I would love to see the law changed to force not just political non-profits but any organization donating to candidates, PACs or running 'issue ads' to disclose all member's names. That way when our politicians are bought we can know who bought them.
As to the voting rights act and pre-clearance, however, I detect a note of liberal hypocrisy here. One of their reasons for wanting to seal criminal records is the claim that the fact that a person has committed a crime in the past should not be used against them now. Yet, because states have committed crimes in the past, that is to be used against them in the future?
The Democrats are wise to downplay anti-trump campaign rhetoric and focus on the positive issues they will work on - even with some Republicans - if given the chance. Fortunately, it appears a significant majority of Americans agree with much of their agenda. Unfortunately, our current democracy does not always deliver for the majority, but that could change.
2
Voting rights are a problem. But they're a very small problem compared to voting apathy.
2
Protecting real democracy means preventing real Empire --- which, after all, as all our founders understood (more than folks today) that "the disease of democratic Republics is Empire"
1
Democrats need to turn Trump and McConnell into the no party of all things Americans think are fundamental to a fair and compassionate America.
I have an idea I think they should also float, since closing all of the Tax loop holes Trump and his ilk use to avoid paying taxes end the cap on Social security and Medicare taxes and make those taxes immune to any kind of loop hole.
1
Protip: None of this will happen unless Dems win the Senate.
1
Nancy. You haven’t won yet. Big mistake here. Wouldn’t it be nice to allow the newly elected representatives have a say here and let them partake in the agenda? Rethink your approach.
1
Why didn' they come up with this months ago?
2
Get us back into the Paris Climate Accord, for god’s sake!
2
The majority (if it happens) may very well be temporary. They have to put ONE thing on top of the agenda - fix the DEMOCRACY. Without that any & all gains will be rolled back again.
Remove big money from politics, get rid of gerrymandering, clamp down on right wing fake news & pripaganda, start getting rid of electoral college, make voting easier (why do we not have a democracy day public holiday on election day like many other democracies of the world).
If this is not done, sooner or later our democracy *will* collapse. It is already ripping at seams under this congress & administration.
1
I'm glad they came up with a central message that can help improve the ethical and political situation, appeal broadly and nationalize the election, which should help given who the President is, but had they done this a couple of months ago, it might have helped hold and maybe even take some Senate seats. Given where the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts are now, having 48 or 49 or even 50 in the Senate isn't good enough, and those might be optimistic numbers. Perhaps they can learn from this to do their homework before the last minute next time.
The agenda is really quite tiresome. It is reactive. For some reason Pelosi thinks Dems need to demonstrate they are not a mob. Why buy into that?
There's next to no change any of this can happen as long as McConnell is there and I truly doubt that Trump will go along.
Geriatric Democrats just want to go back to the status quo ante and horse-trade for legislation, which usually ends up disappointing Dems and enraging Republicans.
No, I'd rather see a Demo House majority start by really changing up the Committee chairs and the leadership.
2
I would also add a change in leadership to the plan and take away Trump and the Republicans main talking point.
Let's remember in 2013 and 2014 the democrats controlled the house, senate and occupied the White House. Obama had a veto/filibuster proof majority in the senate. Look at the score card:
Immigration reform - 0
Gun Control - 0
Infrastructure Program - 0
Tax reform - 0
Regulatory reform - 0
Low, flat economic growth even with interest rates at zero.
I can't go back to them until the leadership changes, same leadership, same results.
1
@jMC
So you are going to stick with the guys driving us off a cliff?
Your scorecard may have a zero for all categories. If you had one for the last two years all would be in negative territory.
2
Good strategy and reminds me of the saying about how to eat an elephant: one bite at a time.
2
Ms. Pelosi's legislative agenda is the *only* thing that matters. Moreso than the president's tweets. Moreso than his desperate attempts to regain "momentum" with wild policy proposals. Moreso than anything out of McConnell's mouth, or Pence's or Ryan's or even anything and everything said on Fox News. Reading this article I felt a tremendous sense of relief, realizing what might happen should adults regain at least one lever of power. Evidence-based policy making, government responsible to the will and needs of the people, the curtailment of the Republican oligarchy -- it doesn't matter to me whether Nancy Pelosi wins popularity contests -- I'll take the party of rational judgement any day. Please remember that on election day and get out and vote.
4
"Ambitious”? Surely, you must be joking. Minor tweaks to Obamacare and other minor reforms. And Nancy Pelosi at the helm. Really?
I think I'll just vote for the GOP.
Why do I think of all the Cold War messages at this time. The Red Threat, The Red Menace, etc. Perhaps, we have a new threat from republican red politicians who need to be labeled THE RED MENACE who put our democracy and freedom for fall in serious danger. VOTE the RED out and the BLUE in next Tuesday like a true patriot.
3
The Democrats along worth Republicans, ignored illegal immigration for decades and the entire Trump momentum stemmed from that. Now both domestic and foreign players while posing as various entities, have via social media, incited and encouraged the caravans. We have serious problem as we know. Hollywood Dems are on Bloomberg with an ad to vote promoting undefined support for women and the same for immigrants. Without definition it sounds like open borders and get in give birth. Impossible.
Amazing that the GOP fears democratic victories because ethics will be a priority.
1
Why are the Democrats showing their hand without really having a seat at the table? Is it related to midterms' performance? If so, does that turn off undecided voters who may hesitate to vote for Democrats? Or is it that some just can't stop talking, in love with their own voice?
Dems: tell young people how you are going to reduce their education debt. Then they will vote. This is not the group that cares about health care, infrastructure or drug prices.
1
"The idea, said Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic leader, is to show voters that Democrats are a governing party, not the leftist mob that Mr. Trump describes"
No, NYT, the "idea" is to govern. Democrats govern. They don't illustrate the concept. Democrats enact policies to make lives better.
3
I’m a little confused here...Pelosi was the house leader when the D’s were in the White House and had majorities in the senate and house
And nothing got done. So why should we expect a different outcome?
The definition of madness is trying.....
@Paul Obamacare is nothing? My niece would disagree with you. She can walk because she got urgent back surgery.
1
Just eliminate gerrymandering and voter suppression and We The People will do the rest.
2
"They said they would work to improve the Affordable Care Act, for example, rather than rushing to replace it with a single-payer health care plan."
Let's see, we've lost most of our power at the state level and lost all three branches of the federal government, so what should we do?
Yeah, we'll ignore the will of the people and continue to give the insurance industry what they want.
Come on Nance, even Republican voters support Medicare for all.
