I could see that being an improvement, although it’s not terribly different from the current system. It might be clearer for the public to understand.
On the other hand, reps would have to explain to their constituents why they voted for the kicking puppies act which people might have trouble grasping.
I think it’s a good method for achieving compromise. If the various factions perceive more benefit than cost, the bill passes. Obviously some bad things get snuck in, but you get good things out of it as well.
Even if your personal calculus is that this bill does more harm then good, I don’t think banning this method is a good idea.
There is certainly a level of disfunction that it can’t overcome and we may have reached that.
Well I don’t know which state you mean but a lot of them are not divided the way then federal government is.
I have read lots of history but I take your meaning.
Perhaps a better phrasing would be: there is no ethically sound reason to pursue this as an end goal.
I don’t really understand why that would be an objective for anyone.
This one I can get behind.
What would the purpose of this even be?
China dipping their toes in some CIA shit. Ominous.
Well it’s common but maybe not ubiquitous in the sense that you mean. I don’t know, does anyone have any numbers to look at the actual frequencies here?
It’s certainly a sentence to a high risk of sexual assault.
No. Next question.