I have more, but the first legislative act I would introduce is to place all federal agencies under the control of Congress, removing the executive from that role. You know, EPA, CDC, FEMA, Dept. of ED., etc.
Reich said – we need basic meat-and-potatoes reforms of how our government functions — reforms that will be necessary to get anything done. The most important essential reform is to enforce the law against insurrection. Insurrection has stopped the proper functioning of the federal government.
For years, six justices on the Supreme Court led by John Roberts have been criminal felons engaged in a rebellion against the laws of the United States including the Constitution and have been working with their decisions to illegal assist in the installation of a lawless fascist autocracy with a power unlimited dictator as president who has immunity for official acts - but felony criminal insurrection is not an official act.
Insurrection happened on January 6, 2021, but the violations of (18 U.S. Code § 2383) continued into 2025 and 2026 with Trump, members of his administration, Republicans in Congress, and six justices on the Supreme Court violating federal law (18 U.S. Code § 2383). According to the federal law (18 U.S. Code § 2383), a felony crime is committed by “Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office”.
If Democrats get elected in 2026 and 2028, they MUST enforce the law against insurrection and arrest, prosecute, convict and jail Trump, members of his administration, Republicans in Congress, and six justices on the Supreme Court.
Reich can eliminate the need for the Constitutional Amendment in 8. Get big money out of politics because a new Supreme Court with all justices appointed by Democrats after they win in 2028 will overturn Citizens United.
If we go with Robert's suggestion that we advance 18 year term limits for the SCOTUS, we will lose Thomas, Roberts and Alito. The court would then be 6-3 which is workable. But we also need a real and enforceable Code of Conduct and Ethics. Somehow we need to remove the oversight and enforcement from the parties. It needs to be done by a completely independent, non-partisan body.
I so totally agree with you Barbara that "Somehow we need "a real and enforceable Code of Conduct and Ethics done by a completely independent, non-partisan body". This is essential. Thank you Barbara for adding this.
A better approach is to make the Inspectors General a standing committee of Congress under its Constitutional power of investigation. Therefore, the president would have no authority or power over them.
Congress does have oversight of SCOTUS but fails to act. The intent of the Constitution was for voter oversight of Congress' investigative body when self-policing fails, which is why the entire House stands for reelection every two years. For that to work, there is no alternative to an informed voting public. As Thomas Jefferson famously wrote, "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be".
A massive reform of media is called for. Local broadcast licenses must be locally owned and ownership of multiple licenses must be banned to stop the corporate consolidation of information channels.
Yes, apply penalties when politicians profit from crime and/or cheating. The USA already has measures that are supposed to protect against such crimes and the deterioration of a functioning democracy. Yet...?
You can have all the rules in place, but it's "useless" if those laws are simply ignored or overridden by criminals and cheaters. What has become very apparent to the rest of the world; trump, his fascistic cabinet, corrupt politicians and a compromised SCOTUS are flagrantly flouting the law every day, and NOTHING is or can be done to stop most of it. The lower courts are struggling.
There has to be some form of justice, "retribution," for all those complicit in the grift and destruction of your democracy. A corrupt regime, enabled by a billionaire cabal of greedy, drugged-addled morons with delusions of grandeur, must to be held to account. It's got to end.
The supreme court just ruled that the president controls agencies. Where are the democrats arguing against yhat? Ans. Theyre home raising money and pursuing handouts for social programs. The democrats pursue proposals that sound great but are utterly unrealistic. Plus they are not coordinated with other states. Sure, give money to Geeorgia. But what about Idaho and Montana. Senators ignore fact that legislation has to be national. And regulations have to be national and determined by agencies. Not one person.
I think we are going to have a multigenerational opportunity to reform the Constitution after 4 years of tRump or tRump-then-Vance. I like Bob's ideas but I'd take them a little further and make them Constitutional because given this Court's proclivity for pulling new law out of Alito's derriere, they will just declare any statutory fixes the Heritage Foundation doesn't like, unconstitutional. We really need to rewrite the Executive Branch into a technocratic executor of the laws Congress enacts and, eliminate the President as a civilian Commander in Chief, pardoner of last resort, redecorator of the Nation's Capitol. And make the President subject to all the laws of the Land! If he is not a unitary exeutive, he can just jolly well step aside if indicted and await adjudication. there is much more that we need to do to fix our foundational document.