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/08/new-poll-majority-of-gop-voters-support-medicare-for-all.html
2
What agenda? Without the Senate or Presidency there is nothing they can accomplish. They have attacked and alienated Republicans and should expect zero cooperation.
The biggest catastrophe in my lifetime was not the Vietnam war, 911 , Citizens United, Gerrymandering, or even Trump. It was the placement of Kavanaugh and Gorsuch on the Supreme Court. Like a play that you pay to watch, even though you know the ending, so are the decisions of this ultra conservative court. Over the coming years, there will be headlines and noise about important issues from gun control, healthcare, labor laws. Issues that directly affect us. After all the fanfare and attention, we know where these cases end up and how they are going to end. The first thing that Democrats should do is fight to expand the Supreme Court and level the field. It’s going to be a long and miserable thirty years, if they don’t.
33
I think it's a great idea to pursue an ethics bill. If it doesn't get through Senate, fine. The Democrats can take the individual provisions and ask the question: why is [my] Republican opponent against this? The 2020 election will be about corruption, and Pelosi is very smart to focus in this. In addition, if Democrats take power in 2020, the bill will be ready to go (or could make even stronger).
In addition, Pelosi is setting the tests for infrastructure and prescription drugs that the President ran on. As Michael Moore said, Trump ran to the left of Hillary. Don't let him get away with this. He must be demonstrated to not be capable of rallying support for the measures he says he supports.
The Democrats should also pass a measure to take the cap off social security taxes. They should consider raising the earliest age to 63 or 64 as well, and the latest age to 71 or 72 (grandfathered of course). The standard age is moving to 67, but if people wait to 70, they only get 3 years accumulating. They should be able to get their full five.
Love Pelosi - such a smart politician. That's why Republicans hate her - she's effective.
19
To all those calling for bigger changes, get real. If we take the House but not the Senate, we will only control one half of one of the 3 branches of Government. To get anything passed through the entire congress, there will have to be major comprises and a search for common ground. That said, Democrats should propose as much reform as possible - even though we know it's not going to pass and/or be signed by Trump. That way, we at least show as the party of responsible adults who are trying to address the middle class and below. It's also wise at this time not to talk too much about going after Trump. Plenty of time for that after we actually win back the House.
22
Why not do what they did and actually know how to negotiate. Say no to everything and only go for what you want. They pawned the previous president doing this. Ask for the world then settle for at least half of it.
@JL Pacifica I agree with one slight modification to your last part. We need to protect the independence of the investigation being taken on by Mr. Mueller. Make it where Trump can't unilaterally fire him as soon as the mid-terms are over or he comes to work for the House.
1
Haven't you noticed that the Republicans always get their way no matter if they are in the minority or in control of all branches of government? The Democrats lose because they are paid to lose.
Democrats haven’t even won yet and they are talking about what they’ll do when they win. Have you ever played team sports, Dems? You haven’t won anything until the final whistle blows. That whistle will blow early morning on Wednesday November 7th. Then, providing you have won, you can talk about what you’re going to do.
5
@John Murray. They have to be prepared in case they do win. You don’t plan what you’re going to do with your life?
3
@Rita c
Please consider the analogy of two teams playing a game of football. Neither team plans for the celebration. They plan out strategy and tactics that will win the game. Only if they win will they celebrate.
@John Murray. "What they'll do" should have been done in June, as a "Democratic Congressional Contract:(1) individual rights and political equality -- (2) lawful elections and ethical governance -- (3) middle class growth and small business entrepreneurship -- (4) market transparency and corporate responsibility."
Just what was wrong with Newt Gingrich and his "Contract for America" as a major American party strategy? -- I also really liked his idea of a federally funded laptop for every kid on free lunch to access the internet -- for those living in neighborhoods where it is dangerous to walk to the public library. (some "crazy" Ds wanted more memory for video games too, so they voted against it.??!!)
1
Pelosi refuses to learn how to motivate the Progressive base and young voters. Without a plan to push universal single-payer healthcare as the first and most important goal, she will guarantee that the Republicans will win again in 2020. Democratic representatives need to give up working for corporate elites and work for average Americans for a change.
11
Democrats should strive for a supermajority in Congress to guarantee a sufficient counterbalance to Trump for the next presidential contest. To do that will require sticking to issues that Independents and moderate Republicans can support.
3
@Jim Tokuhisa, "sticking to"? How about having the courage to advocate for policies that independents and moderates want to support, like Medicare for All, seriously addressing our climate crisis, and increasing Social Security benefits?
Check the polling and please read the op-eds by Prof Krugman and by Hertel-Fernandez, Mildenberger, and Stokes. The pols agenda is not the voters' agenda, not even that of independents or moderates.
2
@Jim Tokuhisa There's a problem with that... If the Senate is controlled by the Republicans (as this article says is likely -- and I agree), then the only one that can bring a motion to the floor is McConnell. He's already shown he has no interest in anything a Democrat has to say even if he said it first.
Good list of objectives, but I hope they will add to this a serious attempt to reduce the cost of tuition and student debt for students attending college. It's criminal that this generation has saddled our youth with such high costs, and years of debt, as college costs have risen faster than inflation since the 1980's. Where were the adults in the room while all that was happening? A total dereliction of duty.
12
@JS
Democrats voted to allow refinancing of student loans at the (then) lower interest rates, saving this generation many tens of billions of dollars of debt, but Republicans blocked them.
Here is what the Democrats proposed in their 2016 party platform, which is what would have been implemented by now if Hillary Clinton had become President with Democratic control of Congress.
https://democrats.org/about/party-platform/#affordable-education
Note the sections calling for:
1) Making Debt free college a reality
2) Providing relief from crushing student debt
3) cracking down on predatory for profit schools
2
breathtakingly stupid
is she really this arrogant?
what does she think she gains by this?
why not keep your powder dry -
one more reason the Dems need to ditch her and get someone young + hard hitting who will return to the GOP the behavior they gave the dems - the word bipartisan should not be coming from their lips - funk that
dump her - a nearly 80-year old multimillionaire from SF is not who we need to lead the party - get her out
Here is my prediction - Dems do not get control but she once again does not step down - -
10
@j Scorched-earth liberalism isn't going to work. I'm not a fan of Mrs. Pelosi either but the agenda makes sense. You don't need to personalize your detestation for the senator.
Or maybe the role of government is to govern. Not just dish out spite to the losing party.
1
Congress does not set how states apportion their seats; luckily, these ideas will go nowhere in the Senate and certainly not in the Supreme Court.
