as usual very positive thoughts. But little will happen until money gets out of politics. "Citizens United" (freedom of expression for corporations?) "must be reversed, and private funding should be strictly limited, with public funding of political parties as e.g. in France
Colin, you are right about too many Christian nationalists on the SC, but I would suggest there are 6. Every conservative member has those what I call "pseudo-Christian" tendencies and generally decide cases based on it despite our Constitution's intention of religious freedom, not freedom of Christians to force their beliefs on others.
Roberts would be fine if the rest of the supreme court was the same quality as Ruth Bader Ginsberg Who got even majority Republican support. Clearly come after the fact, Receive that the long-term strategy of the minority Republicans was to pack all the courts and once done it may be impossible to unpack them.
Even though it might currently be impossible, and Supreme Court Justice should probably receive 80% support or better yet not be voted on by the party in power at all but before us to get 66% of popular voter support. The entire country voting for Supreme Court justices every two years would make a lot more sense when you consider their life appointment.
Sorry -- what secular values are being forced on you? Could you be a bit more specific? I see that fundamentalist Christians are trying to force their values on everyone, but you've got me confused.
Please quote me chapter and verse of Gov. Hochul's "compelled speech" laws. If you go to a private religious school, I doubt that the private religious school is compelled by the Dept of Ed to do anything that would violate its religious principles. But show me. I'm open to being educated. And thanks, but I don't need a Talmudic discussion on Jewish history. Referring to your extended colloquy in response to my critical comment dealing with the intolerant Orthodox Jewish positions regarding the LGBTQ community. Nobody is forcing you to respect the humanity of others except that you do live in the United States and consider the Constitution a legitimate document, I suppose. But then, as with your compatriots (the non-Jewish Christian and Muslim fundamentalists), respecting the personal freedoms of others seems not to be part of the equation.
I am hoping that we can get some enterprising investigative reporter to do an analysis of the court with a title something like "SCOTUS - Legal or Political". Analyze the decisions that are questionable. The key to Citizens was that there would be no quid pro quo for money given. Are you kidding? The section of the Civil Rights law that required southern states to submit proposed changes to voting rules to DOJ for approval - SCOTUS decided that procedure was no longer necessary - legal decision?
There are many more examples. The point would be to expose the problem and get people talking about it. I think it is a required prelude to actuating doing something about it.
I often wonder if people in power actually believe in it. They come to power by playing on the beliefs of others. The former president would certainly fear going to hell if he really believed it.
What are you talking about? News flash our country was founded upon CHRISTIAN VALUES, our constitution is only for a MORAL and RELIGIOUS people. It will be totally inadequate for anyone else. The separation between Church and State is another lie cooked up by a radical supreme court that made up a right to an abortion and said you have no individual right to bear arms. The church was meant to work hand in hand with the state and the state is not supposed to endorse or force one religion over the other. This is a CHRISTIAN nation, if you don't like that MOVE TO CHINA!!! They have no religion their, you would love it. Abortion up to 9 months, no guns, no freedom of speech.
We were founded on, among other things, religious freedom. This includes atheism. I do not believe in god(s) or the supernatural in general. By you logic I am not truly American. I beg to differ.
Have you actually READ the constitution? I have and it says nothing at all what you describe.
So then where do our rights come from? You don't have to believe, but if nobody does, our rights will eventually be gone. It is the idea that they come from GOD that makes them INALIENABLE, without it, they can just be taken away.
No they don't. Unless you decide I am an alien because I do not believe in your god. Google Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists. Spoiler. That is the document where Jefferson invokes the phrase "a wall of separation between church and state."
Thanks for proving my point. You think our rights come from government and that means they can be taken away by government and that goes against EVERYTHING our founding fathers stood for. People like you would give up all our rights and America would cease to exist. Like I said, without a belief in GOD, America would not be a thing and you would be a slave to communism, the only reason you're not is because of people like me. People like you would have already burned the 2nd amendment and think free speech should be censored for things like hate speech and misinformation. Guess what, the official religion of the CCP is atheism.... What Jefferson meant, was the church should not be giving orders to the state. I don't care about Church, GOD is about relationships, not religion. The church has a place, and that is to provide a service to the community and give guidance to our elected officials if they want it, not to rule and control the state and government. That is no good either. Our leaders are supposed to be bound by a moral and religious code because the constitution is sacred. A separation from church and state is not a separation from GOD and the state. When the state does not even admit to GOD existing, you get Communist China. Do you understand the difference? I believe in a separation of Church and state in the sense the church controls everything is bad. Churches can be just as corrupted as governments. Do not confuse GOD and the "church".
Oh Isaac, you do know better than to think our government was set up just for religious folks. The founders knew about atheists and did not propose they be kicked out or kept from citizenship. The Constitution has "moral" elements, of course, since many of the founders were religiously observant. The Supreme Court conservatives have to rework it to make it harm the people they want harmed over the years, mostly women, people of color, and non-Christians. My question is, which is moral, the Constitution or the pseudo-Christian conservatives who have served on the SC at various times? I'm hoping it's the Constitution but that does not mean it only accommodates the moral. We have a whole lot of amoral people who serve in offices all over this country and swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.
Our rights come from GOD, that was the idea behind this country. While these rights are for all, only the believers in GOD know they cannot be voted away. People who do not believe in GOD cannot uphold out rights, because they do not think they came from GOD, but the government. This is why they have no respect for free speech or the right to bear arms and think it can be taken away for safety reasons. You cannot uphold the constitution if you do not believe that our rights came from GOD and are unalienable. OH and Christianity does not harm anyone. It is not a harm because we believe you should never kill your baby or that homosexuality is immoral. Nobody has to accept you or your immoral ways of life and you have a right to live your life the way you want, but just because we are not accepting of that does not make it backwards or harmful. I do not want to live in a society where people think they get to pick and choose what is moral or think they can decide what notions of morality they want to abide by. These are non negotiable. Oh and more black and Hispanics are Christian than anything else. I didn't know the bible said no blacks allowed? God and Christianity are accepting of all people, not just all behavior, their is a big difference. But as well any real Christian knows it is not our place to judge, just love and help people find GODS love. It in this idea though, that are rights come from GOD, if you do not believe that or in GOD, you cannot EVER truly appreciate your rights or understand the true foundation of which this nation was founded upon. So yes, America was created for a moral, RELIGIOUS PEOPLE, to anyone else, this system will be totally inadequate. Our system was not set up only for religious people, but it can only be upheld and last with a religious people. The further Americans sway from GOD, the further they get from the idea of freedom and GOD given rights, until communism takes it's place. This is what we are seeing right now.
Isaac, your religionist nonsense has no basis in fact. Our founders were not all Christian or even believers, many Deists and I suspect more than one atheist. They knew well that religion and government are separate and should remain such. Theocracies in the modern age do not work out so well because people get sick of the blundering religious leaders who have to keep warping the religion to make it fit what the men in charge want. It helps if people employ their faith to help guide them in their dealings with others and in the ways they deal with the earth and its creatures, and govern and vote, but that is it. Their religion should never be written into the laws they write because what you believe and what I believe may be quite different. I should not be able to infringe on your faith nor you on mine. The only exceptions would be if a particular faith or set of believers puts born human beings at risk. For example, if you don't want to have an abortion, don't have one but stand back and don't try to pump your beliefs into my life and try to make or have others make my decisions for me. That's what a democracy is, the freedom to decide and live my life knowing that my rights end where yours begin and vise versa, again unless the lives of born human beings are at risk. The first amendment says that but a whole lot of conservative Christians aren't satisfied because other people may do things they don't like or understand. I say, grow up and have an adult religion that permits different understandings of one's faith and doesn't feel the need to dictate religion to others. Stop putting God in a box that only you have the key to. It's ugly and unChristian!
Really? No GOD. Science proves the existence of GOD sorry. Matter cannot form without an observer to witness it. Quantum Mechanics, look it up. The universe could not have formed without an observer to witness it. Oh and that little pit in your stomach that makes you cry or feel bad, that is called your soul, is was given to you by GOD. All you have to do is open your eyes and you can see GOD everywhere. Must be sad to think you are nothing more than dust with no hope for anything but death and darkness. The simple fact of the matter is that there is far more proof GOD exists.
Citizens United hands down is the worst decision ever foisted on the American people by the Supreme Court (financially hurts the greatest number of Americans), followed by the reversal of Roe vs Wade (threatens the lives of 51%), followed by the dehumanization of 20% with the reversal of Affirmative Act.,,,,,
CJ, you are right about how bad Citizens United is. Following your list of Roe v. Wade and the upcoming anti-affirmative action rulings. I would add that tied with these is the Shelby voting rights case of 2013. Perhaps worst of all will be the ridiculous "let state legislatures decide who wins elections rather than the people" case which is coming up next month. Alas, our current Supreme Court is out of control and that is exactly what Republicans claim they want, until their daughter gets pregnant in Texas or Mississippi, or when their state legislature takes away their vote.
I was unaware of Holder vs Shelby. I believe that where the preamble says “All men are created equal” means all individual human beings. And I believe Jesus’s inclusion of even women and children demonstrated that he preached inclusion of every human being. And when the scripture speaks of “the breath of life” means that a human being is considered a human being when their body is capable of sustaining their life! Women are NOT 2nd class citizens and neither are people of different races. We are all human beings loved by God because He created us all and Jesus died for every one of us!
Citizens United betrays, delegitimizes and ultimately dooms American Democracy. SCOTUS knows this, is playing along, and is complicit. Justice Scalia brought the gun and pulled the trigger. The current court is burying the half living body.
