• aelwero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    112
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    We need to get rid of riders… Someone propose a “one bill-one item” rule already, and stick that motherfucker on every single fucking bill as a rider until something comes along that’ll bait em all into that shit.

    • PupBiru@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      perhaps, but combining bills does allow for good ways of compromise… i’ll pass your bill that i don’t agree with if you pass a change to this other thing that addresses my concerns, etc

    • tacosplease@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      11 months ago

      Obama did something like that. It didn’t work. All the little add ons are so each politician in a contested district can get something for their voters to justify all the other parts of the bill their voters don’t like. Without that nothing ever gets passed.

    • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      What if I told you that slime ball Matt Gaetz has already proposed this issue multiple times. Not sure how I feel about that but it’s the only sane thing I’ve heard from his side.

      • tacosplease@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Because it would cause gridlock. That’s why Gaetz wants to do it. There are too many things to pass one at a time. There are not enough affirmative votes on most single issues to pass anything. You need the little extra things to pull in the politicians who would otherwise not vote for that one thing because their local base doesn’t want it.

        • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yeah I don’t really support that implementation. The single topic vote causes problems. Not every senator needs to be well informed on every single issue they vote for. That’s what committees are for. And what the rest of the party is for.

      • aelwero@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        11 months ago

        Don’t know a single thing about Matt Gaetz, and Google suggests I really wouldn’t care to :)

        I’m a moderate, a (GASP!) Jordan Peterson type. Gaetz sounds partisan enough that I wouldn’t listen to him for more than about 15 seconds, but I gotta qualify that remark by saying I’m not really part of his opposition either, because not choosing a side is basically not a thing anymore and I do it anyway ;)

        • Zink@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          I’m registered as an independent, and am not a fan of how political parties lead people to bundle opinions together. However, if you insist on not “taking a side” in today’s political climate, you either aren’t paying attention or you’re in denial that you prefer the bad guys. If you don’t know anything about Matt Gaetz, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you’re the former.

          This independent’s “side” for the foreseeable future is whoever has the highest likelihood of beating their Republican opponent.

    • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      And like that you’ve broken the biggest tool legislators have to negotiate marginal votes into their camp