You don't sound either entitled or radical to me, at not least so far. The easiest and most effective thing that could be done to fix the House AND the Electoral College would be to repeal the Reapportionment Act of 1929, take the artificial cap off the House of Representatives, and stop the under-representation of the most populous stat…
You don't sound either entitled or radical to me, at not least so far. The easiest and most effective thing that could be done to fix the House AND the Electoral College would be to repeal the Reapportionment Act of 1929, take the artificial cap off the House of Representatives, and stop the under-representation of the most populous states. It only takes an Act of Congress, not an amendment, and it really frustrates me that Pelosi's leadership team apparently had no interest in it during the last Congress. I hope that changes next year if the Democrats win.
I totally agree on the filibuster, but the dirty little secret is that both parties denounce it when they're in the majority but never get around to abolishing it, because they think that they'll need it when they're in the minority. It gets a lot of mileage for something that came into existence as an oversight and everybody in the Senate claims to hate. As for gerrymandering, that's another thing that both parties hate -- but only when the other one does it. Neither the courts or the Congress are going to do anything about it; it's going to have to be the people ourselves, state by state.
"You don't sound either entitled or radical to me, at not least so far."
You are one of few who would say so. When the Dems actually had the ability attempt to remove the filibuster making repairs to the ship was deemed too dangerous and radical. It would scare the moderates. I still remember the pic of Manchin the saint in Tim's article on this site after he protected the filibuster and thus scuttled any chance of democratic reforms (which in turn led to internecine strife since all that was left was to argue over typical policy matters). Maybe the moderates have started to come around but neither Biden nor this site which is my only source of non-MAGA conservative thought says anything about such things so I doubt that. Neither do the moderate liberal sources for that matter.
Agreed on the Reapportionment Act and the filibuster. I thought that would have been one of the first things on the docket after Jan 6th but I was as naive about the Dems or the democracy coalition or whatever political entity this is now in 2020 as I was about Republicans in 2016. All the talk of principles is bullshit. When the time came to act on them they both balked as usual and I don't know how the stakes could get higher while still being in peacetime in a nominally functional society than covid and a coup. I trust neither. Voting in 2024, at the moment, is like buying a lottery ticket as my retirement plan. Is there a chance it pays out? ...sure but the chance is so small is it even worth wasting the effort?
I was very disappointed with Manchin over the filibuster, and over the Inflation Reduction Act, too. The next person who holds that chair will be a lot worse, though.
I was a "Liberal Republican" while there still was such a thing, and call myself "Center-Right" now. I've never called myself a "conservative", and especially won't now that the word is meaningless. I just want the government to work the way that I think the Founders intended: preserving and extending individual liberty, no filibuster, the House and the Electoral College growing to keep pace with the growth and distribution of the population, the debt limit respected and not gamed, strong federal action against racial discrimination and to dismantle structural racism (the Civil War Amendments are as much part of the Constitution as Articles I-VII!), the states and the federal government respecting each others' authority, including NOT incorporating the Second Amendment against the states, and levels of progressive taxation adequate to support the level of public services that the people decide, through their representatives, that they want to have and pay for. I keep hoping that that isn't asking too much.
"I was very disappointed with Manchin over the filibuster, and over the Inflation Reduction Act, too. The next person who holds that chair will be a lot worse, though."
This is where I don't understand the moderate argument. Neither Manchin nor the person who will be worse will allow the necessary reforms to get us out of this situation. Where is the hope to be found then? We are damned if we do and damned if we don't.
"I just want the government to work the way that I think the Founders intended [...]. I keep hoping that that isn't asking too much."
We are generally the same at that level of abstraction but the real world doesn't operate at that level so it is kind of meaningless. I say that not to be flippant and insulting but to communicate how cynical I am of that level of connection. Still, I understand and respect the sentiment.
Manchin was the best we were ever going to get out of West Virginia, and he WAS willing to work with Biden on a wide range of changes; if Jim Justice will be willing to work with him on anything, I'll be more than pleasantly surprised, I'll be flabbergasted. Anyone who doubts that that there's a big difference between the two is going to see next year.