I politely disagree with the need to reform or overhaul our Constitution. I do agree we must get rid of the electoral college and we need to pass the Equal Rights Amendment, but that’s it. The problems we’ve had with both Trump administrations boil down to one thing, rampant corruption—a corrupt Supreme Court, a corrupt Republican Party and a corrupt President and Cabinet. In other words, the problem is with the people, not our governing document.
There is no governing Constitution that can protect us from corrupt people. We do need more safeguards and Bob’s list takes care of many of them. As he said, his list isn’t meant to be comprehensive, but it would go a long way toward protecting us and it can be accomplished with legislation.
There are at least 3 main reasons for not reforming the Constitution:
1. People forget that our Constitution is what made the U.S. the most powerful and wealthy nation in the world. It was very carefully crafted by the Framers and when interpreted by people with integrity it works beautifully. There is no other Constitution on earth that is any better than ours and many countries have tried to emulate it.
2. When Trump and his Cabinet are gone, the corrupt Republican party will still exist and we will still have to fight with them over their corrupt values. Those people aren’t going anywhere, so it would be foolish to begin a process to re-write, reform, or whatever you want to call it, our Constitution, because it would give them a grand opportunity to manipulate voters yet again, convincing them we must overhaul the Constitution in a way that is deceptive, the same way people were deceived into voting for Donald Trump.
I’m not willing to take that risk because it would play right into their hands. There is nothing republicans would like more than an opportunity to re-write the Constitution.
At the very least, arguments over our Constitution would result in more divisive rhetoric among voters, and polarizing of political positions. That’s the last thing we need right now.
3. The process for reforming the Constitution
is lengthy and fraught with danger.(mostly from republicans.) It’s lengthy and difficult to change for excellent reasons. How good would a Constitution be if it were easily reformed? Answer—not very good. The Framers knew what they were doing.
The Constitution needs an update, badly. Some things need to be specified by law eg “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Launching an insurrection is a high crime that needs prosecution immediately. That means arrest, Miranda rights, indictment, etc. Forget impeachment. That is a political play that has proven to be useless.
James, we have a provision in the Constitution re insurrection and a federal statute that addresses insurrection as well. Both could use some tweaking, but even if tweaked, neither can save us from a corrupt majority on the Supreme Court. That’s why we need to expand the Supreme Court from 9 justices to 13 justices.
Susan thank you! Thoughtdul! Agree with expanding the court. Great idea. But not being proposed except by a few. How likely is proposal. No democrat is proposing it. And if there is republican majority expansion could produce more authoritarian judges. I think there is to be clear concerted coordinated reform plus democratic president to select judges. If court expanded with extreme republican judges it would be a disaster.
Impeachment is a powerful tool, but legislators must be willing to exercise it. In 2021 Mitch McConnell could have Trump impeached by both Houses of Congress, but he remained more loyal to his party than to the natin.
Susan, I agree with you. I have thought about this a lot. We have to deal with our monopolistic oligarchic media before we can get a lot of what needs to be done accomplished. Our media has fed people's fear, anger, resentment, and hatreds (which I refer to as the true "four Horsemen of the Apocalypse) because they are present in nearly all the media's propaganda and the SC rulings that have warped our Constitution. Greed would be the 5th Horseman and right now, our Republican Party and its oligarchic cohort is swimming in greed. There should be no monopolies or near monopolies in our media. A set of rules as to how many points of media one individual or corporation can own and how many pieces within that framework. I would rather see the various media close than see them run by too rich white men who use their media platforms to get even more power and money they don't deserve. We do need all the ideas we can compile because some of them are going to work and it is a challenge sometimes to find the best ideas. The more ideas the merrier!!
I would tend to agree with you, Susan. My fear is that because we are having such a terrible experience with the way this President and his team operate (total disregard of the law, belief in his ability to do anything without consequences, cult-like loyalty to personalities, etc.) we will create a whole set of rules, a new system, and multiple guardrails that will make it difficult for succeeding generations. In my opinion, we need to avoid any “knee-jerk reactions” and address the root causes of what has brought us to this point over the past 40-60 years. The beauty of our Constitution and the success of the adherence to the “rule of law” have been cast aside because of power, greed, tolerance for corruption, lack of concern about those less fortunate, racism, Christian nationalism, male dominance, etc., etc. We can never create enough laws that will guard against those. So….what do we do? Not at all sure.