1
@JOHN -- why don't you read the bill and then perhaps go back and read the constitution?
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1102/text
The bill cites
(1) the authority granted to Congress under article I, section 4 of the Constitution of the United States gives Congress the power to enact laws governing the time, place, and manner of elections for Members of the House of Representatives; and
(2) the authority granted to Congress under section 5 of the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution gives Congress the power to enact laws to enforce section 2 of such amendment, which requires Representatives to be apportioned among the several States according to their number.
1
While I am fully supportive of this approach (especially focusing on getting legislation passed, not just endless investigations, however valid), the Democrats should have their sights on addressing the systemic power imbalances that consistently grant Republicans an upper hand in the political landscape. Pushing for Puerto Rico and D.C. statehood, reducing barriers to voting, de-politicizing the Supreme Court by eliminating the life-long terms, etc. Without broader structural change in how Americans are represented, this minority control and polarization is only sure to get worse.
11
@NickZ I'll throw in one more for good luck. Limit the size of a state population. As an example: it makes no sense to me why a person in California voting counts for about 1/10th of a vote from someone in North Dakota. If you were to split California and make other states with similar population issues, you'd end up with around 60 states -- North California, South California, etc. The same would apply to Texas where Dallas and Houston aren't in the same state. I'm not sure how you'd split New York since it's so geographically small with most of the population in one city, but something needs to be done.
2
its a shame that legislation that seeks to improve ordinary citizens lives such as health care and Infrastructure
are considered democratic issues.
8
Why is it described as “ambitious”? Some puny internal reforms that none of us will understand. Some tweaking of health care. This trivial stuff is their “big ideas.”
8
This is embarrassing. Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are the absolute wrong people to be leading the Democratic Party at this moment, when the opposition operates in bad faith and scraps all norms and traditions in pursuit of political power. Leadership like this will only hurt the volunteers and activists who are out there trying to turn out the Democratic vote. We're not looking for milquetoast (and futile) attempts to restore bipartisanship with the far right—we're looking for bold advocacy.
10
Win first. Dream later.
15
Should the Democrats win the House, and possibly the Senate, it will be difficult to know where to begin. Starting with the damage done to the E.P.A., and then continuing on to the rollback of important issues of foreign policy, like the Iran agreement and the Paris Climate Accord, those would be good places to start.
And, then there is the Education Department, and H.H.S., and the Interior Department.
Wait. All the cabinet positions need to be replaced, and their departments completely reformed and modernized.
And then, ethics. What about the president’s lack of ethics, along with his own family of grifters?
Let’s just roll it all up and start over!
6
A great majority of Canadians would cast their votes for a liberal leaning, even progressive America. We've seen enough of the alternative as we've lately witnessed a constant friend, as kind and as generous as she was great, hobbled as if overnight through the stoking of old sectarian angers and resentments throughout the land (and beyond) in service of the unworthiest and most unattainable goal ever: the satisfying of an insatiable greed. Please vote on behalf of a concerned Canadian, if no other reason.
20
Please stop showing us Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton! I love them both but I want to see new people!
7
Ooh the first thing they will do regarding prescription drugs take from medicare again and put it in medicade for the fatherless children. Just think in twenty years we will be a totally socialist third world country. Hey is there anything we american tax payers can do to help the other poor 65 million people in the world. How we start calling our medicare and ss tax what is a Ponsi Shceme. Thanks FDR and JFK for telling people don't worry.......
This article provides a perfect example as to why the Democratic party has lost over 1,000 seats in State Houses during the last 10 years or so; why it lost the presidency, the House, the Senate; and why the Supreme Court is stacked with right wing ideologues extremists.
After everything we know: tax avoidance fraud to the tune of $500 million; incitement to violence; using public office for self-enrichment; cruelty, sadism, vulgarity, unprecedented in American history. And this is the counter-argument, the "resistance"? Pathetic!
8
@Luis Mendoza What is pathetic is the horrid mess the Republicans are pushing on it's citizenry. Unchecked deficits, trying to eliminate Social Security and Medicare only to give the tax breaks to those who least need it. This is insanity.
1
Sounds good to me.
8
A very polarizing Nancy Pelosi, well on in years, needs to bow out gracefully as Speaker of the House.
[The position of Speaker is just too important, not to mention second in line of succession to the presidency if Trump, blessed hope, is removed.]
7
As a long-time Democrat and NYT subscriber, I'm really sick of the constant snarky tone about Democrats. I gave up my subscription for a time because of it--and only came back because of your opinion writers. It really is possible to be even-handed in your reporting without it.
That said, this sounds like a terrific agenda to me!
14
Pelosi on Colbert last night saying its already in the bag. Everyone should know what that means. Dems do not take the House. Barely lose it by maybe 2-3 seats. Good Times ahead for sure.
5
That's a big IF, republicans are pulling ahead in key states like KY......
2
@There Please visit the 538 polls. Of course Kentucky would elect Republicans. The Democrats have a 5 in 7 chance of winning the House according to their polls. This site has 3 different methods of polling.
1
Americans are supossedly clamoring for sensible government and legislation, yet few pay any real attention when it actually happens.
8
And support the effort by Oregon's two Senators to get vote by mail into the law for all federal elections. It is a cheaper system, leaves a paper trail, and pretty much stops voter suppression efforts.
Hugh
20
The feckless Democrats will have me believing again if their first order of business is replacing Nancy Pelosi.
Learn for Mitch McConnell and don't bend at all. Show some backbone!
3
Pork barrel politics, bs ethics, and vague nonsense.
I expected more
Here is what the Democrats need to pledge to before the secure the house:
1) Prosecute elected officials who give favors to donors at the expense of the people they were elected and paid by to represent
2) Support trade that helps Americans, not trade that leaches money out of our country and encourages slave labor
3) Criminalize racism. Including race preferences
4) Prevent the influx of cheap labor into the country, that suppresses American wages. Whether it is by illegally crossing our border or abusing H1B visas.
Each one of these are liberal ideals, not conservative ones.
The Democrats need to embrace them, They have yet to
3
it all sounds like a dream...
3
After two years of this “president” a/k/a grifter in chief...this article makes me want to cry. Dear God please let it be true.
19
Monday, October 29, 2018
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 50% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance. Forty-nine percent (49%) disapprove.
3
@k.hoffecker -- Gallup sys otherwise:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1038667/US-midterm-elections-Donald-Trump-news-poll-Pittsburgh-shooting
"“Trump Job Approval” dropped to 40 percent the week ending October 28, the American Firebrand’s disapproval rating increased four percentage points to 54 percent.