Good discussion -- thanks. Politics and baseball will always break our hearts; the best we can do with politics is to try to keep it moving more or less in the right direction most of the time. Baseball is already the perfect blend of tragedy and hope, so we should probably stick to reforming politics.
You don't sound either entitled or radical to me, at not least so far. The easiest and most effective thing that could be done to fix the House AND the Electoral College would be to repeal the Reapportionment Act of 1929, take the artificial cap off the House of Representatives, and stop the under-representation of the most populous states. It only takes an Act of Congress, not an amendment, and it really frustrates me that Pelosi's leadership team apparently had no interest in it during the last Congress. I hope that changes next year if the Democrats win.
I totally agree on the filibuster, but the dirty little secret is that both parties denounce it when they're in the majority but never get around to abolishing it, because they think that they'll need it when they're in the minority. It gets a lot of mileage for something that came into existence as an oversight and everybody in the Senate claims to hate. As for gerrymandering, that's another thing that both parties hate -- but only when the other one does it. Neither the courts or the Congress are going to do anything about it; it's going to have to be the people ourselves, state by state.
"You don't sound either entitled or radical to me, at not least so far."
You are one of few who would say so. When the Dems actually had the ability attempt to remove the filibuster making repairs to the ship was deemed too dangerous and radical. It would scare the moderates. I still remember the pic of Manchin the saint in Tim's article on this site after he protected the filibuster and thus scuttled any chance of democratic reforms (which in turn led to internecine strife since all that was left was to argue over typical policy matters). Maybe the moderates have started to come around but neither Biden nor this site which is my only source of non-MAGA conservative thought says anything about such things so I doubt that. Neither do the moderate liberal sources for that matter.
Agreed on the Reapportionment Act and the filibuster. I thought that would have been one of the first things on the docket after Jan 6th but I was as naive about the Dems or the democracy coalition or whatever political entity this is now in 2020 as I was about Republicans in 2016. All the talk of principles is bullshit. When the time came to act on them they both balked as usual and I don't know how the stakes could get higher while still being in peacetime in a nominally functional society than covid and a coup. I trust neither. Voting in 2024, at the moment, is like buying a lottery ticket as my retirement plan. Is there a chance it pays out? ...sure but the chance is so small is it even worth wasting the effort?
I was very disappointed with Manchin over the filibuster, and over the Inflation Reduction Act, too. The next person who holds that chair will be a lot worse, though.
I was a "Liberal Republican" while there still was such a thing, and call myself "Center-Right" now. I've never called myself a "conservative", and especially won't now that the word is meaningless. I just want the government to work the way that I think the Founders intended: preserving and extending individual liberty, no filibuster, the House and the Electoral College growing to keep pace with the growth and distribution of the population, the debt limit respected and not gamed, strong federal action against racial discrimination and to dismantle structural racism (the Civil War Amendments are as much part of the Constitution as Articles I-VII!), the states and the federal government respecting each others' authority, including NOT incorporating the Second Amendment against the states, and levels of progressive taxation adequate to support the level of public services that the people decide, through their representatives, that they want to have and pay for. I keep hoping that that isn't asking too much.
"I was very disappointed with Manchin over the filibuster, and over the Inflation Reduction Act, too. The next person who holds that chair will be a lot worse, though."
This is where I don't understand the moderate argument. Neither Manchin nor the person who will be worse will allow the necessary reforms to get us out of this situation. Where is the hope to be found then? We are damned if we do and damned if we don't.
"I just want the government to work the way that I think the Founders intended [...]. I keep hoping that that isn't asking too much."
We are generally the same at that level of abstraction but the real world doesn't operate at that level so it is kind of meaningless. I say that not to be flippant and insulting but to communicate how cynical I am of that level of connection. Still, I understand and respect the sentiment.
Manchin was the best we were ever going to get out of West Virginia, and he WAS willing to work with Biden on a wide range of changes; if Jim Justice will be willing to work with him on anything, I'll be more than pleasantly surprised, I'll be flabbergasted. Anyone who doubts that that there's a big difference between the two is going to see next year.
Good discussion -- thanks. Politics and baseball will always break our hearts; the best we can do with politics is to try to keep it moving more or less in the right direction most of the time. Baseball is already the perfect blend of tragedy and hope, so we should probably stick to reforming politics.