The Voting Rights Act of the 1960's had a section that required 15 or so districts to obtain permission from the DOJ before they could change their voting rules or procedures; this was called "Preclearance." As that requirement was about to sunset,
Shelby County (Alabama) v. Holder (U.S. Attorney General) was filed asking the SuCt to abolish it. Rep. Sensenbrenner, a Wisconsin Republican, headed a group in the Congress that garnered extensive data indicating that the preclearance was still needed. Moreover, in the Senate the vote was 98-0 to keep it and in the House only 35 votes were cast to abolish it -- a huge plurality ! Despite these two factors, the court said that there had been many changes since the law was passed and the preclearance was no longer needed. Immediately, states passed voting requirements that amounted to voter suppression. In essence, the SuCt was legislating from the bench, something it often says it is not supposed to do. A lucid analysis of the Court is contained in Senator Whitehouse's book, THE SCHEME, just out.
My father was a Sociology professor at UNC. He could be prescient about political and cultural matters. I remember when "Citizens" (yeah, right) United was passed by SCOTUS, he said, "Well, there goes our democracy."
We can get there as long as we don't give up. I get discouraged sometimes, but Robert is right. We can do this as long as we keep on trying. We are bigger than money.
Philippe, I know you are right about the problem of money in politics. I too, would like to see the downfall of Citizens United. Maybe after this election cycle's disgusting collection of ads and obscene amount of spending when we have so many real problems that money could benefit, people can be encouraged to rise up against it for sensible spending on elections with reasonable contribution limits and elimination of dark money no matter where it is and comes from.
Or the UK, for example. When the British prime minister calls for an election, he or she is given 3 weeks and 3 weeks only, to campaign. He or she is given 100,000 pounds, and 100, 000 pounds only, to spend on the campaign. Members of Parliament are given 50,000 pounds to campaign. Neither the PM nor the MP is allowed to spend anything outside of these allotments.
Elections and campaigning have become an industry in the US, now worth billions to pollsters, campaign managers and advisors, ad makers, television, social media, and talk radio. We are perpetually having an election, nearing an election, and raising money for elections. We are so busy electing that we cannot indict the one person who has proved willing to do away with all future elections. It is insane! Does any other functioning democracy operate this way? It is more American "exceptionalism." I don't see a way forward unless the democratic republic goes down in flames and a modern Constitution emerges from the ashes.
Meanwhile, from Field Team Six. We still need your help to encourage unregistered folks to use their right to same-day registration on Election Day in states like Wisconsin. Can you join our election day phone banks to Georgia, Wisconsin, California, and Nevada? Check out our Volunteer Opportunities here https://www.fieldteam6.org/volunteer-ops
WHEN we Americans retake the senate AND keep the house, yes I'm hopeful, we CAN eliminate Citizens United! Hopefully it's one of President Biden's first actions.
Daniel, Were we to attempt to overturn Citizens United through Congressional legislation, presuming the legislation passed in the House (a heavy lift), we would need enough Senators either to modify or set aside the filibuster to move the legislation to the floor for debate and an up or down majority vote (an even heavier lift). My point in writing is not to dissuade us from trying, but merely to detail what’s involved so we’re better prepared.
Daniel, At best, we could gain one Senator, which leaves us one Senator shy of surmounting the guaranteed resistance from Manchin and Sinema. Moreover, though the margins are tightening, the latest projections for control of the House still favor Republicans.
Roger, I absolutely love that saying! And isn’t that the truth!
None of my grandparents were from the US. All left countries because of fascism! To see it being supported by these willfully ignorant rubes is beyond outrageous!
The lack of punishment is criminal in my mind too. Just as you would not yell at a child for something they did one month a ago, delaying punishment of such obvious high crimes gives an impression of acceptance or vindication. Very dangerous with people who cannot determine truth from lies.
I hear a lot of polling where they report that Americans rate the economy and inflation high as one of their concerns. Why don’t the pollsters ever ask about the things that drive inflation and today’s economic problems? If price gouging and crazy billionaires (perhaps another adjective) were part of the question, would Americans rate that high?
Rose, While you’re right that we need more granular polling unveiling record corporate profits (a 54% increase) as the biggest driver of inflation, I also am troubled that Democrats, overall, have declined to enact a united, laser focused effort to expose how corporate profits account for over half of the increased prices people are paying.
While some might defend a party’s reluctance to bite the hand that feeds it, I believe the benefits of pinning corporate pricing as the biggest driver of inflation would outweigh the costs.
Philippe, I simply would add, were Dems to hold the House and pick up a handful of Senate seats, they possibly could pass H.R.1/S.1 For the People, the predecessor to the edited down Freedom to Vote Act. The For the People Act, that passed in the House, not only established ironclad federal voter protection safeguards, but also called for enacting serious measures to get big money out of politics.
Considering several subscribers on this thread also rightly expressed deep concerns about the Court, I would note that the additional Senate seats would increase the likelihood of the Senate setting aside the filibuster so Congress could expand the Court. Here, it should be noted that in 1869 the number of Supreme Court Justices was set at 9, with one Justice assigned to 1 of the 9 Appellate Courts. Today, there are 13 Appellate Courts, enacting a break in precedent dating back to the Judiciary Act of 1789, wherein Congress set the number of Justices at 6, each assigned to 1 of the 6 Appellate Courts at that time.
Framing my sign off with a generalized reply to Reich’s missive, admittedly, regardless of the midterm results, we are dealing with a radicalized, organized, extremist right wing movement. The one positive, aside from their telling us their playbook, is that we are the majority. Nonetheless, we’re not organized. Thus, we must organize politically to take on this Fascist threat.
You are so right,these idiots are scared out of their minds of all of us.And we definitely are the future of America.
They who have closed minds can't see a future where they aren't nearly as special as they seem to believe themselves to be.
Whoever y'all are,if you haven't already voted,get up and hang out in the line and vote!Pack some snacks and a couple cold drinks,seeing as it don't say diddly about y'all bringing your own.
Melissa, good advice! I hope everyone who can and has not already done so will get up and go to vote as soon as the polls open. That is a good way to show our strength and that we really do care about the future. Besides you can get to know some of your neighbors while waiting in line to vote. Don't forget to thank the poll workers for being there on our behalf.
That sounds much like the attitude Ukraine is taking against its monstrous foe Russia that has invaded them. Not such a bad analogy to what we Democrats are facing versus the Republofascists. And this attitude seems to be working for them. They are slowly but surely taking back their land & defeating the monster.
Jaime, I like your connecting the Ukrainian underdog fight to what Democrats and progressives are facing here. So, let's take heart and do what we can to get people who actually care about this nation elected.
Daniel, that's a very astute observation: "the war in the Ukraine will be won or lost in Wisconsin." If Repubs get control of Congress and people like Marjorie Taylor Greene rise to leadership position, we could actually see US support swing from Ukraine to Putin. Then there's climate change, income inequality, fentanyl epidemic, women's rights, voting rights, Jan.6 insurrection ... There is so much at stake in this election. And what are voters' main issues? this week's price of gas and lettuce?
I expect Republicans to claim victory tonight even though half the votes (early votes, mail-ins, etc) won't be counted till tomorrow and later). I can already hear "rigged" and "stop the steal". There are more Dems than Repubs, and never has the need been greater to get out there and vote. Positive comments like Robert's post will hopefully motivate a big blue turnout. Let's hope so.
I just read Hartmann's column (started late last night then fell asleep & finished this morning). Like Reich, he is 1 of my favorite political commentators, & is very perceptive. Thanks for the article. I hadn't seen this.
I had read back when it was happening what Trump's Homeland Security was doing in Portland, picking up people in unmarked vans. I found it troubling & the mark of a fascist regime. Wyden is typically on top of matters dealing with security & privacy & violations thereof.
Well, it looks like Democrats barely held on although many races are still up in the air, including here in Oregon, & the majority in the House is still undecided.
Oh, I'm sorry you've had to endure being misrepresented by Boebert. That is a nnail-biting. The Democratic lead keeps shrinking as the vote total gets closer to 100% at about the right proportion for it to be tied when the tabulation are completed. That is almost sure to go to a recount. I really hope Boebert loses.
I just heard that Wisconsin has been decided in favor of that russophilic traitor Ron Johnson, ending our chances of a Manchinema proof Senate majority. So it likely comes down to Nevada & Georgia, which might go to a runoff, although Warnock is pretty close to 50%. I really don't want another 50/50 Senate, & losing the majority would be disastrous, especially if we also lose the House.
Oregon's votes may take a long time to count, too, for perhaps 3 of the congressional races.
I don't know how Wisconsin can keep on electing Johnson. Remember Russ Feingold? Such a fine senator! How Wisconsinites could give him up for such a louse as Johnson, twice! Money maybe. Johnson's own & more from the Kochs.
Sadly I've heard that expectations are that Republicans will probably barely take the House. Can you imagine Kevin McCarthy as speaker? A man with absolutely no principle nor moral compass. Or worse, Gym Jordan or even Trump. Ugh!
