Could we eliminate most, if not all, of this contentiousness if we allowed only single issue legislation?

The parties are so polarized at this point if someone were to come along and propose something great it would have vehement opposition. I think that’s probably a fine idea but we’re not dealing with rational people here.

Yes more of this please. I don’t like raw pork.

I think the give and take is how things that the majority does not want gets done.
Let’s say the ‘pubs were in charge and an issue came up on… abortion. ‘Pub prez, ‘pub house, ‘pub senate. Is it back to coat hangars, ladies? Not necessarily. The minority dems could still squeeze in favorable legislation by sacrificing something else up in it’s place. Take your pick. Gay marriage. Save the gay marriage thing for when Dems have more clout. Right now we have to protect abortion.
Multi part legislation give a minority the ability to save things they really believe in, and guess what – the ‘Pubs in this case can also claim a victory! They stopped gay marriage!

I would like to see it tried.

Great idea, but t wouldn’t get us out of where we are today.

Today’s government shutdown is because of failure to pass funding legislation. The House initiates bills for the budget, of which each piece is part of the whole. Today’s issues is about including funding for parts of the Affordable Care Act. It is a single piece of legislation for funding: each department and program has to be in the bill.

Legislation with a single focus allows elected officials to show where they stand and shows electors about the character of those they elected. Creating forced choices between two separate important issues clouds the positions on each issue.

I like the idea, but @zenvelo is right. This shutdown is all about a continuing resolution and what should or shouldn’t get funded in it.