• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Congress: Is working with the other party a good thing or a bad thing?

Congress: Is working with the other party a good thing or a bad thing?


  • Total voters
    19

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,576
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Congress: Is working with the other party a good thing or a bad thing?

Should it be encouraged or discouraged?

Note the neutral phrasing.
 
Congress: Is working with the other party a good thing or a bad thing?

Should it be encouraged or discouraged?

Note the neutral phrasing.

Depends on what they are working on. For example many of us are anti-Civil-Forfeiture. So a lot of us would support both sides working together to end the practice of civil forfeiture. While many who support it would oppose both sides working together to end it.
 
Congress: Is working with the other party a good thing or a bad thing?

Should it be encouraged or discouraged?

Note the neutral phrasing.
It is never a bad thing and it should be encouraged and never used as a threat.
 
Congress: Is working with the other party a good thing or a bad thing?

Should it be encouraged or discouraged?

That all depends on whether they are working on something that is in the best interests of the people as a whole, or just another joint effort to give some special interest another benefit at the expense of the American people.
 
As long as Republicans live by the 'Hastert rule' in both chambers .....
 
That all depends on whether they are working on something that is in the best interests of the people as a whole, or just another joint effort to give some special interest another benefit at the expense of the American people.

Yep, the next major "bipartisan" agreement will be for congress critters to raise the "debt ceiling" in order to borrow even more from future generations to help assure re-election for themselves in 2018. All of that "pay for" rule nonsense is tossed out the window when it is time to get "bipartisan" and borrow some more to make their "budget" work.
 
It is never a bad thing and it should be encouraged and never used as a threat.

Even its on something you oppose you would want them working together on that thing you don't want?
 
That would depend on the bill and the situation.
 
Even its on something you oppose you would want them working together on that thing you don't want?
There's a big difference between saying they should be encouraged to work together and saying anything they work together on is good.
 
There's a big difference between saying they should be encouraged to work together and saying anything they work together on is good.

You said in your post its never a bad thing.Doesn't that imply you think that anything they work together on is a good thing?
 
As others have said, it depends entirely on what they are working on. But I will say, given that the two party's interests tend to only overlap when it comes to preserving the status quo of entrenched interests and overreaching big government or worse yet, in expanding federal authority even further, I'm very skeptical of most bipartisan projects.
 
You said in your post its never a bad thing.Doesn't that imply you think that anything they work together on is a good thing?
No, it doesn't.

Allow me an example. Tension between local, state and federal law enforcement is well recognized in this country. But anytime local and state law enforcement are working together, it's a good thing. However, just because they are working together to investigate something, that doesn't mean a crime was committed. But it's good they are working together to come to the most informed conclusion.

So it goes here. When legislators are able to work together, then you have open lines of communication and various viewpoints. And if they work together to create legislation which is bad, it's still not a bad thing they worked together, it just means their collective effort resulted in bad legislation. But here's the other good thing about working together...if legislation is bad and is shown to be bad, then BOTH sides have a desire to work together to fix it. So it's win either way.
 
No, it doesn't.

Allow me an example. Tension between local, state and federal law enforcement is well recognized in this country. But anytime local and state law enforcement are working together, it's a good thing. However, just because they are working together to investigate something, that doesn't mean a crime was committed. But it's good they are working together to come to the most informed conclusion.

So it goes here. When legislators are able to work together, then you have open lines of communication and various viewpoints. And if they work together to create legislation which is bad, it's still not a bad thing they worked together, it just means their collective effort resulted in bad legislation.
If they are working together on creating bad legislation then that instance of working together is bad. Because if they were not working together on that bad legislation then that bad legislation would have not been created.So it is a bad thing they worked together.
 
If they are working together on creating bad legislation then that instance of working together is bad.
I disagree. If you get in your car and have an accident, is driving a car bad? If you try to cook for your significant other but accidentally burn the food, is it bad you tried to do something nice for them?

No, I strongly disagree. If it's a bad piece of legislation, then it's just a misfire. It's not bad they worked on it together.

