The comments the gentlemen just made here illustrate my point of view that no model can be agreed upon by everyone. When our goals are so contradictory, what decisions will we make? What is the purpose of these arguments? Sir, it is to find the right and just conclusions. Can this be achieved, without important compromises and good reasoning? Opposes the Senate’s right to participate in the amendments to income and tax laws because it considers that the right to be corrected is the same as the right to initiate laws. In essence, these two rights are the same. In his opinion, this goes far from the basic principle that only people who are truly representatives of the people are allowed to interfere with money-related laws. Seattle Seahawks filter face mask. He wanted to know the reasons for making this clause. The aristocrats in England had never been allowed to intervene in such laws, but he did not know why the Senate was allowed to do so. In the House of Representatives, the population is represented based on the size of the population, while the Senate represents the political capacity of the states. Delaware or Rhode Island has the same number of delegates as Massachusetts. So why does the Senate have the right to money laws when representation here is not equal and fair?