100
1 vote
Aug 3, 2015

We don't want bad laws. Preventing them is good. Requiring 60% to pass a law is one of the best rules we have.

The only problem is that we do want to repeal bad laws, and we need to pass a budget. And the filibuster prevents us from doing those things. We should change the rules so we need 60% to pass a law, but only 50% + 1 to repeal a law or pass a budget.

Reply to this opinion
subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
0
main reply
0 votes,
Aug 3, 2015

It's important to note that budgets are not categorized differently from any other bills going through senate. To change their categorization would be a pretty complicated procedure.

subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
100
1 vote,
Aug 3, 2015

It's very easy to distinguish the budget from other bills. If a bill gives the government the power to imprison or fine people for doing anything or for not doing anything, then it is not a budget. If a bill gives the government power to do anything other than spend money, then it is not a budget.

subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
0
0 votes,
Aug 3, 2015

Yes, but the procedure for passing them is to my knowledge the same. That's what I was trying to convey.

subscribe
::unhide-discussion::
0
0 votes,
Aug 3, 2015

Agreed. Additionally, they could shove all sorts of new law into a budget bill via amendment in order to bypass philibuster.

subscribe
Challenge someone to answer this opinion:
Invite an OpiWiki user:
OR
Invite your friend via email:
OR
Share it: