Indeed. And join us @ Civic.Net as we organize in Town Meeting to Reboot Democracy & Rebuild America. It's time for We the People to get angry, and by any means necessary preserve protect and defend our government of the people by the people for the people that it not perish from this earth.
Thank you for your detailed, intelligent, absorbing, analysis. Lots to ponder and reflect upon. Also, I love the photo of Half Dome. I've been to the summit, and the world is beautiful from up there. I also joined Bluesky recently. I do believe it can leave X in the dust. Let MuskX pander to the worst instincts of humans. We need a larger, more progressive, reach to counter plain old rubbish.
There's no chance that Congress will pass legislation enforcing the 14th Amendment and barring Trump from holding office because of the insurrection, is there? Is there a way to at least force them to vote on it?
"A majority of the court also ruled the section to be non-justiciable, and that only Congress can enforce Section 3, i.e. the courts (federal or otherwise) cannot declare a candidate ineligible for office under Section 3 unless an Act of Congress explicitly grants them that power."
"No person shall … hold any office, civil or military, under the United States … who, having previously taken an oath … as an officer of the United States … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."
I am writing from New Zealand, which does have a form of proportional representation. I reluctantly report that this doesn't work too well either, as it leads to coalition governments where minority parties can have disproportionate influence on government policy. Looking around the world, it seems to me that democratic governments are not performing well anywhere, regardless of the form of representation they employ. In my view, democracy needs to be urgently redesigned around 3 key areas:
1. Eliminating political parties because they are inherently competitive (as George Washington forecast they would be)
2. Eliminating the influence of wealth from politics by banning donations for political purposes, while providing all candidates for elections with federally funded equal opportunity marketing channels for them to express their (fact checked) views.
3. Eliminate the polarizing office of president and also the senate and have just a single-house congress whose members are elected on a "rolling" basis. This would have (as an example) 1/48th of electorates voting monthly over a 4 year repeating cycle. Effectively, this could lead to 1/48th of congress being partially refreshed monthly. This constant refreshment should avoid the huge disruptions and economic waste of the present longer term electoral cycle.
In my view, democracy needs major redesign and introducing proportional representation isn't sufficient. I will be pleased to expand on these ideas if of interest.
Yeah, legislation is still passed by majority rule, so it's still only going to represent half of the PR legislature in the worst case. That's why I tend to think that consensus voting systems like STAR or Condorcet are actually better than PR because they elect broadly-appealing moderate representatives of each district who should be better able to work together, instead of trying to represent every little ideology and spreading out the representation too far. MMP with local reps selected by a consensus method and top-up seats selected by party list PR might be an OK compromise.
1. Disagree. Parties are a good shortcut for voters to understand what a candidate represents, and vet the candidate's statements about what they will do. Parties aren't the problem; the two-party system is the problem.
2. Yep.
3.a. If the President were elected using a consensus voting system instead of a polarizing one that suffers from center-squeeze, I don't think that would be a problem anymore.
3.b. If you eliminate the Senate will you have states secede?
It seems to me that the two key flaws with most forms of democracy is that they over-emphasize competition and they are cyclic.
Instead of a group of individuals quietly debating their way to a long term consensus, current democratic governments are party-based shouting matches to see who can make the most noise. The quiet individuals with good ideas to put forward don't stand a chance (and wouldn't even want to enter politics).
The other big problem with all present forms of democracy is the cyclic nature of elections. The pendulum of political sentiment swings too far over too long an interval of time before the next election results in corrective steps. The financial waste that typically occurs upon a change of government can be huge. That is why I suggested rolling mini-elections, where 1/48th of Congress seats come up for election every month. If the public feels that Congress is heading the wrong direction, those electorates voting over the next few months will surely send signals that Congress should pay attention to.
Since I live in New Zealand, it's not really for me to say whether states should secede, or not. However, if the Federal Government is not keeping the bulk of the population happy, maybe one or two states seceding might be the wake up call the Federal Government needs to get its house in order!
> The other big problem with all present forms of democracy is the cyclic nature of elections. The pendulum of political sentiment swings too far over too long an interval of time before the next election results in corrective steps.
Agreed. That's why I advocate "consensus" voting methods over majoritarian ones.
> That is why I suggested rolling mini-elections, where 1/48th of Congress seats come up for election every month.
That's probably a good idea, too, though I assume we converged on a single election day for the whole country for practical reasons.
Thank you for this. It is the most and nuanced and helpful thing I have read since the election. I'm sharing with my friends.
Your assessments are calm and realistic. I appreciate your clarity and hopefulness.