The results come amid several acts of terror shaking the US over the past week and intensified scrutiny of the US President and his aggressive campaigning style.
1
So much for the wild-eyed liberal Nancy Pelosi. Showing once again that she is the best House speaker in the last 25 years. If she were from Ohio, she would be considered mainstream. Since shes's from San Francisco instead, she just becomes caricature fodder for the right. (I guess they didn't leave their heart their heart in San Francisco!)
8
Six days. Pound on this message. VOTE.
11
All the issues mentioned in the first couple of paragraphs are great part planks. However, this is the first time I have heard them laid out like this and I read this paper every day. Bottom line the Democrats message is not getting out or is to convoluted. Democrats should bullet point their message and speak about the bullet points at every opportunity.
16
Pelosi and Dem leaders will block any effort to move to Medicare for All. She will re-institute Pay Go, meaning any new social program will be paid for by cutting some other social program. Ethics reforms will be limited to more transparency, not any serious reduction of gifts, etc. They're willing to consider some privatizing of infrastructure. If they have any economic or environmental policies they're too insignificant to be mentioned here.
That is, Democratic leaders will continue on the same losing path they've been on for decades, only tinkering with the status quo that has enriched them and major corporations beyond their wildest dreams.
2
Could not have said it better. This is weak soup when a call to arms to save the Republic is needed. Pelosi only cares about her speakership and clout. My heart sank when I read this. @ELK
1
So, the Democrats do have issues besides health care as we consider the Democratic message versus the Republican message.
Thank you for running this article. The size of the font for the headline and its positioning on the page didn't invite me to think it was a very important piece.
Even in this article, I kept finding "Trump" getting the attention.
Please, New York Times, make an effort between now and election day to make it easier for your readers to know what the Democrats' vision of the future is.
15
All well and good, but even if by some miracle, the Democrats take back the House, it will be by a slim majority, and many of the new members will have campaigned as anti Pelosi, Republican lite candidates.
Any such House would initiate its tenure with a vicious, drawn out fight over the speaker's gavel. Even if Pelosi survives, she will be so badly wounded that no progressive agenda could follow.
3
The first thing I have seen that actually excites my about my party. Yea for Mrs Pelosi.
6
So how much of this agenda is expected to get through the Senate and be signed by Trump?
And why do Democrats still entertain thoughts of trying to work with the GOP, or GOP presidents? Have they not read the story of the frog and the scorpion?
I leave it to the reader to assign which party is the scorpion.
5
It will mean something if the Democrats win the House, however, without that Senate, we are still in trouble with all of those new incompetent federal judges they are appointing. That needs to come to a grinding halt and more sensible appointments (rather than rubber stamp judges with limited knowledge) need to happen. Without that senate, we are still in deep trouble. I hope this Blue wave is really and truly a massive turnout..............
2
@Pamthe House holds the purse strings so Senate can't pass anything that has $ in it, due to the House may say "that is a NO go" like Mitch likes to say NO,NONE SAYS IT BETTER than Mitch.Ask Obama.
@leighdale Yes, but that Senate holds the approvals for federal and supreme court judgeships................And that is a huge problem. I understand that the House holds the purse strings, however, we need that senate. Badly.
This seems like a bunch of pre-election talking points. Many of these "sweeping changes" would be deleterious to the Democrats' agenda as well as the Republicans'. Moreover, some stand on thin ice and may be struck down as unconstitutional, which would certainly result in a revival of tea party fury, posing a political threat in 2020/2022.
Undoubtably, there are apparatuses of our constitution that require modest regulation and refinement--amelioration, such as financial regulation of political contributions; but how can we achieve that without infringing on clear, constitution precedents?
@DJPage
Do you really think there's any clear Constitutional precedent for Corporations are people? Dark Money?
The Supreme Court loosed a flood of dark money and corruption on us that makes it hard to govern for the Public Good, a concept dear to the Founders.
1
A pragmatic approach, demonstrating a capacity to govern and not just heckle and obstruct, is the winning path for Dems in 2019. Hope they can stick to the themes mentioned in this article until 2020, when I'm sure the Prez primaries will bring out the lefties who seek to build from that (wing) base, which is a doomed strategy.
Good. It’ll be the first time that chamber did anything positive for the betterment of the country since the Democrats lost control in 2010.
4
Whatever it takes to defend Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security is the top priority.
A weak senator from Kentucky wants to dismember those programs to offset his ill-conceived tax cut that will ultimately lead to a recession as the debt explodes.
Shoring up healthcare and those programs are JOB#1!
Before any of that happens everyone must VOTE!!
4
The Dems dont know what they stand for and have no leaders. I see no hope from them at all. if I were American, I'd leave.
3
Hopefully there will be a Democratic House and the Democrats will fight against the policies of this President each and every day.
5
This is a good start but there is so much more that has broad support.
-Require all future Presidential Candidates to provide all personal and business tax filings.
-Make Election Day a national Federal Holiday and guarantee a few hours with pay for those who must work.
-Automatic voter registration for everyone turning 18 or who becomes a citizen.
-raising the minimum wage
-reverse the tax cut to corporations and the wealthy (anyone earning over $250k/year)
-reinstate SALT tax deduction
-raise the limit on earnings eligible for Social Security Tax to secure the Trust Fund for the foreseeable future.
These are just a few ideas. I'm sure the majority of Americans would support other policies.
49
@Eddie These are all good idea -especially raising (or eliminating) the Social Security tax cap.
I agree that everyone should register - but automatic voting registration is problematic. It is a limitation on free speech - people have a right to demonstrate their disgust with the system by not registering.
Also registering to vote is part of the process of determining your state citizenship which has implications for which state courts have jurisdiction over you in civil matters.
3
The two most important issues facing us are money in politics and climate change. The first is an existential threat to the United States, the second to the world.
Money creates both the reality and the appearance of corruption, both destroy public confidence in government and open the door to conspiracy theories and radical movements. But just as importantly we will NOT have a government of the people until money is banished.
Climate change means hundreds of millions of people will be homeless and without food most in countries with less than strong, stable governments and possessing nuclear weapons. Do we think they will all go die quietly in the night?
We need a constitutional amendment equivalent to one person one vote: one person one dollar. Congress should pass a constitutional amendment limited to federal elections, that bans any and all financial contributions to, or in furtherance of, a political party, candidate or campaign other than from flesh and blood human beings who are: citizens of the United States, eligible, not necessarily registered, to vote and residents of the respective jurisdiction. Congress SHALL limit these contributions to equal dollar amounts per person with limits such that a person of modest means can be reasonably expected to be able to make the maximum contribution with it being a financial burden. Further Congress shall have the authority to regulate rules related to these limits such as disclosure.
