Interesting.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I mean if you want to weight certain regions, which can be a legitimate choice sometimes, you can do it by giving the smaller regions a couple extra seats or something, not creating an entirely separate chamber.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
States having bicameral legislatures where both houses are picked by identical criteria is peak aping
-
At least make one proportional vote party list or something , but the best answer is of course is elimination.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I say we give Chile ten years before applauding.
-
England effectively removed the power of the House of Lords more than a century ago and has done okay.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Unicameral America baby
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The primary value today for an upper chamber (Senate) is the longer overlapping terms. It may help stability, it may keep country from changing directions too frequently based on on transient changes in public opinion. But it should still be representative, which ours isn't
-
No reason you couldn’t make the single lower house have staggered, longer terms if that’s your priority.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Remember Pinochet’s veto was that under the 1980 Constitution he got to appoint 25% of the senate, including his own lifetime seat. He destroyed the credibility of the institution.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.