Sunday, May 15, 2011

Sunday Question for Liberals

Same question as the one for conservatives earlier: you get one structural change in the American system of government: what is it?
Bookmark and Share
Posted by Jonathan Bernstein at 2:00 PM
Labels: ,

34 comments:

  1. IanMay 15, 2011 at 2:05 PM

    A constitutional amendment providing that every year on July 1, the marginal tax rate on people making more than $1 million per year resets to 110%. That way, there is an annual opportunity for progressives to extract concessions from conservatives in order to avoid an outcome that conservatives view as unacceptable just like the annual threat of a government shutdown allows conservatives to extract concessions from progressives.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dan MillerMay 15, 2011 at 2:07 PM

    Tough call. A few years ago I would have definitely said eliminating the Senate, as it was the only thing holding us back from meaningful action on climate change (I'm assuming that Waxman-Markey would still have passed, but I think that's a safe guess). Nowadays, I don't know if that would still be true. So I'm tempted by the elimination of a standing army, although I'm not sure that falls under the rubric of the question (and there are probably all sorts of unforeseen consequences). Other possibilities--popular election of the president per NPV, really serious public financing of all campaigns like in Voting with Dollars, or the repeal of Taft-Hartley and a newfound spine in the enforcement of labor laws.

    ReplyDelete
  3. zicMay 15, 2011 at 2:09 PM

    Constitutionally eliminate the 60-vote majority in the Senate; though I'd still leave some sort of filibuster as a break to slow things a bit, but never to stop them, perhaps for 30 days.

    ReplyDelete
  4. phatMay 15, 2011 at 2:11 PM

    Coming from a state that benefits mightily from the Senate, I'm still tempted to agree with its elimination.

    ReplyDelete
  5. McDeviteMay 15, 2011 at 2:29 PM

    1) Require registered voters to pay an annual fee for party membership. $10-25 a year

    2) abolish the electoral college

    3) Institute IRV

    ReplyDelete
  6. R. Michael BarronMay 15, 2011 at 2:55 PM

    Weekend elections. The rest of the world does it, why not us?

    ReplyDelete
  7. KylopodMay 15, 2011 at 3:00 PM

    Proportional representation in the House.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Personal InfamyMay 15, 2011 at 3:01 PM

    1) Add 100 seats to the Senate, and assign them proportional to population (meaning RI, SD, ND, DE, WY, etc. all keep their two senate seats, and CA NY and TX each get like 10 more).

    That would be a structural change I'd like to see. As far as policy changes:

    2) Hike marginal tax rates on those earning over 500k to 60%. Hike capital gains taxes.

    3) Implement a modest carbon tax with rational corresponding subsidies to incentivize energy conservation.

    4) Single payer health care.

    5) Regulate and tax the hell out of hedge funds, private equity, big banks, etc.

    6) Cut military spending by 20-40%.

    ReplyDelete
  9. wkdeweyMay 15, 2011 at 3:06 PM

    I would be open to a parliamentary system. No more "imperial presidency", less opportunity for gridlock, people would actually have to pay attention to Congressional elections.

    ReplyDelete
  10. MatthewMay 15, 2011 at 3:31 PM

    Serious and enforceable campaign finance laws would be a good place to start.

    Instant runoff voting would also be a beneficial change - and I don't say that only because it's endorsed by cats.

    ReplyDelete
  11. DanMay 15, 2011 at 3:44 PM

    Parliamentary democracy with a "presidential" kicker, France style.

    ReplyDelete
  12. AnonymousMay 15, 2011 at 3:52 PM

    Outlaw political parties

    ReplyDelete
  13. Dan MillerMay 15, 2011 at 4:03 PM

    Oh, and if I get a bonus--ideally statehood for Washington DC; retrocession to Maryland as a next-best option. The disenfranchisement of 600K citizens is a disgrace.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Brian D.May 15, 2011 at 4:11 PM

    Require corporations to apportion their political contributions according to the will of their shareholders. So the board determines how much per share they want to donate and then the shareholders decide individually if their 'share' of the money is donated and where it goes. The board could make recommendations, explaining how contribution options would help increase shareholder value. No individual shareholder needs to be identified as allocating to a particular cause, but the overall outcome needs to be disclosed. Proxies are allowed as with voting, but the default is that a shareholder's portion is not spent - they have to affirmatively designate a proxy or choose where their share goes.

    ReplyDelete
  15. the classicistMay 15, 2011 at 4:12 PM

    I'm completely shocked that no one has mentioned state-federal relations. I'd like either something that made it easier for politicians sharing a metropolitan area to work across state lines (city lines, county lines, whatever). But I don't really know what could bring that about so failing that, maybe ... federalize Medicaid and other welfare state functions?

    Oh I'm also shocked that no one has said anything about the courts (no advocates of 18-year terms for Supreme Court justices, or for changing the way the Circuits are run?) or the Fed.

    ReplyDelete
  16. AnonymousMay 15, 2011 at 4:23 PM

    Abolish the Senate.

    ReplyDelete
  17. AnonymousMay 15, 2011 at 4:44 PM

    Public financing of campaigns/reforms that limit the ability of the super-rich and super-rich interest groups to hold such sway over our electoral processes.

    Though sure, that the US can claim to be democratic while having the Senate (or denying statehood to DC) is rather silly.

    ReplyDelete
  18. BillMay 15, 2011 at 5:40 PM

    Abolish the states, replace them with roughly equal administrative departments based on physical, economic and social geography a la the French Revolution.