Violation shall be a felony.
5
@D Rome Speech may be expressed through monetary means. And concurrently, congress has no standing to equalize the financial contributions of individuals to, or in furtherance of, political campaigns. Freedom is not equality. We all have the right to contribution insofar as we desire; but for the government to impose limitations to such an extent encroaches on the political freedom of the minority. I concur in positing the mitigation of todays political debauchery on thwarting the venality of political candidates, but I don't believe in infringing on minority rights to do so. Perhaps dissolution is natural, and man has an inherent proclivity towards demoralization.
1
@DJPage there's absolutely zero chance the founders intended free speech to include millions of dollars. when they wrote "speech" they meant people talking. they weren't even millionaires here then; inequality was pretty much a non-issue, hence the lack of protections for the poor in the Constitution.
@DJPage That's a somewhat nihilist response. Unfortunately I can't find the article, I suspect it was here in the NYTimes, but that article in essence said that public opinion had no affect on political outcomes, but money did. If public opinion prevailed it was only because money agreed.
Money = Speech, corporations are people these are oxymorons. They're also the real point of Republican control over the Supreme Court.
Hopefully what Republicans (the party) is doing is a rear guard action destined to fail because this is not where the country is. But there are no guarantees.
If Democrats win, the 1st priority should be doing what ever it takes to prevent radical right-wing Republicans from regaining power; especially in the mid-terms of 2022. Our democracy depends on it.
7
They can propose whatever they like, but without s veto-proof majority how do they pass it?
1
@Mike Livingston, public pressure would help!
1
Ending gerrymandering would let American votes matter again in each community!
In other words, it is critical for a democracy.
36
I’ll believe Dems are serious about ending gerrymandering when they go after their gerrymandered districts first.
3
@EGD So only unilaterally disarming qualifies as serious? If that's the definition, I hope Dems are never serious about gerrymandering, campaign finance reform, voting rights, ethics, etc.. All things Dems have fought for, only to see Republican dismantle.
1
@EGD Democrats in California, who control the legislature there, have already taken that step:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/national/gerrymandering-in-california-where-do-you-draw-the-lines/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7af9c9df6494
1
@EGD You mean when they do exactly what they've already done with the 53 House seats here in California? Seems pretty serious to me.
2
The great looming threat that faces this country and the rest of the world, automation is not being addressed by either party, largely because their handful of mega-donors stand to benefit and our "leaders" are completely lacking in foresight. Millions of jobs will be lost, millions more will be diminished in value and significance and no provisions are being made for the massive displacements that will result. If you think the angry mobs, scapegoating, and drug addiction are bad now, just wait. Of course, any measures to address the issue will require huge sums of money from the very "visionaries" who are racing to make this dystopia a reality. Until the nations of the world make it impossible for Google, Apple, Amazon etc. through financial chicanery, to shift trillions of imaginary dollars around the world in a deft effort to avoid taxes, the rest of us will just be "collateral damage" in this brave new world.
3
Notice that the Democratic leadership isn't proposing to repeal the $1.5 billion tax cut for corporations and the wealthy; notice they aren't proposing extending Medicare to the entire population; notice they aren't proposing to pass legislation to extend the right to unionize to public employees nation-wide, or to enact card-check to allow unions to organize more easily; notice they aren't proposing to raise the national minimum wage to $15 dollars; notice they aren't proposing legislation to provide federal subsidies for child care, or to enact paid family leave for workers; notice they aren't proposing federal funding for social housing to solve the national housing crisis; notice they aren't proposing legislation to boost federal funding for public schools, and that they still support privatized charter schools; notice they aren't proposing relief from student debt or to support low-cost higher education. In short, they will do virtually nothing to help working class people, despite the fact that refusing to help working class people is the Democratic failure the brought Donald Trump to power in the first place. Not only is there nothing "ambitious" about their agenda, but even calling it "modest" is giving them far too much credit.
7
@john riehle, your comment assumes that what is reported is all they plan to do. Hence, your comment is not only assuming things that are not proven but grossly unfair. Attitudes like yours end up hampering rather than augmenting progress.
2
They haven't learned a thing from the Clinton loss because it's not in their interest to do so. The Democratic party is now basically a voracious money machine, whose sole goal is to perpetuate itself indefinitely, like a Ponzi scheme. Even worse, millions of small donors believe they now have a voice, but who do you think Chuck Schumer is going to pick up the phone for, one of the ten million schmoes who donated $20, or the guy who bundled $2,000,000? Obama made headlines with millions of small donors and he gave away the store to Wall Street after the crash. So much for that.
3
@john riehle how do you propose they get ANY of that passed with a slight majority in the house and a minority in the Senate and Trump in the White House?
Do you understand how the government actually works?
2
Commendable agenda in some ways, but I'm just going to quote another article that appears in the NY Times, an opinion piece about how in the dark members of congress and their aides are about what Americans really want. Tellingly, there is little if anything in this agenda that addresses those issues:
Only about 30 percent of Americans supported it (the tax bill) — unlike the well over 70 percent of Americans who consistently support raising the minimum wage, background checks for gun sales and taking action on the climate crisis. Bills were actually proposed on these issues, but you would hardly know it; they were barely considered, and it goes without saying that none passed.
Congress doesn’t know what policies Americans support. We know that because we asked the most senior staff members in Congress — the people who help their bosses decide what bills to pursue and support — what they believed public opinion was in their district or state on a range of issues.
3
Maybe if you voted.
@Bruce Rubenstein. What is worse is that the agenda described is precisely what a big chunk of the electorate is sick to death of, hence Trump.
This agenda is good, reasonable and necessary, and will help all Americans. Which means a Republican senate will work tirelessly to stop it in its tracks. It's not good enough to say we have no chance to win the senate - as I've been hearing for months - but we must get out there and vote for Democratic candidates at each level.
Trump was elected by non-voters. Let's not have the senate elected the same way.
15
How about hold the GOP accountable for the ads they ran saying they support coverage for pre-existing conditions and no cuts to Medicare and Social Security if they maintain the majority? Capture those GOP ads and hold them up to the public.
14
I would second that motion! It forces the GOP to act on the words they are using today to get elected.
It benefits all Americans, shows Congress can function again after a republican majority and mitch will hate it all!
I say go for it.