I see from your correct usage of the written English language that you possess an IQ of 100 or above. While I was taking a Brain and Behavior class at U of KY, my professor pointed out that in the Physicians Desk References, members of the LGBTQ+ community were no longer considered mentally il after researchers discovered that homosexual men, who were born without the receptors on the area of the brain where a brain is masculinized by of all things the female hormone, estrogen. We are all aware that trisomy 21, produces Down’s syndrome, which can be passed along to a baby, due to a break off of part of one of the 21st pair of genes resulting in the broken gene passed along as one whole and two broken parts of the other 21st genes. God’s creation of DNA in all living things with some exceptions like viruses results in genetic mutations in normal genes. We all carry fatal mutations in our genes. So in males born as homosexuals , in a very crude definition, you have males born with female brains, due to the missing receptors due to a genetic mutation. Do you or a family member have blue, green, or hazel eyes? You did not get to choose the color of your eyes did you? Members of the LGBTQ+ community did not get to chose the genes the inherited, one from each parent, either. Do you believe that medical treatments can cure some diseases either with medicine or surgery? Then you believe in science. Just because you or I do not have PHDs in Genetics or Chemistry or any science do not keep any of us going to the doctor when we are sick. Therefore, we believe in science.
Democrats have won 6 out of the last 7 presidential votes with the popular vote. Look it up. The popular vote IS the VOICE OF THE PEOPLE! Yet it is often crushed by the electoral college, a system of assigning privilege to the few.
Try focusing on the electorate, with millions of people who continue to support a malignant narcissist and traitor, trump, despite years of overwhelming evidence that he is a loathsome human aberration. The Dems have done poorly at messaging again, but they remain vastly superior to the R swamp gang of dishonest, cynical, traitorous and hypocritical swine. Your little smear of Dems show only that you are ill-informed, bigoted and a failed citizen.
Chuck, you are living a delusion. The J6 hearings were extensive and specific. Pretend all you want, you , the criminal cabal, formerly known as republicans, will lose everything. Trump will not be walking away.
You can live in denial and dismissive thinking about reality, but that won't change the reality. If you claim the evidence is not overwhelming, you are either ignorant of what's been established with extensive investigation or you're just obstinate about rejecting the facts. The record of trump's frauds, his incitement of insurrection and his so many other offenses is in the public record and irrefutable. Just as easy examples of concluding legal cases against him, his "foundation" was forced to shut down and pay $20 million in penalties after it was found that he used the "charity" as his personal slush fund and broke the law on how charities are to operate. Likewise, his "trump university" scam was shut down and forced to pay $25 million in penalties to students who were duped by that scam. The Mueller report led to impeachment, but Rs were so cowardly and so concerned about protecting their corrupt political swamp gang that they voted against removal from office that was called for. The crap that hit the wall was R falsehoods and craven conduct. The Jan 6 committee has NOT resulted in nothing. It has resulted in a wealth of damning evidence so far and is not over yet, but apparently you don't bother to follow it. The final report is expected on Dec 21 and will likely include criminal referrals to the Justice Dept for trump and others. The DoJ itself is engaged in at least two major investigations into trump's seditious conspiracy, illegal possession of govt documents and more. Why do you keep lying about the facts? Fear, delusion or unwillingness to confront reality? All of the above, clearly.
I'm as disgusted with the DNC as you are for their malicious interference in both parties' primaries, supporting some of the worst candidates. They are almost as bad as the RNC.
Your characterization of Ukraine parrots russofascist propaganda. How can you let yourself believe anything propagated by that lying regime?
If you want Naziism, stick with the Republicans. They will bring you Naziism the likes of which you've never seen before. They are clearly headed in that direction & are almost there. A Republican presidency in 2024 will bring them there perhaps permanently. That will bring them in alignment with their allies & inspirers, the Putinist Russians.
At least in Ukraine, the Nazi elements that have existed there have been relegated to insignificance. Not here
Just as many other republofascists, you keep on repeating false russofascist propaganda that the republofascist base always falls for. Once & for all, the revolution in 2014 came from the Ukrainian citizens, who were fed up with Yanukovich's rule & his willingness to keep Ukraine subservient to Russian demands.
I have deep contempt for Putin apologists who fail to realize, or are willing to accept, that Putin is the most dangerous man since Hitler, that he poses the greatest threat to world peace since the 2nd World War, & that his invasion of Ukraine is the most important international conflict since WWII that is crucial for those of us who care about democracy & world peace to prevail.
Oh! I feel much better after reading this. I was thinking of relocating to some other country if the GOP were to re-take congress. Now I feel like staying to fight the good fight.
Now my next guest ion involves the fact that we generally define human beings born with a pair of XX chromosomes as female and a pair of XY chromosomes as male. What do you call a living, breathing human being whose sexual chromosomes might be something like XXXY or XXXXYY? I no longer have the text book that listed the combinations that list unusual, viable, sexual chromosomes so my examples might not be viable, but do you see how people can be born with both male and female sexual chromosomes and therefore one of those unusual combinations can result in male looking humans who can get pregnant and have a baby?
Thank you Mr Reich, many people (including myself) cannot afford to lose sight of the long term. Even if today doesn’t go well for us, we must continue to fight. The future of the country depends on it.
Derek, Yep, we need to keep fighting no matter what. Maybe we need to be a little louder and assertive so the media will have to pay attention. Maybe we need to encourage our young people to speak out more and loudly. It's their future we and they are helping to decide today. Let's do our best to aim our nation in the most caring, active, positive direction.
Thank you, Robert, for your message of comfort and inspiration. I shall awake and head out into the cold to watch a Lunar eclipse, here in Michigan. Although the celestial darkness is beautiful, you remind me that it is the inevitable return of the light that I will welcome. Then, I will walk (indeed) to my polling place and cast my ballot filled with hope and commitment to our future together.
I am getting ready to go out into the chilly Michigan night to see the eclipse also. Being a True Night Owl. And we already cast our votes. Lets hope it all goes well.
Alas, here in western Maine, the sky clouded in as the hour of full eclipse approached. I caught one puny glimpse of a coppery red disc and then more clouds closed in over the face of the moon. The temp dropped over 30° overnight and the wind has risen, making the stay outside--on the off chance of another fleeting glimpse--a very frosty endeavor, indeed.
Cloud cover spotty, so I drove to a dark hilltop for similar fleeting glimpses. I have a pair of motion-stabilized binoculars that gave me a beautiful view of the red moon as the full-eclipse subsided. My pictures on my phone are terrible, I think!
In Baghdad By the Sea, we are waiting for a hurricane, figuratively and literally.
We are boarding up, bringing in the plants and porch furniture.
From Field Team Six. We still need your help to encourage unregistered folks to use their right to same-day registration on Election Day in states like Wisconsin. Can you join our election day phone banks to Georgia, Wisconsin, California, and Nevada? Check out our Volunteer Opportunities here https://www.fieldteam6.org/volunteer-ops
Tom, two marvels in one day! Lunar eclipses are stunning (I got to see 4 of them in my life before losing my vision). Then there is voting, a right not everyone in the world has, but we do. That's a great day!
Thank you so much Mr. Reich for continuing to give us hope, for believing in all that is right, and for speaking on behalf of those who believe in how wonderful this country can be for ALL Americans.
From Field Team Six. We still need your help to encourage unregistered folks to use their right to same-day registration on Election Day in states like Wisconsin. Can you join our election day phone banks to Georgia, Wisconsin, California, and Nevada? Check out our Volunteer Opportunities here https://www.fieldteam6.org/volunteer-ops
As this mid-term election comes to a close, I feel a need more than ever, for three important Constitutional Amendments.
First: Article I, Section 2, House of Representatives. We need to set the term of Representatives of the House of Congress to four years instead of two. America has changed greatly from 1787 to 2022. In 1792 they could expect to get 9 to 15 months of work from a Congressman. The House of Representatives main function was to raise taxes and pass laws concerning the finances of the thirteen States. The aristocratic framers of the Constitution felt this would be the “lower” House filled with more common people who would arrive March 4th spend 4 to 6 months passing the necessary legislation, return the following year for maybe 6 to 8 months. Possibly run for one or two more terms and go back to tending their own business. They couldn’t even imagine campaigning for 20 to 23 months of every 24, raising millions to billions of dollars, having a staff write all the legislation and spending one or two days a week (while in Washington DC) debating their issue. With some of these legislators they have lobbyists write the proposed legislation, write the speech they are going to deliver. So if we give them a four year term coinciding with the Federal election maybe we’ll get one or two constituent bills written.
Second: Article I, Section 3, The Senate. We need to change the term of Senators from six year to eight, with one Senator from each State running for office in the first Federal election following the ratification, while the second Senator from the same State runs in the next election after that. This way we’d only have to have one Federal election every four years instead of every two.
Third: Article III Judicial Department. We really need to set term limits for Supreme Court Justices. I think either ten or twelve- year terms and limited to no more than two terms.
Then we need to push for legislation limiting electioneering (or campaigning) to no more than 6 months prior to the election date, with severe penalties for encroachment (at least $500,000 (maybe more) for each ad or speech) That way our inboxes and messages will not be clogged with begging for money for 42 months of every 4 years. I would love to see spending limits imposed too, but that’s probably setting the bar too high.
I appreciate that you're trying to think of beneficial reforms, but I don't believe yours are nearly bold or comprehensive enough. Also, getting a constitutional amendment passed is entirely too difficult and has become more so in the last 75 years. The Supreme Court needs to be expanded (to 13, preferably) with term limits, a firm code of conduct for the justices (unlike every other federal judge, they have NONE), required disclosure of all financial and political ties that could represent conflicts of interest, and removal of justices who are shown to have lied to congress, as several have. The Electoral College needs to be abolished. The Senate is a grossly un-democratic body and cannot continue to be tyranny of the minority. The value of an individual citizen is dramatically different depending on what state you reside in, and this does not serve the purpose some falsely claim was the original intent of the Senate's composition. That's the same problem with the archaic and undemocratic Electoral College.