    ReplyDelete
  19. JCordesMay 15, 2011 at 6:19 PM

    Add 201 seats to the Senate, apportioned by population, with none guaranteed to small states (but every state gets to keep the two they already have).

    ReplyDelete
  20. JesseMay 15, 2011 at 6:36 PM

    Extend terms in the House to four years and stagger them so that only half of the House gets elected each cycle.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Litzz11@yahoo.comMay 15, 2011 at 7:33 PM

    Electoral reform for sure, but torn between some kind of major restructuring of campaign finance -- say, public financing of elections, or some change that removes corporate and PAC money -- or else some kind of instance runoff election law, which would give third parties more viability.

    I do think money has corrupted our politics more than anything, and I'd like to see that rectified.

    So, torn between those two things.

    ReplyDelete
  22. DrickMay 15, 2011 at 7:43 PM

    Abolish the House and Executive Office, delegating all national authority to the Senate. I approach this from more of a hardcore leftist than a liberal perspective, but it is difficult to imagine ever fostering a national community without distributing representation equally among all subnational communities.

    ReplyDelete
  23. DirckMay 15, 2011 at 10:16 PM

    Metropolitan sovereignty: urban areas should never, ever be split across state lines, and the municipal patchwork of each sizable metro area (pop>1m) should be overseen by a metro-wide government with state-like power.

    Actual organic human communities should always take precedence over contrived things like state boundaries and the annexation-inspired divisions of most cities.

    Also, Drick: no.

    ReplyDelete
  24. CriticalMassMay 15, 2011 at 10:41 PM

    Supreme Court term limits. 18 year max. New justice appointed every odd year. Every presidential term would get two appointments, you would know exactly who was going to roll off, presidential elections would have an easily identified consequence. Presidents would also feel freer to nominate older jurists instead of trying to find someone in their forties who will be on the court for 30 years.

    ReplyDelete
  25. AnonymousMay 15, 2011 at 11:48 PM

    Reform the Senate Filibuster rules . Popular voting for the presidency.

    ReplyDelete
  26. AnonymousMay 16, 2011 at 2:29 AM

    Top would be puic financing of elections, I think -- though I like the idea of 18 year terms for SC Justices, maybe with a two term max...

    ReplyDelete
  27. philosophical-ronMay 16, 2011 at 3:01 AM

    I am so surprised, after all the work we did back in the 1990's, holding the "End Corporate Dominance" Conferences in Portland OR, and the recent work of radio host Thom Hartmann, that we get in this space such wimpy, non-real change-making suggestions. I love you people, but really, when are you going to get organized to end corporate power over a corrupted democratic republic?

    All we really need is to add two words to Section 1 of the 14th Amendment. Instead of ending the second and last sentence of Section 1 with "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws," we need to add the word "natural" between the two occurances of "any" and "person." This differentiates between human beings who have rights, and corporations which do not. A whole host of pro-corporate power interpretations from the Supreme Court, culminating in the politically corrupt disaster of "Citizens United," are eliminated.

    ReplyDelete
  28. AnonymousMay 16, 2011 at 7:23 AM

    Robust public financing of campaigns and a ban on fundraising while congress is in session.

    ReplyDelete
  29. BenjaminMay 16, 2011 at 8:35 AM

    Abolish the Senate. Senatorial powers, but not Senate rules, get transferred to the House.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Ron E.May 16, 2011 at 9:10 AM

    I like most of what others propose. For me, the single most significant structural change we could make would be to go to something closer to a parliamentary system. Divided party control of government causes gridlock and destroys accountability. Obama and the Democrats should have had the chance to fully enact their programs (a bigger stimulus, a more robust health care reform, cap-and-trade, card check, immigration reform, repeal of the Bush high income tax cuts, etc.). Then the voters should have had the chance to pass judgment on the results. Instead we have our current mess where a minority of 40 Senators or the GOP controlling half of Congress can virtually dictate policy.

    ReplyDelete
  31. AnonymousMay 16, 2011 at 12:45 PM

    An amendment that the District of Columbia be represented in Congress as if it were a state, but NOT given statehood. The Federal government still needs direct control over the capital city.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Dan MillerMay 16, 2011 at 2:17 PM

    @Anon at 12:45--that still leaves DC residents unrepresented in the Senate, and there's no way that's acceptable.

    ReplyDelete
  33. DirckMay 16, 2011 at 9:51 PM

    @Dan Miller,
    I think this entire comment section make clear there's very little about the Senate that's acceptable, beyond the name "Senate" and title "Senator".

    I'm surprised no one has proposed abolishing the vice-presidency.

    ReplyDelete
  34. AnonymousMay 16, 2011 at 10:18 PM

    I propose to neuter the Senate, by changing ten words in the constitution:

    Article I, Section 7 -- Cut "or concur with". Cut "and the Senate".
    Article I, Section 8 -- Replace "The Congress" with "The House of Representatives".

    This leaves a Senate with almost no legislative powers -- it can't vote on ordinary bills, and its amendments are just advisory.

    This maintains the Senate's other powers: impeachments (I:3), veto-overrides (I:7), treaties (II:2), appointments (II:2), presidential selection (12th Amend.), presidential succession (26th Amend.).

    So the Senate would continue to exist, with equal suffrage for the states in it. The benefit is that legislation would only go through the House.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Who links to my website?