighted to smaller (more rural) states which tend to be more conservative. True conservatism is obviously opposed to fascism but in practice, it isn’t (and neither is liberalism if it is feeling threatened by socialism).