I do agree with some of your concerns about the outrageous influence of money in politics and how it forces elected representatives to spend an inordinate amount of time on fundraising.
Thank you for your response. I disagree that getting the length of terms changed would be difficult. I truly believe many Congress Persons would be delighted to eliminate one election cycle and many Senators would favor 8 year terms in place of 6. The Supreme Court terms would be difficult as both parties would oppose. I too, would love to eliminate the Electoral College but that is one Constitutional Amendment that has a snowball's chance in hell of passing. As you are aware, it takes 2/3 of both houses and 3/4 of the States to ratify. We have 50 States which means 38 would have to vote to ratify. I can think of only five with really huge populations, so we'd have to convince at least 33 more to give up their power over us. The reason the Senate is so grossly undemocratic has more to do with their stupid rules (not laws, not voted on or approved outside the Senate) like the filibuster, and requiring 60 members to vote on financial bills. I agree is is tilted in favor of smaller States, in that all States regardless of population has 2 Senators. But if we could get rid of those imbecilic rules it would be functional. At the very least they should have to abide by the original filibuster rule that at least one member had to be talking (holding the floor) for the duration of the filibuster instead of just threatening.
The length of terms is not as challenging as some other changes, but I think it affects House reps more than senators as it is. As for the Electoral College, in the late 1970s there was wide public support and also strong support in congress. It appeared to be on the verge of passing, and then gaining states to approve, but two southern senators blocked it from reaching a vote--another sign of how dysfunctional the congress is when a couple of people can block beneficial and popular changes.
The filibuster is another ridiculous rule, I agree. But it wouldn't be such an issue if those in the Senate represented something closer to proportional constituencies instead of the minority stranglehold that has grown worse over the years. I agree that the talking filibuster is at least something halfway helpful. The way it is now, senators can essentially phone in a filibuster. The congress is dysfunctional because it is undemocratic, and the House is that way because of radical gerrymandering largely by Rs who have made it into a criminal act.
Another option is to "flip" the filibuster. Instead of 60 votes needed to end it, the rule would require 40 votes to continue it. This forces the senator(s) starting the filibuster to ensure that 40 votes are always available to continue it, a difficult task since a vote could be called at any time by the Majority Leader of the Senate. This avoids tying up the Senate floor with silly nonsense which occurs during a talking filibuster.
TR. Oh, we could expand that amendment to include ditching the electoral college and Congress could and should expand the Supreme Court. I like 13 for now, but more if the need arises. Then, there could be a lottery to see who sits on a particular case. No one bringing a case would know which justices would be on the case, so couldn't "work on" the justice to get favors. We need a group to seriously study changes that could be made to our government that would do more to protect the rights of all citizens to live, vote, be safe, to have bodily autonomy and more. The Constitution allows for that, so let's start codifying those things into law.
The executive Power shall be vested in a U.S. Federal Council comprised of seven members. They shall hold Office during Terms of five Years, and shall be elected, as follows
* Members shall be elected without reference to political party or affiliation;
* Members shall be elected within national proportional regions to fairly and equally represent the population without regard to political party or affiliation;
* Members shall be elected by a majority popular vote in regions; and
* Members may not serve more than two terms of five years.
The idea of limiting electioneering is great. I suggest a 100% tax on campaign contributions over the small donor amount with the money paid to a clean elections fund (somewhat similar to Arizona).
and this idea needs to be put forth-Code of Ethics for SCOTUS WITH consequences-there's NO reason for them to be able to abuse their power and get off scot free.
So you would dispense with the offices of President and Vice-President? or would this Council be in addition to the leaders? Are you advocating to a leadership similar to the Triumvirate of Rome? The five year terms would not align with the current 4 year election cycle, so we would need to change congressional terms to five and senate to 10 to have only one election cycle. Interesting ideas. I like your ideas on limiting financing!
This would replace the Office of the President (i.e elected King) and Vice President (i.e. elected Prince). Such a change would trigger a cascade of changes including eliminating the Speaker of the House in the line of succession.
The model comes from Switzerland and has been in use since 1848.
The 5 year term is meant not to the the same as Congress so that the elections are separate except in years ending in 0. This breaks up the ridiculous circus every 4 years with presidential elections.
The requirement of a majority for an election is meant either to force either RCV or runoffs to thus prevent plurality winners.
Very interesting concept. Would all seven members run in the same election cycle or would they be staggered? I will point out that Switzerland is both much less populated than us and has been neutral for more than a century. I would like to see how this would work out in a State, say Colorado, which is similar in size and geography to Switzerland. Also Colorado is neither predominantly Democrat or Republican.
Very interesting! We obviously need some sort of overhaul of our structure. My vote goes to age and term limits, (especially for the Supremes), and ending Citizens United.
I favor terms of 4 years, each president getting 1 justice nomination every 4 year term and only 12 years (3 terms) per justice. I also favor the same rules for each US Senator and Representative. It is time to eliminate the Electorial College for a directly elected president also.
Fay, You make excellent points! So much to do! Term limits for SCOTUS -ABSOLUTELY! 10 years is plenty.
In terms of electioneering, let’s set that to 3 months. Half of a year is too much. Right now it is insane and swallows up money that can go for basic needs of so many Americans!
We must give a more balanced representation of senators based on population. It is absurd to have California sit with the same number as North Dakota! Something has to change there too.
Hi, Seeking Reason. Thank you for this post. Three months would be fine with me. 60 years ago it was 2 months, 6 months is the maximum I would give - anything less is better. On the Senate, while I agree with you, like the electoral college, it is never going to happen. Changing the number of Senators or ending the electoral college requires a Constitutional Amendment for each. Amendments per the Constitution must be passed by 2/3 majority of both houses AND 3/4 of the States. With 50 States, that means 38 States have to ratify the amendment. I count 5 very large States (population, geography doesn't count) maybe 20 moderately sized. That's 25. 13 short of the number needed. Even if we add DC and Puerto Rico (both liberal progressive, we'd need 39 states for ratification. We'd still come up 11 short. Our problem is most people want to live in or near large cities (for good reason) Also those same people tend to be more liberally progressive. But all the rest of the minority population are spread out so that gives them power outside their numbers. I do believe extending the length of terms for both the House of Representatives and Senate would have a good chance of passing since it is to the legislators and the Constituents advantage (so long as we keep the campaigning limits secret until the amendments have passed) Reducing length and financing of campaigning is simple legislation, not Constitutional amendments. As to the Supreme Court I have less faith in that passing as it only benefits the citizens, not the politicians (or corporate America for that matter) (:-)
Fay, I love your amendment suggestions! I like the 4-year terms but I'm not sure if they should be on the Presidential years because one party could get too much power that way - although I am not sure. I want to think about that more. I would be OK with 8-year terms for Senators too with the same challenge as with representatives - should they be in presidential years. I agree the campaigns should be no more than 6 months for any office, including president. Then we wouldn't have to worry so much about whether Iowa or New Hampshire should be first, 10 months before the election. I would also like to see all primaries on the same day or maybe a choice of 2 dates. I agree the Supreme court should have term limits. I had been thinking of 1 18 year term, but up to 2 10-year terms would work too. Those changes could be made in one amendment to save a lot of trouble.
You are absolutely wonderful, Robert Reich. Thank you for your brilliant mind, your dedication, and your thoroughly compassionate nature. You say it all, just like it is, each and every time!
as usual very positive thoughts. But little will happen until money gets out of politics. "Citizens United" (freedom of expression for corporations?) "must be reversed, and private funding should be strictly limited, with public funding of political parties as e.g. in France
Having five Christian nationalist on the Supreme Court doesn’t help either.
Colin, you are right about too many Christian nationalists on the SC, but I would suggest there are 6. Every conservative member has those what I call "pseudo-Christian" tendencies and generally decide cases based on it despite our Constitution's intention of religious freedom, not freedom of Christians to force their beliefs on others.
Roberts would be fine if the rest of the supreme court was the same quality as Ruth Bader Ginsberg Who got even majority Republican support. Clearly come after the fact, Receive that the long-term strategy of the minority Republicans was to pack all the courts and once done it may be impossible to unpack them.
Even though it might currently be impossible, and Supreme Court Justice should probably receive 80% support or better yet not be voted on by the party in power at all but before us to get 66% of popular voter support. The entire country voting for Supreme Court justices every two years would make a lot more sense when you consider their life appointment.
Agree that Robert’s just pretends to be Moderate.
Sorry -- what secular values are being forced on you? Could you be a bit more specific? I see that fundamentalist Christians are trying to force their values on everyone, but you've got me confused.
Please quote me chapter and verse of Gov. Hochul's "compelled speech" laws. If you go to a private religious school, I doubt that the private religious school is compelled by the Dept of Ed to do anything that would violate its religious principles. But show me. I'm open to being educated. And thanks, but I don't need a Talmudic discussion on Jewish history. Referring to your extended colloquy in response to my critical comment dealing with the intolerant Orthodox Jewish positions regarding the LGBTQ community. Nobody is forcing you to respect the humanity of others except that you do live in the United States and consider the Constitution a legitimate document, I suppose. But then, as with your compatriots (the non-Jewish Christian and Muslim fundamentalists), respecting the personal freedoms of others seems not to be part of the equation.
I am hoping that we can get some enterprising investigative reporter to do an analysis of the court with a title something like "SCOTUS - Legal or Political". Analyze the decisions that are questionable. The key to Citizens was that there would be no quid pro quo for money given. Are you kidding? The section of the Civil Rights law that required southern states to submit proposed changes to voting rules to DOJ for approval - SCOTUS decided that procedure was no longer necessary - legal decision?