2
They should add to this agenda changing back to apportionment from reapportionment and ending the arbitrary cap of 435 House seats. This cap - set over 100 years ago though legislation - keeps an unnatural imbalance of power in the hands of the rural states not only in the House but in the electoral college - resulting in the increasing frequency with which the electoral college does not reflect the popular vote.
Under apportionment the number of house seats (and therefore electoral college votes) would be determined following each census based on creating an average district size roughly the same size as the smallest at-large state. A change back to apportionment -- and the Webster Rule -- which stated a state that did not lose population should not lose seats - would correct the problem of over representation of rural states before we encounter a constitutional crisis.
6
Dems better fix campaign finances, and undoing Citizens United is not nearly enough. Disclosure of donors is not enough. We need mandatory public campaign financing so Congress works for the people and not for the money.
Ethics in government and in business would be a welcome departure from our present Administration.
Jobs and poverty are always a concern. Of course restoring voting rights and civil rights for LGBT people would be necessary.
And in all this, Democrats will get no cooperation from the Republican Senate.
But Nancy Pelosi is a formidable political force, able to hold her caucus together and deliver what she promises. She is a better negotiator than either McConnell or Trump.
20
I hope the Dems win but this is an incredibly naive posture They don't want to show the country they are a "leftist mob." I guess they did not learn a thing from their sound thrashing in 2016. They will accomplish nothing while the right will continue to pander to their base and maintain their hands on the levers of power. God help us.
3
"They said they would work to improve the Affordable Care Act, for example, rather than rushing to replace it with a single-payer".
Polls are showing that even Republicans are supporting Medicare for all, but the establishment Democrats can't even bother to hide their elitist, anti-democratic nature.
There's only one way to significantly improve ACA - get rid of the private insurers. Anything else would be just cosmetic improvements.
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/08/new-poll-majority-of-gop-voters-support-medicare-for-all.html
10
Again, I guarantee that over 90% of the folks who bellow like this can’t define “single payer,” accurately, or name any three provisions of the PPPACA.
1
Agreed, but I will be interested to see what rank-and-file House Dems have to say about this. Will Pelosi and Hoyer even call the shots? I hope not. It’s time to recognize their contributions and move on to a new, younger and more progressive leadership.
2
@Robert That's okay. Robert, can you name any developed countries that have more expensive health care than the US and that also feature worse outcomes?
Might I suggest:
A) A Bill requiring all the members of Congress to send
their children to Public Schools.
B) A Bill requiring all Colleges receiving any Federal Funds
to be "race neutral" in their acceptance policies.
C) A Bill to end Homelessness in America.
D) A Bill requiring two years of National Service for those
between ages 18 - 20 years old.
E) A Bill reforming the broken ( lack of ) - Justice system.
F) A Bill that closes "For Profit" Prisons and leads to
Prison Reform.
G) A Constitutional Amendment that does not grant
citizenship to someone because your Mother arranged to
have you born in America.
H) A Constitutional Amendment that makes the terms of
members of the House 3 years, with 1/3rd elected every year,
the terms of the Senators - 4 years, with 1/4th elected
every year and the President limited to a single 5 year term.
I) National Health Care
3
Some details are advisable. And no Bill can simply throw out the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.
2
Well done and about time. While most Americans are already too familiar with the Republican agenda; namely, maintain control of all three branches of government and increase the wealth of wealthy while taxing everyone else -- the Democrat's plans have largely remained an enigma.
Keeping focus on the real concerns of Americans is a good start.
Now get started.
2
Stop with the measuring the drapes for all the new Democratic election winners' offices!!! There's a week to go. The ONLY, I mean ONLY, topic of public discussion should be getting out the vote to drive Republicans out of power. Period. Any discussion of "what we will do after we win" is just more red meat for the (R) crowd. Stop it!!!
9
@OmahaProfessor Thank you! This is exactly what was done in 2016, and that turned out poorly. Knowing where the candidates stand on issues is important to getting people to vote for them. Planning the first month of a Democrat house is absurd, how about the Democrats win first, then lay out a plan. Regardless - VOTE.
2
There's an article listed immediately to the left of this one in the Times that indicates that dark money has rolled into the party in record amounts in the midterms. Donors unknown. Then of course there's the wholehearted support for the re-election of a certain corrupt NJ Senator.
And they want to make ethics and campaign reform central platforms if they regain control of the House.
Believe them or our own eyes?
5
Democrats have no idea how to exercise power. It is reasonable to conclude that is why the American people took all power away from them. We may not like the outcome but the outcome is a symptom of the disease. If the Dems want , control they must relentlessly and ruthlessly push an agenda and consequences be damned. They are too concerned with a seat at the table and don't realize they are on the menu.
5
@Patrick
Correction. The "American people" didn't take power away from them.
The racist G.O.P. with every trick in the book, including Russian influence, Gerrymandering and the outdated Electoral College took power away from them.
You may think that having one party in control of all three branches of government is a good thing -- but that's hardly a Democracy representative of all of the PEOPLE....And there's a need for a bigger menu.
3
If my Party wins the House upon the next election, it will be one of the happiest days of my life. Blue skies are on the horizon!
5
"Ambitious" is far too generous a description.
3
I agree with the plan wholeheartedly. If Dems don't fix campaign finance and gerrymandering, the majority in America will continue to be on the losing side of elections and Congress will continue to be filled with the most extreme partisans. If we're ever to have a functioning Congress again, we need to get rid of gerrymandering. Priority #1.
Infrastructure and the cost of prescriptions are perfect as #2 and #3. This country is falling apart, and the cost of prescription drugs is a big part of the outrageous cost of the healthcare system.
Thumbs up!
36
A hopeful, ambitious agenda. One which this registered independent can support whole-heartedly.
68
@fsp Describing what they would do if they won is an important contributor to winning the election. The Democrats are offering a return to Constitutional democracy. I would vote for that, wouldn’t you?
6
@fsp how about we parents demand the schools start putting Civics back in, than maybe if kids were taught how our government works, they may, just maybe vote b/c they will know how it works and how important their votrs count. Civics was taken out of schools around 1970s. It is a way how to dumb down kids that grow to adults and know nothing on how government works. Only know what you hear on TV or radio. Your taxes pay for schools. Tell them you want Civics back in school programs again. If you notice, Republicans always want to cut education. So schools get less funds so they have to cut. Physical ed was cut, arts, home education (taught kids the basics in cooking, sewing on buttons just little stuff, auto shop, so you can change your own oil and fix a flat. Bookkeeping,Civics. I had all those classes and more but my daughter's class was the last class that had auto shop. Her brother 2 yrs behind her, it wasn't taught any longer. That's how it goes, Gov cuts education, property owners pay taxes that go up yrly while classes are cut. Sad.
