Which is what they are doing.
No, they can't represent tehir consituents in the legislative process if they aren't present for the legislative process.
Their job is to inhibit their opponents.
No it's not.
Besides that how would this be any different than if they had the majority and prevented republican legislation from being enacted.
Because it would not inhibit representation.
Partisan politics is a good thing.
I absolutely disagree. Partisan politics prevents real issues from being addressed and switches teh focus form long-term to immediate gratification.
It makes it harder for them to work together, which means its harder for them to screw the people.
Partisan politics
is screwing people. Nothing gets accomplished of value and real issues are overlooked because real issues don't get votes.
Well, considering that there is ample evidence of me bashing both parties for tactics like this available on this websit eif one simply looks for it, your doubts have no basis in reality.
Hell, from what I have seen about this bill, I would oppose it. My opinion on the issues has no bearing on how I feel a representaive democracy should be run.
Again their job to is support and enact legislation they and their constituents oppose and to support and enact legislation they and their constituents want.
their job is to vote "yay or "nay" on bills that are put forth. It is not to prevent that vote from going down just because they are pisse doff they are likely to lose that vote.
THats why people vote for politicians based on certian political beliefs.
Tehy vote for a representative because that is how the system is built. Representatives represent tehir people in teh legislative process. When their representative refuses to vote in that process, they are refusing to represent their constituents.
If peopel are voting for tehir representatives because they want them to inhibit the representative democracy itself, then they are ignorant of the system in which they live.
They are representing their voters by opposing legislation that they do not want.
tehy can't represent their voters if they do not put forth a vote. They can only represent an
agenda when they refuse to vote.
Just like the republicans are representing their voters by voting for the anti-union laws.
The republicans are representing their constituents BECAUSE they are voting on the bill (regardless of which direction they vote).
If the situation were reversed, and this was a pro-union bill and the democrats were in power and teh republicans decided to oppose the bill by refusing to vote on it, they would
not be representing their constituents.
The democrats are not trying to enact legislation, they are trying to oppose and prevent it from happening.
And the only way to do this while repreesnting their constituents is to vote against the bill.
Is there a law that says politicians forfeit their votes if they do not show up to vote? No? So then this is just another tool.
Just because it isn't against the law doesn't mean it isn't unethical and a deriliction of duty. Appeal to authority or law is also a logical fallacy.
The other is putting red tape on the government and another road blocks to slow it down.
That only inhibits the democratic process. Red tape and aprtisanship are two reasons WHY governemnt is considered an "evil".
Again this is a tool of the political process.
It's a tool of the parties used to retain power and subdue the democratic process. It is an abuse of the system.
There is no issue in the world that would or could come up that would make you support politicians doing the same thing these democrats are doing?
None. I'm fairly consistent in keeping my ideological beliefs about systems of governance separate from my positions about certain issues. This is why, despite the fact that I personally abhor the Immigration law that was passed by Arizona, I have consistently argued in favor of the right of Arizonans to have such a law passed.
I find that incredibly hard to believe.
What you find difficult to believe has no bearing on what is actually fact.
Wrong, they are doing what they are elected to do.
False. They cannot represent their consituents in the legislative process if they aren't present of for that process. The only reason state representatives exist is to vote on legislation so that there doesn't need to be an direct vote on every issue. By refusing to vote, tehy are not acting as representatives.
(BTW, the ultimate hindrance to passing laws would be a direct vote that required a 3/4ths majority. If you really think that teh goal of the legislative process is to make things as hard as possible, that would be the best approach)