There are many more examples. The point would be to expose the problem and get people talking about it. I think it is a required prelude to actuating doing something about it.
Your hope has been fulfilled in a short book just out by Sen. Whitehouse, entitled THE SCHEME. Very well done.
Wonderful! Thanks for the info.
We should also do something about SCOTUS’ term on the bench, 100 for Gods sake. They should run and be re-elected or replaced every 8 yrs or so.
This video made by Sheldon Whitehouse is a great start: https://www.google.com/search?q=whitehouse+video+roberts+court&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:aae5fa35,vid:8dNKqB9j000
I often wonder if people in power actually believe in it. They come to power by playing on the beliefs of others. The former president would certainly fear going to hell if he really believed it.
What are you talking about? News flash our country was founded upon CHRISTIAN VALUES, our constitution is only for a MORAL and RELIGIOUS people. It will be totally inadequate for anyone else. The separation between Church and State is another lie cooked up by a radical supreme court that made up a right to an abortion and said you have no individual right to bear arms. The church was meant to work hand in hand with the state and the state is not supposed to endorse or force one religion over the other. This is a CHRISTIAN nation, if you don't like that MOVE TO CHINA!!! They have no religion their, you would love it. Abortion up to 9 months, no guns, no freedom of speech.
We were founded on, among other things, religious freedom. This includes atheism. I do not believe in god(s) or the supernatural in general. By you logic I am not truly American. I beg to differ.
Have you actually READ the constitution? I have and it says nothing at all what you describe.
So then where do our rights come from? You don't have to believe, but if nobody does, our rights will eventually be gone. It is the idea that they come from GOD that makes them INALIENABLE, without it, they can just be taken away.
No they don't. Unless you decide I am an alien because I do not believe in your god. Google Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists. Spoiler. That is the document where Jefferson invokes the phrase "a wall of separation between church and state."
Thanks for proving my point. You think our rights come from government and that means they can be taken away by government and that goes against EVERYTHING our founding fathers stood for. People like you would give up all our rights and America would cease to exist. Like I said, without a belief in GOD, America would not be a thing and you would be a slave to communism, the only reason you're not is because of people like me. People like you would have already burned the 2nd amendment and think free speech should be censored for things like hate speech and misinformation. Guess what, the official religion of the CCP is atheism.... What Jefferson meant, was the church should not be giving orders to the state. I don't care about Church, GOD is about relationships, not religion. The church has a place, and that is to provide a service to the community and give guidance to our elected officials if they want it, not to rule and control the state and government. That is no good either. Our leaders are supposed to be bound by a moral and religious code because the constitution is sacred. A separation from church and state is not a separation from GOD and the state. When the state does not even admit to GOD existing, you get Communist China. Do you understand the difference? I believe in a separation of Church and state in the sense the church controls everything is bad. Churches can be just as corrupted as governments. Do not confuse GOD and the "church".
Oh Isaac, you do know better than to think our government was set up just for religious folks. The founders knew about atheists and did not propose they be kicked out or kept from citizenship. The Constitution has "moral" elements, of course, since many of the founders were religiously observant. The Supreme Court conservatives have to rework it to make it harm the people they want harmed over the years, mostly women, people of color, and non-Christians. My question is, which is moral, the Constitution or the pseudo-Christian conservatives who have served on the SC at various times? I'm hoping it's the Constitution but that does not mean it only accommodates the moral. We have a whole lot of amoral people who serve in offices all over this country and swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.
Our rights come from GOD, that was the idea behind this country. While these rights are for all, only the believers in GOD know they cannot be voted away. People who do not believe in GOD cannot uphold out rights, because they do not think they came from GOD, but the government. This is why they have no respect for free speech or the right to bear arms and think it can be taken away for safety reasons. You cannot uphold the constitution if you do not believe that our rights came from GOD and are unalienable. OH and Christianity does not harm anyone. It is not a harm because we believe you should never kill your baby or that homosexuality is immoral. Nobody has to accept you or your immoral ways of life and you have a right to live your life the way you want, but just because we are not accepting of that does not make it backwards or harmful. I do not want to live in a society where people think they get to pick and choose what is moral or think they can decide what notions of morality they want to abide by. These are non negotiable. Oh and more black and Hispanics are Christian than anything else. I didn't know the bible said no blacks allowed? God and Christianity are accepting of all people, not just all behavior, their is a big difference. But as well any real Christian knows it is not our place to judge, just love and help people find GODS love. It in this idea though, that are rights come from GOD, if you do not believe that or in GOD, you cannot EVER truly appreciate your rights or understand the true foundation of which this nation was founded upon. So yes, America was created for a moral, RELIGIOUS PEOPLE, to anyone else, this system will be totally inadequate. Our system was not set up only for religious people, but it can only be upheld and last with a religious people. The further Americans sway from GOD, the further they get from the idea of freedom and GOD given rights, until communism takes it's place. This is what we are seeing right now.
Isaac, your religionist nonsense has no basis in fact. Our founders were not all Christian or even believers, many Deists and I suspect more than one atheist. They knew well that religion and government are separate and should remain such. Theocracies in the modern age do not work out so well because people get sick of the blundering religious leaders who have to keep warping the religion to make it fit what the men in charge want. It helps if people employ their faith to help guide them in their dealings with others and in the ways they deal with the earth and its creatures, and govern and vote, but that is it. Their religion should never be written into the laws they write because what you believe and what I believe may be quite different. I should not be able to infringe on your faith nor you on mine. The only exceptions would be if a particular faith or set of believers puts born human beings at risk. For example, if you don't want to have an abortion, don't have one but stand back and don't try to pump your beliefs into my life and try to make or have others make my decisions for me. That's what a democracy is, the freedom to decide and live my life knowing that my rights end where yours begin and vise versa, again unless the lives of born human beings are at risk. The first amendment says that but a whole lot of conservative Christians aren't satisfied because other people may do things they don't like or understand. I say, grow up and have an adult religion that permits different understandings of one's faith and doesn't feel the need to dictate religion to others. Stop putting God in a box that only you have the key to. It's ugly and unChristian!
WE are not a Democracy and everything I said went over your head.
"in other words, America was founded by a nutty religious cult".
-
from "Fantasyland" by Kurt Andersen
There is no god, and Satan doesn't exist either.
Really? No GOD. Science proves the existence of GOD sorry. Matter cannot form without an observer to witness it. Quantum Mechanics, look it up. The universe could not have formed without an observer to witness it. Oh and that little pit in your stomach that makes you cry or feel bad, that is called your soul, is was given to you by GOD. All you have to do is open your eyes and you can see GOD everywhere. Must be sad to think you are nothing more than dust with no hope for anything but death and darkness. The simple fact of the matter is that there is far more proof GOD exists.
Citizens United hands down is the worst decision ever foisted on the American people by the Supreme Court (financially hurts the greatest number of Americans), followed by the reversal of Roe vs Wade (threatens the lives of 51%), followed by the dehumanization of 20% with the reversal of Affirmative Act.,,,,,
CJ, you are right about how bad Citizens United is. Following your list of Roe v. Wade and the upcoming anti-affirmative action rulings. I would add that tied with these is the Shelby voting rights case of 2013. Perhaps worst of all will be the ridiculous "let state legislatures decide who wins elections rather than the people" case which is coming up next month. Alas, our current Supreme Court is out of control and that is exactly what Republicans claim they want, until their daughter gets pregnant in Texas or Mississippi, or when their state legislature takes away their vote.
I was unaware of Holder vs Shelby. I believe that where the preamble says “All men are created equal” means all individual human beings. And I believe Jesus’s inclusion of even women and children demonstrated that he preached inclusion of every human being. And when the scripture speaks of “the breath of life” means that a human being is considered a human being when their body is capable of sustaining their life! Women are NOT 2nd class citizens and neither are people of different races. We are all human beings loved by God because He created us all and Jesus died for every one of us!
Citizens United betrays, delegitimizes and ultimately dooms American Democracy. SCOTUS knows this, is playing along, and is complicit. Justice Scalia brought the gun and pulled the trigger. The current court is burying the half living body.
...and let's NOT forget the LONG history of John Roberts of destroying voting rights. Holder v. Shelby etc. For details: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/john-roberts-voting-rights-act-121222/
The Voting Rights Act of the 1960's had a section that required 15 or so districts to obtain permission from the DOJ before they could change their voting rules or procedures; this was called "Preclearance." As that requirement was about to sunset,
Shelby County (Alabama) v. Holder (U.S. Attorney General) was filed asking the SuCt to abolish it. Rep. Sensenbrenner, a Wisconsin Republican, headed a group in the Congress that garnered extensive data indicating that the preclearance was still needed. Moreover, in the Senate the vote was 98-0 to keep it and in the House only 35 votes were cast to abolish it -- a huge plurality ! Despite these two factors, the court said that there had been many changes since the law was passed and the preclearance was no longer needed. Immediately, states passed voting requirements that amounted to voter suppression. In essence, the SuCt was legislating from the bench, something it often says it is not supposed to do. A lucid analysis of the Court is contained in Senator Whitehouse's book, THE SCHEME, just out.
My father was a Sociology professor at UNC. He could be prescient about political and cultural matters. I remember when "Citizens" (yeah, right) United was passed by SCOTUS, he said, "Well, there goes our democracy."
It actually gives certain individuals--the owners and powers of these corporations-- two votes. Whatever happened to one voice, one vote?
We can get there as long as we don't give up. I get discouraged sometimes, but Robert is right. We can do this as long as we keep on trying. We are bigger than money.