Barbara, I agree 100%. The beauty of our Constitution and how our government works is its adaptability to changing times and there are no laws or amount of laws that can save us from the kind of corruption we are dealing with right now. I am not in favor of over-hauling our
Constitution at all. In fact, I pointed out 3 reasons that’s a bad idea in an earlier post on this same thread. The way to cure this issue is
to get private money donations out of the picture by making them illegal. The money is the incentive for corruption.
I think we should allow only public money for
the purpose of campaigning. We also need to eliminate endless campaigning. We should have campaigns for 6 or 9 months prior to the election. We can do these things if we can get
people enthusiastic about it.
Another fear I have is that people advocating for a new or reformed Constitution may be
republicans pretending to be democrats insisting on a new constitution. Republicans will happily deceive us for any reason, because
they would love to get people riled up and
demanding a new Constitution, which they would undoubtedly rig in ways we don’t catch.
For that reason alone, I’m against reform of
the Constitution. In addition it would become another politically polarizing, long, drawn-out
exercise that will make everyone angry. We can’t afford that right now.
They did rule that absurdity but his clowns are already in place but they protected the Fed Reserve.... what they also did is allow the next president to fire all the monsters in place as well ... do you think they knew that with this ruling? Because if they said "no" would that mean the next president couldn't fire them? (if we are lucky enough to get a "next president" )
I agree and disagree. Joining together to increase individual power and protection is not inherently bad. IMO what we need is to break the two party system.
But the two-Party system is really just the Party in control against the Party not in control. Politics becomes nothin but a power struggle with no consideration to the Government By the People or Government For the People
JBR, there are Democrats and Independents doing very good things and they will kick MAGA's Ass. Progressives too. Secretaries of state in Montana and Hawaii are working on getting obscene money out of our elections. States have rights to deny corporations and wealthy pacs and trillionaires like Elon Musk from using their vast wealth to buy seats in their state, and legislation that helps them. See Robert Reich's video about this issue. It is informative. No more Elon Musk jumping around in a cheese hat to buy a seat on the state Supreme Court in Wisconsin, with a huge "check " to buy it. we fight like Hell, just like Robert Reich and Bernie Sanders and AOC and more and more progressives do.
I too don’t want to increase the list to an unmanageable number, but I do think the point you make about federal agencies is critical. AND how can we make sure Congress really represents US and not just a weird faction of their party?
I think we have to have a method which does not need candidates begging for money several times a day. Then they could be loyal to all their constituents.
Barbara we can make sure Congress represents us by taking money out of the picture. We have to make ALL private donations illegal. That’s the incentive for their corruption—they’re working for corporations, not their constituents, because corporations can afford to give them lots of money and perks. If we pass a law saying if a candidate takes private money and is found out, they should have to forfeit their candidacy. If it isn’t found out until after they are elected, they should have to forfeit their seat in Congress—that is after a jury trial that finds they took private money.
Private money has corrupted our entire
system of democracy. Republicans helped
the corruption by actively supporting corrupt candidates or corruptible candidates. They
also actively pursued judges who could be corrupted and especially if they had an agenda—like if they were anti-abortion and/or very
religious. Today’s republicans are very anti-
female or misogynistic—however you want to say it.
Lance, the farther we're driven down Unitary Executive Road, the closer we get to Kingsville. Your proposal would be a U-turn that would head us back toward Coequal City.
Robert provides a great list. But unfortunately, before we can even think about implementing those wonderful ideas, we are about to face by far the greatest threat to our nation since the Civil War.
Trump will absolutely try every possible power play...legal and illegal... to prevent a free and fair election this November. Supporters of democracy must have a primary focus on doing whatever is possible to protect that election.
We already have majorities of public opinion for virtually every one of those 10 policies. The fundamental challenge will be to achieve an election that truly reflects those public priorities.
