WWTBAM Bored

Learned of this in passing this week after a Minnesota Democrat staffer made another controversial comment after saying that Republicans should be brought to the guillotine last fall.

https://kstp.com/politics/minnesota-dem ... p/5108969/

The October 15 linked story said he was suspended last fall, but as of a few days ago he still had his job.

Obvious purpose of the post is to point out that if the parties were reversed, SSS and the Bobs would have had their panties in a wad and clutched their pearls for days while pointing out the "Republican climate of violence" etc etc. blah, blah, blah"

Spock wrote:Learned of this in passing this week after a Minnesota Democrat staffer made another controversial comment after saying that Republicans should be brought to the guillotine last fall.

https://kstp.com/politics/minnesota-dem ... p/5108969/

The October 15 linked story said he was suspended last fall, but as of a few days ago he still had his job.

Obvious purpose of the post is to point out that if the parties were reversed, SSS and the Bobs would have had their panties in a wad and clutched their pearls for days while pointing out the "Republican climate of violence" etc etc. blah, blah, blah"

Or if a staffer of some long-term republican congressman were sentence to 4 years in jail for trying to help facilitate violence against democrats.

Spock wrote:Learned of this in passing this week after a Minnesota Democrat staffer made another controversial comment after saying that Republicans should be brought to the guillotine last fall.

https://kstp.com/politics/minnesota-dem ... p/5108969/

The October 15 linked story said he was suspended last fall, but as of a few days ago he still had his job.

Obvious purpose of the post is to point out that if the parties were reversed, SSS and the Bobs would have had their panties in a wad and clutched their pearls for days while pointing out the "Republican climate of violence" etc etc. blah, blah, blah"

Or if an officeholder threatened to shoot state troopers, telling them to "[s]end bachelors and come heavily armed." --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Spock wrote:Learned of this in passing this week after a Minnesota Democrat staffer made another controversial comment after saying that Republicans should be brought to the guillotine last fall.

https://kstp.com/politics/minnesota-dem ... p/5108969/

The October 15 linked story said he was suspended last fall, but as of a few days ago he still had his job.

Obvious purpose of the post is to point out that if the parties were reversed, SSS and the Bobs would have had their panties in a wad and clutched their pearls for days while pointing out the "Republican climate of violence" etc etc. blah, blah, blah"

Or if an officeholder threatened to shoot state troopers, telling them to "[s]end bachelors and come heavily armed." --Bob

The Oregon news doesn't make it here so I never saw this. I do condemn his remarks and perhaps even suggest he should be arrested for making a terroristic threat towards law enforcement.

We had as similar situation in Texas a few years back where one party's representatives held a "sick out" to prevent quorum. The governor had them rounded up. I don't recall which party, but probably the Democrats given the state has held a Republican majority for a long time. Wish I could remember the issue.

BackInTex wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

Spock wrote:Learned of this in passing this week after a Minnesota Democrat staffer made another controversial comment after saying that Republicans should be brought to the guillotine last fall.

https://kstp.com/politics/minnesota-dem ... p/5108969/

The October 15 linked story said he was suspended last fall, but as of a few days ago he still had his job.

Obvious purpose of the post is to point out that if the parties were reversed, SSS and the Bobs would have had their panties in a wad and clutched their pearls for days while pointing out the "Republican climate of violence" etc etc. blah, blah, blah"

Or if an officeholder threatened to shoot state troopers, telling them to "[s]end bachelors and come heavily armed." --Bob

The Oregon news doesn't make it here so I never saw this. I do condemn his remarks and perhaps even suggest he should be arrested for making a terroristic threat towards law enforcement.

We had as similar situation in Texas a few years back where one party's representatives held a "sick out" to prevent quorum. The governor had them rounded up. I don't recall which party, but probably the Democrats given the state has held a Republican majority for a long time. Wish I could remember the issue.

It seems like the most straightforward solution is to amend the state constitution as needed so that a quorum consists of a majority of the chamber's authorized membership. That is the federal rule. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:It seems like the most straightforward solution is to amend the state constitution as needed so that a quorum consists of a majority of the chamber's authorized membership. That is the federal rule. --Bob

There are reasons for setting a quorum just as there are good reasons to require super-majorities for certain votes. If our elected representatives would all behave as adults it would solve a lot of problems.

BackInTex wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:It seems like the most straightforward solution is to amend the state constitution as needed so that a quorum consists of a majority of the chamber's authorized membership. That is the federal rule. --Bob

There are reasons for setting a quorum just as there are good reasons to require super-majorities for certain votes. If our elected representatives would all behave as adults it would solve a lot of problems.

But I really can't think of any reason to set a quorum so high that the number of legislators who are sufficient to approve legislation in the first place isn't enough to constitute a quorum. All it does is enable a back-door filibuster. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

BackInTex wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:It seems like the most straightforward solution is to amend the state constitution as needed so that a quorum consists of a majority of the chamber's authorized membership. That is the federal rule. --Bob

There are reasons for setting a quorum just as there are good reasons to require super-majorities for certain votes. If our elected representatives would all behave as adults it would solve a lot of problems.

But I really can't think of any reason to set a quorum so high that the number of legislators who are sufficient to approve legislation in the first place isn't enough to constitute a quorum. All it does is enable a back-door filibuster. --Bob

Maybe because some feel that a simple majority vote of 50% means only 25% of elected representatives are making the decisions. The problem is when you put in controls, such as quorum requirements, some use them for unintended (and unproductive) purposes.

BackInTex wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

BackInTex wrote:
There are reasons for setting a quorum just as there are good reasons to require super-majorities for certain votes. If our elected representatives would all behave as adults it would solve a lot of problems.

But I really can't think of any reason to set a quorum so high that the number of legislators who are sufficient to approve legislation in the first place isn't enough to constitute a quorum. All it does is enable a back-door filibuster. --Bob

Maybe because some feel that a simple majority vote of 50% means only 25% of elected representatives are making the decisions. The problem is when you put in controls, such as quorum requirements, some use them for unintended (and unproductive) purposes.

That problem is solved by making sure representatives get adequate notice of sessions. If everyone shows up, then it takes a majority to make a decision. As I said, it's worked pretty well at the federal level, which isn't exactly known for a lack of gamesmanship. Or in the alternative, you could provide (as California does) that a majority of the chamber's authorized membership (rather than a majority of those voting) is necessary to approve legislation.

And bear in mind, this has been used in both directions. In the old thread I unearthed from 2011, it was Wisconsin Democrats leaving the state to prevent a quorum. So this isn't a partisan issue. --Bob