On Wisconsin. People can still register.
As of this moment, advanced voting has a blue wave. Up 4,5000,000 votes. Need to withstand the red wave today. https://twitter.com/SimonWDC/status/1572966488725766149
Up to 4,500,000 votes, or 45,000,000 votes? It can't be up to 4,5000,000 votes because that number makes no sense.
Philippe, I know you are right about the problem of money in politics. I too, would like to see the downfall of Citizens United. Maybe after this election cycle's disgusting collection of ads and obscene amount of spending when we have so many real problems that money could benefit, people can be encouraged to rise up against it for sensible spending on elections with reasonable contribution limits and elimination of dark money no matter where it is and comes from.
And we need National, State, and Local Rank-Choice-Voting !
Or the UK, for example. When the British prime minister calls for an election, he or she is given 3 weeks and 3 weeks only, to campaign. He or she is given 100,000 pounds, and 100, 000 pounds only, to spend on the campaign. Members of Parliament are given 50,000 pounds to campaign. Neither the PM nor the MP is allowed to spend anything outside of these allotments.
Citizens United must go.
Elections and campaigning have become an industry in the US, now worth billions to pollsters, campaign managers and advisors, ad makers, television, social media, and talk radio. We are perpetually having an election, nearing an election, and raising money for elections. We are so busy electing that we cannot indict the one person who has proved willing to do away with all future elections. It is insane! Does any other functioning democracy operate this way? It is more American "exceptionalism." I don't see a way forward unless the democratic republic goes down in flames and a modern Constitution emerges from the ashes.
A very good example to follow. This non-stop campaigning and waste of money, when people are in need, must end!
Meanwhile, from Field Team Six. We still need your help to encourage unregistered folks to use their right to same-day registration on Election Day in states like Wisconsin. Can you join our election day phone banks to Georgia, Wisconsin, California, and Nevada? Check out our Volunteer Opportunities here https://www.fieldteam6.org/volunteer-ops
WHEN we Americans retake the senate AND keep the house, yes I'm hopeful, we CAN eliminate Citizens United! Hopefully it's one of President Biden's first actions.
Daniel, Were we to attempt to overturn Citizens United through Congressional legislation, presuming the legislation passed in the House (a heavy lift), we would need enough Senators either to modify or set aside the filibuster to move the legislation to the floor for debate and an up or down majority vote (an even heavier lift). My point in writing is not to dissuade us from trying, but merely to detail what’s involved so we’re better prepared.
It looks like we MAY now have enough Senators! (Final results are still pending, but it's looking good.)
Daniel, At best, we could gain one Senator, which leaves us one Senator shy of surmounting the guaranteed resistance from Manchin and Sinema. Moreover, though the margins are tightening, the latest projections for control of the House still favor Republicans.
Daniel, I’m optimistic with you!
Roger, I absolutely love that saying! And isn’t that the truth!
None of my grandparents were from the US. All left countries because of fascism! To see it being supported by these willfully ignorant rubes is beyond outrageous!
The lack of punishment is criminal in my mind too. Just as you would not yell at a child for something they did one month a ago, delaying punishment of such obvious high crimes gives an impression of acceptance or vindication. Very dangerous with people who cannot determine truth from lies.
I hear a lot of polling where they report that Americans rate the economy and inflation high as one of their concerns. Why don’t the pollsters ever ask about the things that drive inflation and today’s economic problems? If price gouging and crazy billionaires (perhaps another adjective) were part of the question, would Americans rate that high?
Rose, While you’re right that we need more granular polling unveiling record corporate profits (a 54% increase) as the biggest driver of inflation, I also am troubled that Democrats, overall, have declined to enact a united, laser focused effort to expose how corporate profits account for over half of the increased prices people are paying.
While some might defend a party’s reluctance to bite the hand that feeds it, I believe the benefits of pinning corporate pricing as the biggest driver of inflation would outweigh the costs.
Great point Rose
Philippe, I simply would add, were Dems to hold the House and pick up a handful of Senate seats, they possibly could pass H.R.1/S.1 For the People, the predecessor to the edited down Freedom to Vote Act. The For the People Act, that passed in the House, not only established ironclad federal voter protection safeguards, but also called for enacting serious measures to get big money out of politics.
Considering several subscribers on this thread also rightly expressed deep concerns about the Court, I would note that the additional Senate seats would increase the likelihood of the Senate setting aside the filibuster so Congress could expand the Court. Here, it should be noted that in 1869 the number of Supreme Court Justices was set at 9, with one Justice assigned to 1 of the 9 Appellate Courts. Today, there are 13 Appellate Courts, enacting a break in precedent dating back to the Judiciary Act of 1789, wherein Congress set the number of Justices at 6, each assigned to 1 of the 6 Appellate Courts at that time.
Framing my sign off with a generalized reply to Reich’s missive, admittedly, regardless of the midterm results, we are dealing with a radicalized, organized, extremist right wing movement. The one positive, aside from their telling us their playbook, is that we are the majority. Nonetheless, we’re not organized. Thus, we must organize politically to take on this Fascist threat.
Love and respect to Robert Reich, thanks for your message tonight.
Please call Wisconsin, California. https://swingleft.org/take-action?utm_medium=paid-search&utm_source=google-search&utm_term=tlw_branded&utm_campaign=tlw&keyword=last%20weekend%20swing%20left&gclid=CjwKCAiA9qKbBhAzEiwAS4yeDUJYHQ-HhszobaF5sO8ovYULkLYVkg8aiw0wLfRUuoMqS719kkalrBoCH6kQAvD_BwE&s=u
You are so right,these idiots are scared out of their minds of all of us.And we definitely are the future of America.
They who have closed minds can't see a future where they aren't nearly as special as they seem to believe themselves to be.
Whoever y'all are,if you haven't already voted,get up and hang out in the line and vote!Pack some snacks and a couple cold drinks,seeing as it don't say diddly about y'all bringing your own.
And GOOD LUCK to our people!!!
Melissa, good advice! I hope everyone who can and has not already done so will get up and go to vote as soon as the polls open. That is a good way to show our strength and that we really do care about the future. Besides you can get to know some of your neighbors while waiting in line to vote. Don't forget to thank the poll workers for being there on our behalf.
That sounds much like the attitude Ukraine is taking against its monstrous foe Russia that has invaded them. Not such a bad analogy to what we Democrats are facing versus the Republofascists. And this attitude seems to be working for them. They are slowly but surely taking back their land & defeating the monster.
Jaime, I like your connecting the Ukrainian underdog fight to what Democrats and progressives are facing here. So, let's take heart and do what we can to get people who actually care about this nation elected.
As a matter of FACT, Republican leaders like McCarthy have sold out to the Russians.
If you know the game of risk, the war in the Ukraine will be won or lost in Wisconsin, California.
Daniel, that's a very astute observation: "the war in the Ukraine will be won or lost in Wisconsin." If Repubs get control of Congress and people like Marjorie Taylor Greene rise to leadership position, we could actually see US support swing from Ukraine to Putin. Then there's climate change, income inequality, fentanyl epidemic, women's rights, voting rights, Jan.6 insurrection ... There is so much at stake in this election. And what are voters' main issues? this week's price of gas and lettuce?
I expect Republicans to claim victory tonight even though half the votes (early votes, mail-ins, etc) won't be counted till tomorrow and later). I can already hear "rigged" and "stop the steal". There are more Dems than Repubs, and never has the need been greater to get out there and vote. Positive comments like Robert's post will hopefully motivate a big blue turnout. Let's hope so.
I agree, Daniel! The oil corporation have already sold out America and Europe for Russian oil profits!
I just read Hartmann's column (started late last night then fell asleep & finished this morning). Like Reich, he is 1 of my favorite political commentators, & is very perceptive. Thanks for the article. I hadn't seen this.
I had read back when it was happening what Trump's Homeland Security was doing in Portland, picking up people in unmarked vans. I found it troubling & the mark of a fascist regime. Wyden is typically on top of matters dealing with security & privacy & violations thereof.
Well, it looks like Democrats barely held on although many races are still up in the air, including here in Oregon, & the majority in the House is still undecided.
Oh, I'm sorry you've had to endure being misrepresented by Boebert. That is a nnail-biting. The Democratic lead keeps shrinking as the vote total gets closer to 100% at about the right proportion for it to be tied when the tabulation are completed. That is almost sure to go to a recount. I really hope Boebert loses.
I just heard that Wisconsin has been decided in favor of that russophilic traitor Ron Johnson, ending our chances of a Manchinema proof Senate majority. So it likely comes down to Nevada & Georgia, which might go to a runoff, although Warnock is pretty close to 50%. I really don't want another 50/50 Senate, & losing the majority would be disastrous, especially if we also lose the House.
My autocorrupt changed "nail-biter" to "nnail-biting" without my realizing it. I should've proofread it first.
Oregon's votes may take a long time to count, too, for perhaps 3 of the congressional races.
I don't know how Wisconsin can keep on electing Johnson. Remember Russ Feingold? Such a fine senator! How Wisconsinites could give him up for such a louse as Johnson, twice! Money maybe. Johnson's own & more from the Kochs.
Sadly I've heard that expectations are that Republicans will probably barely take the House. Can you imagine Kevin McCarthy as speaker? A man with absolutely no principle nor moral compass. Or worse, Gym Jordan or even Trump. Ugh!
You seem to be subsisting on a steady diet of flaky conspiracy theories.