His various attempts to thwart the upcoming election have bothered me all along. By hook or by crook, he's going to louse it up, or at the very least call it rigged, crooked, or fraudulent, followed by endless review and argument. I agree that we must be extremely vigilant so as not to allow any of that to happen. Wish I knew just how to do that!
That is what constitution says and that is the current structure. Slim majority of court perverted that system. Where is yhe outcry? Where is the push to correct that ruling? The democrats are mute. Hence Reichs recommendation is whistling in the wind.
Excellent moves, and I agree, top-priority, politically.
One caveat: I think that you misread FDR's threat to expand the court. It worked, the standing Supreme Court stopped auto blocking him, and therefore he didn't need to engage the time and attention to follow through on it.
Culturally, we need to work on promoting sustainability and equity. A major reason these marauders have got into power is the Reaganite (and pre- and post-Reaganite) emphasis on a mythology of individualism and competition that pervades USians thinking and conceiving and modeling. It's not glamorous: it's shabby.
I worry a little about age limits because I know many "elders" whose minds are sharp as a tack, and wisdom is undervalued in our culture. Yes, people of a certain age should think very seriously about their overall capabilities before jumping in, but you know, even if Joe Biden had stayed in the race and won a second term, he was the kind of president who relied on his expert analysts for advice... the country would have been just fine.
I agree. Likewise, Obama & Hillary sat and LISTENED to our military advisors instead of cracking threatening remarks such as Trump made to assembled generals last year: "If you don't like what I say you can leave the room. And there goes your rank. Your career......" Drawling slob voice trails off at that point, Mafia style.
After Toto pulls back the drapes, revealing "The Great and Powerful Oz", the Wizard yells: "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain”
Could it be that, while the focus is on the President and his actions, the Secretary of Defense decimates the command structure of our military. To what end? Could it be the total control of what, and where. the “restructured” military is used in this country?
I so agree with you Dorothy about age limits. We need to think carefully and cautiously about including strict generally imposed age limits. Thank you.
Term limits would be better than age limits. My Dad was in wheelchair the last three years of his life but had full mental capacity until he died of a heart attack at 89 years 9 months. FDR was in a wheelchair too and look at all of the great things he headed up for the American people. Don't be so quick to count us old folks out. Institutional knowledge and life-long experience is valuable.
I'm 81, and most of my friends are around my age. Even though we are very active and politically involved, and we all have homes and families to take care of, we know that we are facing physical and mental challenges. I can't work in my yard as long as I used to, my reaction times are slower, I don't dare climb ladders anymore, I take longer to think of a particular word or someone's name, etc. Although I do great in my aerobics classes, I look around and see so many others who are faltering. I know that for me, it's just a matter of time.
Being a president or a legislator or a judge is not only mentally demanding, it's also physically demanding. I can be as smart as a whip, but that isn't the full requirement of the job. It takes a lot of physical activity, quick thinking, the ability to handle great amounts of pressure, the necessity to recover quickly from jet lag, etc.
Age limits are common sense. They aren't discrimination.
I can't help reflecting that I'd vote for Bernie or Liz Warren, if it came down to it. For four damn more years! They would do the right thing if something did happen.
🎯 No convicted felons on any ballot in the country! This seems so obvious, and yet it seems we must put in writing and make it the law. Felons can't even vote in most states until they complete parole and probation. Only 2 states and DC allow prisoners to vote.
Agree Judith! Thus, we must consider cautiously whether to use a strict age limit imposed for all those in office as we all age differently, especially as we get older. I too Judith "would totally accept Bernie in the Oval Office" in a minute at 84 and also RR who just turned 80. They are both more than qualified both cognitively and also morally as they have the necessary moral values which should be a prerequisite qualification to lead a country and which is equally essential imho. Wisdom usually comes from having lived through many years of a wide range of experiences and having learned, changed and grown from those lived experiences. We need wise leaders with good moral values. We are "whole" humans beings with a head AND a heart. This is why critical thinking skills is not enough for leadership without empathy. So wisdom must include the heart which necessitates the development of moral reasoning so that a wise leader would propose policies that would benefit all of the people to live lives with dignity and integrity. We need leaders with what has been referred to as "heart/mind". We can and should be learning a lot from watching and listening to the voices of those currently in power who have totally lost their hearts and souls. We have to wake up and learn from our experiences so we can eagerly and with steadfast determination vote for changes. Thank you Judith for your comment.