Because if they were not working together on that bad legislation then that bad legislation would have not been created.So it is a bad thing they worked together.
Well, the last two attempts at healthcare reform have been done by not working together. Whether it is Obamacare or whatever the Republicans are currently trying, don't you think either one would have a better chance if the two parties worked together?
 
As others have said, it depends entirely on what they are working on. But I will say, given that the two party's interests tend to only overlap when it comes to preserving the status quo of entrenched interests and overreaching big government or worse yet, in expanding federal authority even further, I'm very skeptical of most bipartisan projects.

In that respect I think they still work together. Especially for their own interests.
 
Is that the rule where they're required to screw as many vulnerable people as they can?

The 'Hastert' rule is where the majority of the votes needed to pass legislation, 218 in the house and 50 right now in the senate with the tie-breaker Pence--by reconciliation only, must come from the majority party, effectively shutting out the minority party from any input on legislation.

Boehner got run out of town because he had to have DEM votes to raise the debt ceilings or pass continuing resolutions. Pelosi would always give him the votes he needed.

As I side note, I'd like to hear of your engineering some day. Did you do this in the service? So many of my former HS chemistry and physics students have gone into all the major disciplines of engineering. My nephew is a brilliant electrical engineer, and they do real estate renting on the side .
 
I disagree. If you get in your car and have an accident, is driving a car bad? If you try to cook for your significant other but accidentally burn the food, is it bad you tried to do something nice for them?

That analogy doesn't work because no gets in their car saying hey I am going to wreck my car. Elected officials plan on working on specific legislation.


No, I strongly disagree. If it's a bad piece of legislation, then it's just a misfire. It's not bad they worked on it together.

Working together on bad legislation is still makes working together a bad thing.Working together can be a good thing,But it can also be a bad thing.

Well, the last two attempts at healthcare reform have been done by not working together. Whether it is Obamacare or whatever the Republicans are currently trying, don't you think either one would have a better chance if the two parties worked together?
I didn't support "healthcare reform" when democrats worked on it. I definitely don't support republicans working on it.I definitely don't want both of them working on it working together.
 
That analogy doesn't work because no gets in their car saying hey I am going to wreck my car. Elected officials plan on working on specific legislation.
But they don't plan on crafting harmful legislation. If they're crafting legislation, it's because they think it'll serve some positive purpose, regardless of whether they are correct or not.

Working together on bad legislation is still makes working together a bad thing.Working together can be a good thing,But it can also be a bad thing.
We'll just have to disagree. Reasonable people can disagree reasonably and we're basically at a point where it's a matter of opinion. At the end of the day, I've seen what not working together and what threatening to work together causes. I'd like to see our elected officials work together to do what's best for our country, not quibble and spar in order to score points against each other. And any time our elected officials work together, I think it's a good thing, even if what they're working on is less than desirable. After all, there's a reason we have votes.
 
Not only is it a good thing, it's a necessary thing. Congress doesn't work at all without it.
 
But they don't plan on crafting harmful legislation. If they're crafting legislation, it's because they think it'll serve some positive purpose, regardless of whether they are correct or not.

Wrong on that.They just don't think or care its harmful depending on the legislation. Lets say you are pro-amnesty/legalization for illegals,and or open borders. The republicans and democrats getting together to fund a border wall and more border agents would be bad legislation from the start for you. If you oppose amnesty or some other form of legalization for illegals. Then democrats and republican getting together to grant amnesty or some other form of legalization would be be harmful legislation from the start. So not all bi-partisanship is a good thing.
 
Congress: Is working with the other party a good thing or a bad thing?

Should it be encouraged or discouraged?

Note the neutral phrasing.

Since you limited it to only two choices i pick good. In general and on average its going to be a good thing. There are cases were it could be bad I guess but those are probably extreme cases or issues that congress is making black/white that are clearly not.

My point is im sure i could invent a situation where working together isnt so good but in most cases it will be.
 
Back
Top Bottom