I see from your correct usage of the written English language that you possess an IQ of 100 or above. While I was taking a Brain and Behavior class at U of KY, my professor pointed out that in the Physicians Desk References, members of the LGBTQ+ community were no longer considered mentally il after researchers discovered that homosexual men, who were born without the receptors on the area of the brain where a brain is masculinized by of all things the female hormone, estrogen. We are all aware that trisomy 21, produces Down’s syndrome, which can be passed along to a baby, due to a break off of part of one of the 21st pair of genes resulting in the broken gene passed along as one whole and two broken parts of the other 21st genes. God’s creation of DNA in all living things with some exceptions like viruses results in genetic mutations in normal genes. We all carry fatal mutations in our genes. So in males born as homosexuals , in a very crude definition, you have males born with female brains, due to the missing receptors due to a genetic mutation. Do you or a family member have blue, green, or hazel eyes? You did not get to choose the color of your eyes did you? Members of the LGBTQ+ community did not get to chose the genes the inherited, one from each parent, either. Do you believe that medical treatments can cure some diseases either with medicine or surgery? Then you believe in science. Just because you or I do not have PHDs in Genetics or Chemistry or any science do not keep any of us going to the doctor when we are sick. Therefore, we believe in science.
"long winded drivel" -- have you been to a Trump rally? :-)
Bill the desperate trolls are out big time. I laugh at their desperation. Even THEY know they’re losers.
Let’s remember that people who vote for Democrats are not necessarily allied with the DNC, nor approve of its tactics.
What do you think of the Republican Party and its candidates these days, Chuck? Its platform? Tactics?
Democrats have won 6 out of the last 7 presidential votes with the popular vote. Look it up. The popular vote IS the VOICE OF THE PEOPLE! Yet it is often crushed by the electoral college, a system of assigning privilege to the few.
Try focusing on the electorate, with millions of people who continue to support a malignant narcissist and traitor, trump, despite years of overwhelming evidence that he is a loathsome human aberration. The Dems have done poorly at messaging again, but they remain vastly superior to the R swamp gang of dishonest, cynical, traitorous and hypocritical swine. Your little smear of Dems show only that you are ill-informed, bigoted and a failed citizen.
Chuck, you are living a delusion. The J6 hearings were extensive and specific. Pretend all you want, you , the criminal cabal, formerly known as republicans, will lose everything. Trump will not be walking away.
You can live in denial and dismissive thinking about reality, but that won't change the reality. If you claim the evidence is not overwhelming, you are either ignorant of what's been established with extensive investigation or you're just obstinate about rejecting the facts. The record of trump's frauds, his incitement of insurrection and his so many other offenses is in the public record and irrefutable. Just as easy examples of concluding legal cases against him, his "foundation" was forced to shut down and pay $20 million in penalties after it was found that he used the "charity" as his personal slush fund and broke the law on how charities are to operate. Likewise, his "trump university" scam was shut down and forced to pay $25 million in penalties to students who were duped by that scam. The Mueller report led to impeachment, but Rs were so cowardly and so concerned about protecting their corrupt political swamp gang that they voted against removal from office that was called for. The crap that hit the wall was R falsehoods and craven conduct. The Jan 6 committee has NOT resulted in nothing. It has resulted in a wealth of damning evidence so far and is not over yet, but apparently you don't bother to follow it. The final report is expected on Dec 21 and will likely include criminal referrals to the Justice Dept for trump and others. The DoJ itself is engaged in at least two major investigations into trump's seditious conspiracy, illegal possession of govt documents and more. Why do you keep lying about the facts? Fear, delusion or unwillingness to confront reality? All of the above, clearly.
I'm as disgusted with the DNC as you are for their malicious interference in both parties' primaries, supporting some of the worst candidates. They are almost as bad as the RNC.
Your characterization of Ukraine parrots russofascist propaganda. How can you let yourself believe anything propagated by that lying regime?
If you want Naziism, stick with the Republicans. They will bring you Naziism the likes of which you've never seen before. They are clearly headed in that direction & are almost there. A Republican presidency in 2024 will bring them there perhaps permanently. That will bring them in alignment with their allies & inspirers, the Putinist Russians.
At least in Ukraine, the Nazi elements that have existed there have been relegated to insignificance. Not here
Just as many other republofascists, you keep on repeating false russofascist propaganda that the republofascist base always falls for. Once & for all, the revolution in 2014 came from the Ukrainian citizens, who were fed up with Yanukovich's rule & his willingness to keep Ukraine subservient to Russian demands.
I have deep contempt for Putin apologists who fail to realize, or are willing to accept, that Putin is the most dangerous man since Hitler, that he poses the greatest threat to world peace since the 2nd World War, & that his invasion of Ukraine is the most important international conflict since WWII that is crucial for those of us who care about democracy & world peace to prevail.
Oh! I feel much better after reading this. I was thinking of relocating to some other country if the GOP were to re-take congress. Now I feel like staying to fight the good fight.
Yay Steve! Staying to fight the good fight is just what we all need to do. Our nation and world depend on it.
Now my next guest ion involves the fact that we generally define human beings born with a pair of XX chromosomes as female and a pair of XY chromosomes as male. What do you call a living, breathing human being whose sexual chromosomes might be something like XXXY or XXXXYY? I no longer have the text book that listed the combinations that list unusual, viable, sexual chromosomes so my examples might not be viable, but do you see how people can be born with both male and female sexual chromosomes and therefore one of those unusual combinations can result in male looking humans who can get pregnant and have a baby?
Chuck, you are asking about my post, staying to fight? No, dead serious. Not sarcasm.
Thank you Mr Reich, many people (including myself) cannot afford to lose sight of the long term. Even if today doesn’t go well for us, we must continue to fight. The future of the country depends on it.
Derek, Yep, we need to keep fighting no matter what. Maybe we need to be a little louder and assertive so the media will have to pay attention. Maybe we need to encourage our young people to speak out more and loudly. It's their future we and they are helping to decide today. Let's do our best to aim our nation in the most caring, active, positive direction.
Louder, maybe, assertive, yes. But not nasty. Nasty and abusive is the trademark of Russian trolls and the less evolved trump supporters/believers.
Thank you, Robert, for your message of comfort and inspiration. I shall awake and head out into the cold to watch a Lunar eclipse, here in Michigan. Although the celestial darkness is beautiful, you remind me that it is the inevitable return of the light that I will welcome. Then, I will walk (indeed) to my polling place and cast my ballot filled with hope and commitment to our future together.
I am getting ready to go out into the chilly Michigan night to see the eclipse also. Being a True Night Owl. And we already cast our votes. Lets hope it all goes well.
A beautiful post! Thanks!
Alas, here in western Maine, the sky clouded in as the hour of full eclipse approached. I caught one puny glimpse of a coppery red disc and then more clouds closed in over the face of the moon. The temp dropped over 30° overnight and the wind has risen, making the stay outside--on the off chance of another fleeting glimpse--a very frosty endeavor, indeed.
Cloud cover spotty, so I drove to a dark hilltop for similar fleeting glimpses. I have a pair of motion-stabilized binoculars that gave me a beautiful view of the red moon as the full-eclipse subsided. My pictures on my phone are terrible, I think!
In Baghdad By the Sea, we are waiting for a hurricane, figuratively and literally.
We are boarding up, bringing in the plants and porch furniture.
From Field Team Six. We still need your help to encourage unregistered folks to use their right to same-day registration on Election Day in states like Wisconsin. Can you join our election day phone banks to Georgia, Wisconsin, California, and Nevada? Check out our Volunteer Opportunities here https://www.fieldteam6.org/volunteer-ops
Tom, two marvels in one day! Lunar eclipses are stunning (I got to see 4 of them in my life before losing my vision). Then there is voting, a right not everyone in the world has, but we do. That's a great day!
Thank you, Robert. I feel hopeful in Atlanta, GA. I think we just might be pleasantly surprised after all the votes are counted.
I start worrying when someone like Stacey Abrams doesn’t get over 90% the vote.
This Atlantan hopes you are right! This post is just the kickstart I needed today.
Oh Anita, I definitely would love to be pleasantly surprised! I know we have it in us, but can we do it?
Great thoughts - but that's for the other side. For today - VOTE. Ignore the polls.
Thank you so much Mr. Reich for continuing to give us hope, for believing in all that is right, and for speaking on behalf of those who believe in how wonderful this country can be for ALL Americans.
Thank You Mr.Robert Reich
Just get out there and VOTE. PRESERVE OUR DEMOCRACY
And call WI, CA.
From Field Team Six. We still need your help to encourage unregistered folks to use their right to same-day registration on Election Day in states like Wisconsin. Can you join our election day phone banks to Georgia, Wisconsin, California, and Nevada? Check out our Volunteer Opportunities here https://www.fieldteam6.org/volunteer-ops
As this mid-term election comes to a close, I feel a need more than ever, for three important Constitutional Amendments.
First: Article I, Section 2, House of Representatives. We need to set the term of Representatives of the House of Congress to four years instead of two. America has changed greatly from 1787 to 2022. In 1792 they could expect to get 9 to 15 months of work from a Congressman. The House of Representatives main function was to raise taxes and pass laws concerning the finances of the thirteen States. The aristocratic framers of the Constitution felt this would be the “lower” House filled with more common people who would arrive March 4th spend 4 to 6 months passing the necessary legislation, return the following year for maybe 6 to 8 months. Possibly run for one or two more terms and go back to tending their own business. They couldn’t even imagine campaigning for 20 to 23 months of every 24, raising millions to billions of dollars, having a staff write all the legislation and spending one or two days a week (while in Washington DC) debating their issue. With some of these legislators they have lobbyists write the proposed legislation, write the speech they are going to deliver. So if we give them a four year term coinciding with the Federal election maybe we’ll get one or two constituent bills written.