At 81 years old, I am still sharp and I pass mental agility tests with no problem. (I'm part of a couple of brain health studies.) But... jobs like this require physical endurance, as well. And the ability to recover quickly from stress, travel, staff management issues, competing priorities, sleep deprivation, late-night meetings, and that ever-present issue of a potential stroke, fall, heart attack, pneumonia, and any number of things that could bring us down quickly. "Smarts" and "wisdom" are only part of the job.
Donna, I agree with all but one item you mentioned. The exception is age limits simply because we need people like Bernie Sanders in Congress. Not everyone ages in the same ways, and definitely, some of the elected people have experienced mental decline. In those instances, I see the importance of not having them hold the positions. However, I do not know how we could keep the valued, highly functioning, older people if we had age limits. I see the need in certain situations, but not in each person.
Bernie is not president. He may do well in Congress, but he is the exception. Being president requires not only mental agility, but also physical endurance. We can point to a few older people who still do well, but they are the exception rather than the rule. (By the way, where is Mitch McConnell lately? His sudden health issue is something we should wonder about.) I'm 81, and although I'm sharp and physically active, I'd never consider that I could have the stamina to serve in such a high-pressure environment. I can see and feel what's happening to me and to my friends. I'm sure even Robert would agree that he's not the same as he was even ten years ago.
My goodness, have you noticed how "Communism" and "Commies" and Marx are the new (OLD!) bugaboo? I'm having flashbacks! Kruschev is at the door once again! Like Marley dragging his chains he comes with shrill women burning their bras in tow, along with lazy hippies spitting on returning vets and look! the (black) Welfare Queen! Eeek! You hit a nerve with "mythology of individualism and competition," all right. Here's the "AI brief" when you Google "provide for the general welfare:" To "provide for the general welfare" refers to the core purpose of the U.S. government outlined in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution. Congress is granted the power to collect taxes to fund programs that benefit the country as a whole, such as infrastructure, public health, and disaster relief. That's what Trump is talking about when he goes on about Communism. Exactly Constitutional founding principles THAT!
The GOP appears to be pandering to a group with an average age of over 70. Either that or they think voters are extremely stupid. "Commies", really? There's about 3 dozen communists left, all in faculty positions at universities you've never heard of. Most people in the US probably couldn't tell you where the Berlin Wall used to be, but the "commies" are coming? Pathetic.
It's the same old con. "The commies will seize your homes and put you out on the street." Last time I looked, there are growing numbers of US citizens out on the street and nary a communist or socialist in sight, unless you consider food bank workers communist agents.
Mmerose, "provide for the... general Welfare of the United States" has been twisted over the last fifty years or so to mean "provide for the welfare of corporations and their owners."
I would make an addition to the 9th proposal on the Professor's list to turn that situation back around to how it's supposed to be: Not only tax the hoarders of monumental wealth as per the professor (I would've gone further than Professor Reich - something along the lines of "tax the pants off of them"), but tax their corporations in the same way. Those corporations should be made responsible to help provide for the welfare of all American citizens. After all, it was the citizens who granted the corporations their charters so they could exist in the first place. Or at least, that's how it's supposed to be...
A proposal that includes severe wealth-hoarding taxation of corporations as well as way-too-rich individuals would set America on a path that puts people before profits, ends corporate welfare, and closes the wealth gap. What a game changer that would be... It would reorient America toward caring for its citizens the way that the rest of the developed world does - you know - all of those countries who have evolved beyond the "mythology of individualism and competition" that have strong social safety nets and public services.
I would suggest beefing up the Professor's 9th proposal to include taxation of corporations along with way-too-wealthy individuals, taxation that's well past their squealing point.
There is standard taxation, and there is windfall profit taxation, and there is capital gains taxation, and ordinary income taxation, because there are different kinds of wealth. Getting taxation right is key to a healthy society.
There are no actual communists, certainly not here, not even in Russia, China, North Korea or Cuba. There are simply authoritarian states that claim an origin story. There are no Communists except here and there a scruffy guy who puts out pamphlets and runs old movietone newsreels through his aging head.
