I think vacant seats should automatically count as a no vote.
Otherwise we have shenanigans...
this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2024
104 points (99.1% liked)
politics
19309 readers
3524 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Why should vacant seats get a vote?
-
So you have a hypothetical 218-217 US House, only a majority of one seat
-
Senate and President are the opposite party of the house
-
two members of the majority party mysteriously dies
-
house majority flips
-
theres now a government trifecta
-
free reign to pass laws until the special elections happen
Vancancy = "No" Vote, means that it doesn't matter how many of your opponents you assassinate, you can't gain a majority by killing and bypassing elections.
And if you assassinate those who would be voting yes?
See the thing is. Things should be made as fail-safe not fail-deadly.
[Edit:
TLDR: I kinda rambled a bit. But my point is:
Its better for a good law being slightly delayed from a few deaths, rather than a bad law being passed because of a few deaths.]
Example:
If they want to pass a law that, say, gives everyone universal healthcare.
The president, and both chambers want to pass it. House is at 218-217, one seat majority.
Big pharma doesn't like it and assassinates 2 members of the house that belongs to the party that wants to pass it.
Okay now they lack the votes since the 2 dead members means a "no" vote.
Okay doesn't matter, special elections are held in a few months.
Meanwhile, an investigation is done.
The assassination plots will most likely be linked back to Big pharma.
Arrests will be made. Charges will be filed. Conviction will take longer, but its inevitable as long as theres enough evidence.
The assassination also motivated people to vote for the dead legislator's replacement candidate that is most aligned with the dead legislator.
So, special elections happen, seats are filled.
There is now higher protection to all members of congress. Some might even have their own private security on top of that.
Law is eventuallt passed, just with slight delay.
This is also the same with or without the "Vacant = 'No' Vote" policy, without such policy, the bill will also fail, but with [216 yes to 217 no], instead of [216 yes to 219 no], the assassinations are just a minor delay. Its not like they could assassinate the president, some senators at the same time, if that happened, there'd be bigger issues anyways.
In contrast, the other scenario involves the President and Senate wanting to pass a law that give the government more power, but the house opposes, by a 218-217 vote. So they assassinate 2 house members voting no.
If theres mo "Vacant = No" policy, then they could pass any "Enabling Act" now with the 2 members voting no dead.
But with the "Vacant = No" rule, they can kill 5 or 10 members of the house, and still cant get an "Enabling Act" through. But meanwhile, investigations would happen and the plot would be revealed. But had "Vacant = No" rule not exist, they would already passed the Enabling act would would allow them to interfere with the investigations into the assassination plots.
When theres power shifts in the legislature due to deaths, its better to be safe and make it harder to pass laws rather that make it easier.
Couldn't they just like, play opposite day for whatever they want?
It's messed up you can even get on the ballot without having to residency in your chosen district.