Indeed. And join us @ Civic.Net as we organize in Town Meeting to Reboot Democracy & Rebuild America. It's time for We the People to get angry, and by any means necessary preserve protect and defend our government of the people by the people for the people that it not perish from this earth.
Thank you for your detailed, intelligent, absorbing, analysis. Lots to ponder and reflect upon. Also, I love the photo of Half Dome. I've been to the summit, and the world is beautiful from up there. I also joined Bluesky recently. I do believe it can leave X in the dust. Let MuskX pander to the worst instincts of humans. We need a larger, more progressive, reach to counter plain old rubbish.
I predict that Trump will be impeached for the 3rd time after the 2026 midterm elections. (It's getting to be a habit.)
Only this time the Senate will convict.
There's no chance that Congress will pass legislation enforcing the 14th Amendment and barring Trump from holding office because of the insurrection, is there? Is there a way to at least force them to vote on it?
"A majority of the court also ruled the section to be non-justiciable, and that only Congress can enforce Section 3, i.e. the courts (federal or otherwise) cannot declare a candidate ineligible for office under Section 3 unless an Act of Congress explicitly grants them that power."
"No person shall … hold any office, civil or military, under the United States … who, having previously taken an oath … as an officer of the United States … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."
A pro-democracy starter pack on Bluesky would be really helpful.
I am writing from New Zealand, which does have a form of proportional representation. I reluctantly report that this doesn't work too well either, as it leads to coalition governments where minority parties can have disproportionate influence on government policy. Looking around the world, it seems to me that democratic governments are not performing well anywhere, regardless of the form of representation they employ. In my view, democracy needs to be urgently redesigned around 3 key areas:
1. Eliminating political parties because they are inherently competitive (as George Washington forecast they would be)
2. Eliminating the influence of wealth from politics by banning donations for political purposes, while providing all candidates for elections with federally funded equal opportunity marketing channels for them to express their (fact checked) views.
3. Eliminate the polarizing office of president and also the senate and have just a single-house congress whose members are elected on a "rolling" basis. This would have (as an example) 1/48th of electorates voting monthly over a 4 year repeating cycle. Effectively, this could lead to 1/48th of congress being partially refreshed monthly. This constant refreshment should avoid the huge disruptions and economic waste of the present longer term electoral cycle.
In my view, democracy needs major redesign and introducing proportional representation isn't sufficient. I will be pleased to expand on these ideas if of interest.
Yeah, legislation is still passed by majority rule, so it's still only going to represent half of the PR legislature in the worst case. That's why I tend to think that consensus voting systems like STAR or Condorcet are actually better than PR because they elect broadly-appealing moderate representatives of each district who should be better able to work together, instead of trying to represent every little ideology and spreading out the representation too far. MMP with local reps selected by a consensus method and top-up seats selected by party list PR might be an OK compromise.
1. Disagree. Parties are a good shortcut for voters to understand what a candidate represents, and vet the candidate's statements about what they will do. Parties aren't the problem; the two-party system is the problem.
2. Yep.
3.a. If the President were elected using a consensus voting system instead of a polarizing one that suffers from center-squeeze, I don't think that would be a problem anymore.
3.b. If you eliminate the Senate will you have states secede?
It seems to me that the two key flaws with most forms of democracy is that they over-emphasize competition and they are cyclic.
Instead of a group of individuals quietly debating their way to a long term consensus, current democratic governments are party-based shouting matches to see who can make the most noise. The quiet individuals with good ideas to put forward don't stand a chance (and wouldn't even want to enter politics).
The other big problem with all present forms of democracy is the cyclic nature of elections. The pendulum of political sentiment swings too far over too long an interval of time before the next election results in corrective steps. The financial waste that typically occurs upon a change of government can be huge. That is why I suggested rolling mini-elections, where 1/48th of Congress seats come up for election every month. If the public feels that Congress is heading the wrong direction, those electorates voting over the next few months will surely send signals that Congress should pay attention to.
Since I live in New Zealand, it's not really for me to say whether states should secede, or not. However, if the Federal Government is not keeping the bulk of the population happy, maybe one or two states seceding might be the wake up call the Federal Government needs to get its house in order!
> The other big problem with all present forms of democracy is the cyclic nature of elections. The pendulum of political sentiment swings too far over too long an interval of time before the next election results in corrective steps.
Agreed. That's why I advocate "consensus" voting methods over majoritarian ones.
> That is why I suggested rolling mini-elections, where 1/48th of Congress seats come up for election every month.
That's probably a good idea, too, though I assume we converged on a single election day for the whole country for practical reasons.