Mimerose, I immediately thought of Joe McCarthy, and his hunt for communists in the 1950's. People being blacklisted and even executed for being "spies". an ugly time. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg left their children in 1953.
I am not convinced that Trump understands communism enough to know that the constitution sounds communist to some people. I think he just says “commies!” because it has been a rallying cry during his earlier years and it produces the response he wants. Like “antifa,” it’s just a word and his followers jump on it. He wants a response from MAGA and he gets it.
"Shrill women burning their bras" did absolutely no harm to you or anyone else. Spitting on vets by anyone -- lazy or totally engaged -- was and is wrong.
I’m not but I can’t speak for the MAGA cult—people without adequate language skills, empathy, or foresight, and who for years have been smacked upside their heads and inside their wallets by Trump’s spectacular corruption of everything decent and worthwhile. (Of course, I was born British.)
Glad to see you put SCOTUS reform at the top of the list. I do not share your pessimism about expansion; expansion is vitally necessary at this point. More justices can do more work. This might help shrink the "shadow docket." And the justices need to be subject to an enforceable code of ethics.
I would add to your list the necessity to bring back the inspectors-general and other "watchdogs" that Agent Orange and his sycophants summarily dismissed or hire new ones. Also, expand the IRS budget and staff to investigate fraud.
I'm praying that 20 Jan 28 becomes our nation's real Liberation Day, and that I'm here to see it.
I unearthed this tidbit about Franklin & Eleanor's White House. If invited to a White House dinner, savvy guests would eat their "real" meal beforehand, because Eleanor had installed Henrietta Nesbitt as WH cook, NOT chef, and following a hearty salted cod dinner would arrive a dessert of canned fruit floating in a red jello mold. The Roosevelts were too busy pulling the nation out of financial ruin and facing off with the Axis powers to worry about fine dining.
There's a difference. Trump provides cheap eats, but squanders millions to drag us all into debt slavery, whilst "redecorating" DC and welcoming battalions of masked goons:
In other words we need a Project 2028. Democrats need to have a plan. Republicans have been working on Project 2025 since Reagan. Years of careful brainwashing by right wing media and the NRA allowed them to implement it. So many things to do like seize that damn plane and sue for all the taxpayer money he has grifted from the taxpayers. Go after his family and friends too. And release the Epsoein files. Prosecute those who are named as attackers.
We need a list of actions that can be done to address the rest of tRump's term given his ability to veto legislation and the fact of his control of the Repukelican party. That might begin with the Epstein investigation. Publicly proving perversion and child sex abuse might losen his domination.
I agree. I think a lot of his actions are diversions having to do with the Epstein files. I've heard nothing about Judge Sullivan granting the 60 days that Blanche requested when he went to court on the deadline the judge had given him to release the Epstein files in full and to explain the redactions in what was released. Did Judge Sullivan grant the extension? If not, why isn't somebody sitting in jail for contempt until ready to comply? It's mind boggling to me that so much of this Trump second term seems to be court appearances... How do we get away from that?
The Trump cultists could not care less what's in the Epstein files. The only way to get at Trump is to put the fear of God into the plutocracts that control the GOP senators.
Really, it all comes down to term limits on the Supreme Court, 12 would be better than 18, and removal of the money corrupting politics. Getting rid of gerrymandering is also critical. It's not obvious how any of this can be done.
How about just some enforceable ethical standards on the Supremes? The litany of perjury in confirmation, conflicts of interest, non-disclosure and even tax evasion is shocking! For some reason, Thomas's "forgiven" loan on his motor home, then not reported as taxable income, was on my mind today. Along with Rehnquist's two sons working for the Bush campaign when he voted on "Bush v. Gore." (How would you like to go into court in front of a judge who had a couple of kids that were employees of the guy on the other side?) The only last-ditch remedy now is impeachment, and the Senate wouldn't impeach Jabba the Hut with an R next to his name.
Its really hard to enforce ethics rules, actually hopeless under current law, but at least term limits gets rid of the crooks on a schedule. Guillotines and/or public caning for the real crooks might raise the ethics of the temptable also. The nonstop examples of blatant corruption going unpunished throughout the government are corrosive to democracy.