1
As a former life-long democrat, I have seen that democrats are always full of ambitious plans - before an election. For example, I quite clearly recall Ms. Pelosi promising the aging Armenian population in her district that if she's reelected she would buck the Turkish government and get the US to recognize the Armenian genocide at the hands of the Turks. But when she took office again, she pulled the usual cop-out saying she still supports this but "now is not the right time." And that time has never come. This is but one example. Democrats are all for Big Ideas as long as they don't have the power to implement them. When they do have power, nothing happens. Recently, also in California, they were firmly in favor of Universal healthcare, twice vetoed by a republican governor. But once they took the governorship, it was again passed and killed - this time by a democrat. The reason? "We still support Universal Healthcare, but this is not the right bill."
The electorate has cottoned on to this bait and switch game.
This is why democrats lose again and again.
They have come to exemplify what Nixon's people said: "Ignore what we say. Watch what we do." And people just don't like what they see.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
6
@Rev. E. M. Camarena, PhD: I disagree completely. Dems have done plenty, when allowed to do so. The ACA was created and enacted by them, and all Repubs can think of is to repeal it, with hardly a concept of a replacement.
In my state, where Dems have control, we've made real strides on climate issues, such as a cap-and-trade system and vehicle fuel economy. While balancing the budget.
31
One would have thought that somebody with a doctorate would be capable of better argument than this, and be far more scrupulous about facts. Not to mention be willing to be honest about their political affiliations.
3
@Jomo: Bringing up the ACA is, as Rick told Ilsa, poor salesmanship. That was a conservtive Heritage Foundation plan which the neoliberal Obama thrust on us to the delight of the insurance companies.
"In my state, where Dems have control, we've made real strides on climate issues..."
So the climate is restricted to state lines? One state has a cleaner climate than another? Never forget that everything that caused global warming began as a method to improve life. To think that we will reverse that is wishful thinking. People can change the world, but never have we as a species improved it. Everything that most folks consider wrong began as somebody's plan to make things better.
The fact is, since the DLC hijacked the brand name, the democrats have out-republicaned the republicans.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
1
Verily I say to you, of these the greatest is action on "Citizens United." We must have meaningful campaign finance reform.
When campaigns are so hugely expensive, only the rich can afford to buy them.
When campaigns are financed from the shadows, the public can never know whose interests are being served.
Citizens United, a sham suit brought by the folks whose interests the decision serves.
6
It will be a new day on the correct path when Democrats promote progressive taxation for a change and start selling the idea of a government - in contrast to the anti-governmentalism of the GOP, and the antigovernmentalism of American culture.
I happen to believe government is a good thing as opposed to how we would be controlled without it. Or how we are working together (not so much) without it. Then if they convince us that government could be good, can they propose good government.
You know - like publicly fund our elections at some point - eliminating ALL private money at some point (two months before election day). Have all states adopt mail-in ballots (like Oregon where I live, and others) - enough of bozo backwardism. Etc. You know - rational type thinking, etc. FOR A CHANGE.
2
Sounds like a sane political agenda to me!
9
With Pelosi in charge of the mob, it will be the same ole political stalemate.
10
@Brewster Millions Please specify exactly what "mob" you refer to. As a former member of my state's Democratic central committee, I assume you're including me. Frankly, I find it hilarious that anybody would class this old lady as somebody akin to those "fine people" with the torches in Charlottesville.
2
If Democrats win control of the House, they will not have have enough power to enact their agenda, no matter how modest--after all, Republicans would still control the Senate & the White House.
The Democrats' aim should be to emulate the Republicans' behavior during Obama's two terms: do anything, everything, to frustrate, block, and obliterate all Republican intitiatives.
There is no such thing as a positive Republican policy--unless you believe starting trade wars (or real wars) with Europe & Asia is a positive policy; unless you believe showering tax breaks on the wealthy is a positive policy; unless you believe increasing the toxicity of air, water & food is a positive policy; unless you believe treating everyone but white Christian men as pariahs is a positive policy.
Democrats should be ruthless & relentless and treat Republicans for what they are: enemies of the people.
6
Can we please — PLEASE — focus on winning the election? Don’t count your chickens....
59
Thinking ahead is part of not stumbling, which the clowns that lucked into the excutive branch, thankfully, did in the early months of the current presidency. Different people do the politicing, while analysts and managers do the planning. The fact thea the mouth piece is a politician doesn't means she's diverted from the election, especially then you are trying to show competence as one of the reasons to be elected.
8
@Barbaro Advancing a popular agenda used to be a big part of winning elections. I'm glad to see it return.
8
@Barbaro
You can't win elections without saying what you would do. This statement is about two months late, not early.
1
The issue of gerrymandering has to absolutely be stopped and should be a priority. Why bother with independent commissions though? Why not simply form voting districts based on counties?
The structure is already there and local government and tax payers would push hard at having those boundaries manipulated. It invites a greater number of stakeholders and is likely to be stable.
3
@SM It goes back to the principle of "one person, one vote." In California, where we have a commission, we also have vast counties with relatively small populations and tiny ones (like San Francisco with 47 square miles) with much larger populations. So the independent commission does try to consider county lines and geographic contiguity. But they also try to balance other factors like population. I had my doubts when we started it. But I have to admit it's worked out pretty well.
This list of priorities is very encouraging and will enjoy broad support from the people. I hope that they get the chance to pursue them and follow through. Even if the Senate and the President block them, the Democrats need to show that they are serious about governing responsibly and representing the will of the people, not the corporations.
18
I think that it is absolutely necessary, in light of the presence of Kavanaugh now on the Supreme Court and Trump in the White House, that legislation be passed by Congress that Supreme Court Justices be subject to the same ethical code of conduct now applying to all other lower federal court jurists, particularly those provisions pertaining to recusals and conflicts of interest. This is not only good general governmental policy going forward, but obviously a required preemptive step that must be taken for obvious reasons.
72
It all sounds like good proposals that the majority of voters would agree with.
Typically the republicans vote party line whereas the democrats vote on policy, but since the majority of swing voters also vote on policy, then the House will be able to make nice proposals.
That said, what is the use of nice proposals if they'll be blocked by the senate and president?
We all know that the president and republicans are much more adept at framing the issues in compelling ways, and the democrats in the past have been much more adept at running for cover.
