An interview for your consideration:
Mike Zamore ’93 — Filibustered!: How to Fix the Broken Senate and Save America
I find the charter of the Watson Institute to be funded on dubious grounds.
So these same companies that created the problem are here to fix it? Lucky us!..
This is funny because Mike Zamore seems to embody this in speech. I don’t see much value in exaggerating the reverence for the product of the current process minus some fine tuning (If only the filibuster was worth fixing now).
Nor can I condone the aggrandizement of politicians plight in furtherance of the senates role to maintain influence in shaping policy.
It would be interesting to hear more concretely what your criticisms of the presented points might be. I shared this material in case it could help inform our discussions of how we might address the filibuster.
I found the perspective from this presenting institutional political insider fairly interesting, in that regard. But yeah, other than that, the feeling I read from this speaker makes them (and their bias) seem to me to be among the most questionable I’ve heard from the Watson Institute; I otherwise find the Watson Institute YT material generally much better (though, I don’t watch even half their material, so maybe my own filters are coloring too much my opinion of their material generally).
I am not sure if your even incorrect on any level as far as your observation. You may be accurate. I am saying that is a risky bet from here. That puts you on a speculative limb (as far as yielding results from allocation of scarce resources).
As for the filibuster if it ends tomorrow by magic Biden wouldn’t want to push agenda items outside border reform. He wouldn’t do that now considering the Israel crisis he needs their opposition to give him cover.
The border package if passed would likely be applauded by Democrats and used by Republicans to buttress their support. I don’t see much to gain from a removal now. I don’t see the filibuster as valuable to remove in the short term.
The much bigger worry is to trust a institution like the Watson Institute in my opinion. They (financial partners) start off by saying the correct things only to capture those fighting for what’s right and subvert them at pivotal moments. It is the poison pill so to speak.
1 Like
You make fair points! Thanks for the input. I suppose the filibuster is just another fig leaf excuse in some ways, and yet, at times it seems like a real obstacle, (at the least, an obstacle from seeing where /whom the next obstacles are).
As for the Watson Institute, I think I hear and agree with you; any trust I have in some of their materials is not based on their institution. I’m not saying one should trust them, even if I’ve found some of their materials to my standards. I think doing things like this, sharing our experience, observations, perspectives, and thoughts on matters and sources is useful context for our organization and movement. I am more curious and cautious now about how which companies are funding them.
1 Like
With both parities being so unscrupulous and dishonest I am very cautious to hand either party anymore power. I think your on the right track, I just think a opportunity will present itself where we can push this with far less resistance.
If they are willing to help us in that they lend us media, I am all for it. I am just pointing out you can’t really join them. If anything allowing them to join you is dangerous but unavoidable. At the point they join us under their guise they will attempt to fund a coup (political party) or subversion of the project.