ridenrain ridenrain:
Who are they accontable to?
Well, as far as repercussions, nobody but they dont really DO anything, except make recommendations for redrafting. IF the PM doesnt want to redraft he can always lobby the senate and/or appoint more senators to break the filibuster. Generally, the senate does not KILL legislation from the house, it can only stall it. The beauty in that is because they are not elected, they tend to dial down the senationalism that politicians in the House insert into bills as crowd-pleasers.
I suspect that the elected politicans actually like this, that way they can offer up absurd crowd-pleasing policies with the full knowledge that the blame can be laid on the Senate who will :
1) through hearings and testimony by experts brought before the senate, discredit frivolous but popular provisions of a bill.
2) be the focus of public attention when House bill is modified or rewritten, even though by rewriting it, the House has basically agreed not to press the issue.
The senate is supposed to be the house of "sober second thought". Let me give you an example of what that means:
In ontario, there were a few high-profile pit bull attacks that sent the public into hysteria. The Liberal govt, pandering to the hysteria, enacted a ban on pit bulls, even though the vast majority of dog attacks are not by pit bulls. It was a stupid law meant to appeal to public emotions. The "sober second thought" can not prevent that but it does temper it by airing the issue publicly in a way that increases public understanding through public hearings and giving the elected politicans an opportunity to reconsider the specifics of a bill at a later time after the hysteria has subsided. The Senatorial system is not perfect and does need some reform, but it does serve a purpose and have some benefits.