I need some good points for reforming the Senate. Can someone give me 1 example with examples please.
3 Answers | Add Yours
Some argue that shortening a Senator's term from six years down to four would give more accountability to voters, and make more democratic sense. No other elected office is six years, and the Senate was loosely based on the British House of Lords, a rank of privilege for royalty. Six years seems rather like a number just picked out of the air.
If a Senator is elected just three times, they serve for almost two decades, while a person in the House of Representatives would have to be elected nine times to serve the same length. I can't think of a single reason why that is fair or democratic.
The most common idea I have heard for reforming the Senate (assuming you are talking about the US Senate) is to do away with the filibuster.
The filibuster is something that is unique to the Senate. Basically, if you can't get 60 of the 100 senators to vote with you, you cannot get things passed. That is because 41 senators can vote to prevent a bill from coming to a vote.
People often say that doing away with the filibuster would make the Senate more democratic. As it is, 41% of the senators can block the other 59% from getting their way. This does not seem fair to many people.
We’ve answered 318,930 questions. We can answer yours, too.Ask a question