So it will be very interesting to see how the dems play their cards.
And how they set the stage for 2020.
2
What if the Democrats lose? Then what? I already voted straight ballot Democrat, but I am unsure if the Democrats are going to have a majority in 2019. Trump's rhetoric is sure to fire up his base. Will this election be enough to change Congress?
8
And here is the problem. Countless "moderates" and even some "conservatives" are asking everyone to vote for the Democrats regardless of policy preferences to "save America" and "put a check on Trump." But how is that possible if the Democrats plan to pass this liberal agenda? Reading the article, I don't think I supported a single item in their wish list. How am I supposed to vote for that? No thanks.
17
@DRS - So, you are in favor of gerrymandering, loose ethical standards for politicians, dark money in politics, higher drug prices, and doing nothing about a crumbling infrastructure? Sounds great!
9
Oh, so now they have a "plan" too little, too late and unlikely to be enacted as they know so well. Enough of these sham positions!
13
@mikemn, did you say the same thing when the republicans voted 70 times to repeal the ACA when President Obama was in office? And then failed to follow through when they were in the majority in both houses of Congress and the Presidency?
12
@mikemn All of their proposals were needed in 2009 when they had both chambers and the White House, but they did nothing.
2
I want to secede from The Confederate States of America. People turn out in mobs (yes, mobs) to worship a so called President that denigrates the free press and political opponents. These people are not Americans, and certainly not my countrymen. How can the Educated States secede, and keep our tax dollars?
71
@MoneyRules I agree. Many people where I live (Maine) would like to leave the US and join Canada. Makes perfect sense to us, but, unfortunately, I don't think CA would take us in...
2
@MoneyRules- That would be just as wrong as what the CSA did to America in 1861.
Apparently you are not a student of the great emancipator, Lincoln.
He taught us that every inch of America is America.
Disregard history at your own peril.
2
Good ideas. But why didn't they come out with this agenda more than a week before the midterms? That would have given them something to run on now.
Remember, none of this will ever become law with an almost certain GOP controlled Senate and White House. And even if it did (now or after 2020), the GOP controlled Supreme Court may well block it.
Elections have consequences. 2016 will live with us for at least a generation.
Vote on November 6 as if your rights depend on it. They do.
14
The democrats are dreaming - again. They just never learn. Their laughable party is lacking leadership and a serious agenda. All they present is the same old same old. Yjeu stand little actually chance of winning anything. Their party is finished. Sad.
7
@Sang Ze If you seriously want to debate the Democrat's agenda then state your position and we can engage in a civil debate. But simply using the term, "lacking a serious agenda" does nothing to allow for any informed debate.
6
I fear they will bow to their base and go with impeachment leading to ongoing trench warfare with the Trump administration which, sadly, will 1) easily eclipse everything else they say they want to do, and 2) not get the result they want.
7
I wish you good luck.
3
I hope that the columnists and readers of the NYT are not too upset by this moderate and reasonable approach to governing. This is what we are trying to get back to. A Congress that actually works rather than postures. I hope that Nancy Pelosi and the other Democratic leaders mentioned in this article don't get too much criticism from the NYT commenters.
23
Hopefully this will be true. If the democrats take the House (and probably not the Senate) this is the way to go, moderate progressive ideas that most Americans can agree upon and not east coast liberal, identity politics, never met a war, wall street banker or trade agreement I did not like, like Hillary ran.
Emphasize things that most Americans can agree with, infrastructure, universal health plan, corporate welfare tax cuts, etc etc. not impeaching Trump, or going on witch hunt hearings like the republicans are doing now or passing identity obsessed legislation.
If the democrats do the above they may not get much of it since the republicans will most likely control the Senate and have the WH, but will show the American people that the democrats are able to govern all three branches in 2020.
62
@Paul
"...witch hunt hearings"? So you are saying that the blatant, criminal corruption that permeates the administration right now should just be let go? No! That was the worst mistake made by the Obama administration, not punishing the industry, and Bush administration criminals that brought America to its knees. They learned that they could misbehave and there would be no consequences.
There MUST be consequences. A Democrat controlled House must expose all of the corruption in DC, in the Trump administration to the light of day and all those responsible must be held to account or else it will just happen all over again next time the GOP is running the show.
8
@Paul
going along to get along sure has worked well for the dems - not
why not take a leaf from the GOP and hit hard and compromise less
this country is not as conservative as the gop wants us to believe
the dems should burn their crops and salt their fields
and trying to win the votes of middle of the road white dudes from the mid-west is a loser long game
4
@arusso
Exactly, if Obama had arrested the global banksters instead of coddling them, the original (pre Koch) Tea Party would have been on our side. Instead Obama left all the bad actors in place and made sure they got their bonuses!
And instead of prosecuting known torturers, he helped cover up their crimes, and now we have a known torturer as head of CIA, with Democratic votes!
You can't oppose the Party of Trump by implementing their policies and protecting criminals.
Crimes must be investigated and prosecuted or else the rule of law goes out the window and the Constitution with it.
2
If the Democrats win the House, the first thing to do is get rid of Perlosi, and her deputies, from the leadership. People are voting for change, not status quo. It is not enough to switch the House to Democrats; it is time fro new and younger blood, to take over the leadership.
Lest we forget, it was Perlosi, her deputies, and the DNC, that is the root cause of indirectly putting Trump into power, in the first place. Also, by their choice, created a lower voter turn out, to allow the GOP retained the House, and gained the Senate, in 2016.
31
@Nick Metrowsky Lest we forget, it maybe called Obama care, but it was Pelosi who fought for it, and her leadership that got it passed.
1
Their agenda looks reasonable but they need to consider the order in which they pursue different initiatives, since they are likely to run into the kind of obstruction Obama faces if they go with outlawing gerrymandering, etc. Might be sensible to start with infrastructure and middle class tax reform as well as Medicare expansion, since those will help in the 2020 race.
44
Agreed! Republicans always overreach and hopefully the electorate will punish them this time around, although I am not as optimistic as Pelosi.
Infrastructure and middle class tax reform first, would be the sanest approach. If Dems get into another cultural tit-for-tat, it will turn off folks and jeopardize an opportunity to right our sinking ship.
17
@WHM They absolutely need to start with gerrymandering if they wish to keep the support of their base and keep them actively engaged.
The presidential election - like it or not - begins next year.
This is a matter that will return integrity to our elections and counter the disenfranchisement felt by the majority of the population. You can not have a legitimate democratic form of government where the voices of the people are routinely ignored and manipulated.
8