Second: Article I, Section 3, The Senate. We need to change the term of Senators from six year to eight, with one Senator from each State running for office in the first Federal election following the ratification, while the second Senator from the same State runs in the next election after that. This way we’d only have to have one Federal election every four years instead of every two.
Third: Article III Judicial Department. We really need to set term limits for Supreme Court Justices. I think either ten or twelve- year terms and limited to no more than two terms.
Then we need to push for legislation limiting electioneering (or campaigning) to no more than 6 months prior to the election date, with severe penalties for encroachment (at least $500,000 (maybe more) for each ad or speech) That way our inboxes and messages will not be clogged with begging for money for 42 months of every 4 years. I would love to see spending limits imposed too, but that’s probably setting the bar too high.
I appreciate that you're trying to think of beneficial reforms, but I don't believe yours are nearly bold or comprehensive enough. Also, getting a constitutional amendment passed is entirely too difficult and has become more so in the last 75 years. The Supreme Court needs to be expanded (to 13, preferably) with term limits, a firm code of conduct for the justices (unlike every other federal judge, they have NONE), required disclosure of all financial and political ties that could represent conflicts of interest, and removal of justices who are shown to have lied to congress, as several have. The Electoral College needs to be abolished. The Senate is a grossly un-democratic body and cannot continue to be tyranny of the minority. The value of an individual citizen is dramatically different depending on what state you reside in, and this does not serve the purpose some falsely claim was the original intent of the Senate's composition. That's the same problem with the archaic and undemocratic Electoral College.
I do agree with some of your concerns about the outrageous influence of money in politics and how it forces elected representatives to spend an inordinate amount of time on fundraising.
Thank you for your response. I disagree that getting the length of terms changed would be difficult. I truly believe many Congress Persons would be delighted to eliminate one election cycle and many Senators would favor 8 year terms in place of 6. The Supreme Court terms would be difficult as both parties would oppose. I too, would love to eliminate the Electoral College but that is one Constitutional Amendment that has a snowball's chance in hell of passing. As you are aware, it takes 2/3 of both houses and 3/4 of the States to ratify. We have 50 States which means 38 would have to vote to ratify. I can think of only five with really huge populations, so we'd have to convince at least 33 more to give up their power over us. The reason the Senate is so grossly undemocratic has more to do with their stupid rules (not laws, not voted on or approved outside the Senate) like the filibuster, and requiring 60 members to vote on financial bills. I agree is is tilted in favor of smaller States, in that all States regardless of population has 2 Senators. But if we could get rid of those imbecilic rules it would be functional. At the very least they should have to abide by the original filibuster rule that at least one member had to be talking (holding the floor) for the duration of the filibuster instead of just threatening.
The length of terms is not as challenging as some other changes, but I think it affects House reps more than senators as it is. As for the Electoral College, in the late 1970s there was wide public support and also strong support in congress. It appeared to be on the verge of passing, and then gaining states to approve, but two southern senators blocked it from reaching a vote--another sign of how dysfunctional the congress is when a couple of people can block beneficial and popular changes.
The filibuster is another ridiculous rule, I agree. But it wouldn't be such an issue if those in the Senate represented something closer to proportional constituencies instead of the minority stranglehold that has grown worse over the years. I agree that the talking filibuster is at least something halfway helpful. The way it is now, senators can essentially phone in a filibuster. The congress is dysfunctional because it is undemocratic, and the House is that way because of radical gerrymandering largely by Rs who have made it into a criminal act.
Another option is to "flip" the filibuster. Instead of 60 votes needed to end it, the rule would require 40 votes to continue it. This forces the senator(s) starting the filibuster to ensure that 40 votes are always available to continue it, a difficult task since a vote could be called at any time by the Majority Leader of the Senate. This avoids tying up the Senate floor with silly nonsense which occurs during a talking filibuster.
I agree that's one decent fix if the filibuster is allowed to remain.
TR. Oh, we could expand that amendment to include ditching the electoral college and Congress could and should expand the Supreme Court. I like 13 for now, but more if the need arises. Then, there could be a lottery to see who sits on a particular case. No one bringing a case would know which justices would be on the case, so couldn't "work on" the justice to get favors. We need a group to seriously study changes that could be made to our government that would do more to protect the rights of all citizens to live, vote, be safe, to have bodily autonomy and more. The Constitution allows for that, so let's start codifying those things into law.
Fay--Thanks for some thoughtful ideas.
I would add another
Art. II, Section. 1.
The executive Power shall be vested in a U.S. Federal Council comprised of seven members. They shall hold Office during Terms of five Years, and shall be elected, as follows
* Members shall be elected without reference to political party or affiliation;
* Members shall be elected within national proportional regions to fairly and equally represent the population without regard to political party or affiliation;
* Members shall be elected by a majority popular vote in regions; and
* Members may not serve more than two terms of five years.
The idea of limiting electioneering is great. I suggest a 100% tax on campaign contributions over the small donor amount with the money paid to a clean elections fund (somewhat similar to Arizona).
and this idea needs to be put forth-Code of Ethics for SCOTUS WITH consequences-there's NO reason for them to be able to abuse their power and get off scot free.
So you would dispense with the offices of President and Vice-President? or would this Council be in addition to the leaders? Are you advocating to a leadership similar to the Triumvirate of Rome? The five year terms would not align with the current 4 year election cycle, so we would need to change congressional terms to five and senate to 10 to have only one election cycle. Interesting ideas. I like your ideas on limiting financing!
This would replace the Office of the President (i.e elected King) and Vice President (i.e. elected Prince). Such a change would trigger a cascade of changes including eliminating the Speaker of the House in the line of succession.
The model comes from Switzerland and has been in use since 1848.
The 5 year term is meant not to the the same as Congress so that the elections are separate except in years ending in 0. This breaks up the ridiculous circus every 4 years with presidential elections.
The requirement of a majority for an election is meant either to force either RCV or runoffs to thus prevent plurality winners.
Very interesting concept. Would all seven members run in the same election cycle or would they be staggered? I will point out that Switzerland is both much less populated than us and has been neutral for more than a century. I would like to see how this would work out in a State, say Colorado, which is similar in size and geography to Switzerland. Also Colorado is neither predominantly Democrat or Republican.
Very interesting! We obviously need some sort of overhaul of our structure. My vote goes to age and term limits, (especially for the Supremes), and ending Citizens United.
I favor terms of 4 years, each president getting 1 justice nomination every 4 year term and only 12 years (3 terms) per justice. I also favor the same rules for each US Senator and Representative. It is time to eliminate the Electorial College for a directly elected president also.
Who is the Head of State? Who serves as Commander-in-Chief of the military? The Chairman of the Council assumes these roles?
Fay, You make excellent points! So much to do! Term limits for SCOTUS -ABSOLUTELY! 10 years is plenty.
In terms of electioneering, let’s set that to 3 months. Half of a year is too much. Right now it is insane and swallows up money that can go for basic needs of so many Americans!
We must give a more balanced representation of senators based on population. It is absurd to have California sit with the same number as North Dakota! Something has to change there too.
Hi, Seeking Reason. Thank you for this post. Three months would be fine with me. 60 years ago it was 2 months, 6 months is the maximum I would give - anything less is better. On the Senate, while I agree with you, like the electoral college, it is never going to happen. Changing the number of Senators or ending the electoral college requires a Constitutional Amendment for each. Amendments per the Constitution must be passed by 2/3 majority of both houses AND 3/4 of the States. With 50 States, that means 38 States have to ratify the amendment. I count 5 very large States (population, geography doesn't count) maybe 20 moderately sized. That's 25. 13 short of the number needed. Even if we add DC and Puerto Rico (both liberal progressive, we'd need 39 states for ratification. We'd still come up 11 short. Our problem is most people want to live in or near large cities (for good reason) Also those same people tend to be more liberally progressive. But all the rest of the minority population are spread out so that gives them power outside their numbers. I do believe extending the length of terms for both the House of Representatives and Senate would have a good chance of passing since it is to the legislators and the Constituents advantage (so long as we keep the campaigning limits secret until the amendments have passed) Reducing length and financing of campaigning is simple legislation, not Constitutional amendments. As to the Supreme Court I have less faith in that passing as it only benefits the citizens, not the politicians (or corporate America for that matter) (:-)
Fay, I love your amendment suggestions! I like the 4-year terms but I'm not sure if they should be on the Presidential years because one party could get too much power that way - although I am not sure. I want to think about that more. I would be OK with 8-year terms for Senators too with the same challenge as with representatives - should they be in presidential years. I agree the campaigns should be no more than 6 months for any office, including president. Then we wouldn't have to worry so much about whether Iowa or New Hampshire should be first, 10 months before the election. I would also like to see all primaries on the same day or maybe a choice of 2 dates. I agree the Supreme court should have term limits. I had been thinking of 1 18 year term, but up to 2 10-year terms would work too. Those changes could be made in one amendment to save a lot of trouble.
I love your optimism and clarity.
Even here in NZ we are affected by your red and blue battle. Thanks for your sane appraisal and inspiration.
A great article and give some release of the pressures of thinking about what is in the future. Thank you Robert Reich.
You are absolutely wonderful, Robert Reich. Thank you for your brilliant mind, your dedication, and your thoroughly compassionate nature. You say it all, just like it is, each and every time!
I agree with you 100%. The only things the GOP offers are murder, chaos, degradation, and hatred. No thanks.
That is a very exact description, if only the MAGAts realized it!