I have had an idea: take the case back to the Bar that originally licensed the scofflaw. With a provision, if found ineligible to practice in any State, disqualified from office as Justice. Those are the people who judge ethics cases all the time.
I agree that amending the SCOTUS is of the most importance. The Republicans on the bench have given Trump, what he believes is Carte Blanche, to completely amend the constitution. The immunity ruling has to be removed or at least amended. 6 justices on the Supreme Court have created another Frankenstein monster.
I agree wholeheartedly with every single thing you have listed, Professor Reich! I believe I would work on them in a specific order. I would first begin by getting the Department of Justice in order and out of the clutches of that man in the White House. We must ensure the DOJ is able to carry out their mission of upholding the rule of law and keeping our country safe. Immediately pass a bill that provides term limits and a code of ethics for Supreme Court justices. Follow through on anyone holding a seat on the high court for over 18 years immediately step down and move to other courts. I also believe expanding the court is not out of reach. Protect press freedom and independence from being run by anyone having close ties or connections to the man in the White House! Getting big money out of politics is essential for preventing these oligarchs from controlling our country and end gerrymandering by any party. Eliminating the Electoral College and reviving voting rights for everyone is an absolute must so that ALL Americans have a voice in our government. Taxing the wealthy is so important as it has been proven that if these wealthy oligarchs paid their fair share in taxes, our programs would never have to worry about running out of money. The freedom of inquiry should never be held hostage by some wannabe dictator in government. Researchers provide truthful information that helps us. No one in the government should ever withhold truthful research just because it does not jive with their beliefs. There is one additional I would like to add, and for me, it is so very important. We absolutely must reverse the damage that has been done to the Department of Education! Making any of the above necessary changes won't be worth a thing if we do not have educated people in this country! It has been proven time and again that uneducated people are more gullible and can be conned more easily. We need a strong Department of Education that ensures Civics is returned to the classroom. Truthful history is taught. Guidelines for every level of school needs to be clear and educators must be allowed to teach their students! Education is key as far as I am concerned. If we do not make fixing the Department of Education a priority, nothing we do will matter as eventually another Hitleresque person will try and take over again.
Agree wholeheartedly. Watered down education caused by lack of funding is how we are in this trouble. School funding should not rely on real estate taxes alone.
Also a necessary change is to return to the Fairness Doctrine. Most media are monopolies which produce propaganda. We need truth in all media.
Absolutely, Diane! We need these tv broadcasters to return to reporting the news and NOT putting their spin on it! All we seem to ever get is what these people want you to believe rather than reporting actual facts and letting viewers decide how they want to digest the information. Lies, misinformation and propaganda is all these news agencies seem to be reporting anymore. They are trying to "normalize" this orange idiot and that does not sit well with me!
Living in a less populous state makes me value my vote more. Getting rid of the Electoral College will make me feel like there’s no reason to get out and vote because my vote will have little or no effect on who becomes the winner.
Jan, if we were to move to the national popular vote, it would seem to me that your vote would count more. Each state would determine the winner for that state and your vote would go far in determining who that would be.
Your list, Peggy, is excellent. You make strong points backing up your priorities. And revision of the Dep't of Education is essential as long as it incorporates what you say. But there is more, the DoE needs to revise it's priorities. Constant testing (I'm not saying all testing has to go) doesn't accomplish a whole lot. The results will be self evident when graduates understand and exemplify the civics and budgetary (as well as others) lessons they learned.
I wholeheartedly agree with you, Gin! Testing has gotten completely out of hand! The constant testing causes more problems than solves them! Students will learn when teachers are allowed to teach them! The way I see it, teachers are so overloaded with paperwork, they do not have time to actually interact and teach their students! Yes, the DoE does need to re-evaluate their mission. Is it to ensure our students are getting the absolute best education possible, or is it to just monitor teachers and only rely on test results.
Agree… however none of this will be accomplished if we don’t address the money . There must be a limit on how much can be spent on any election. Local,!state and national. We have built cars that are very fast, yet we restrict their speed with limits. We having zoning to protect property. We have codes to protect consumers. We need limits on election spending, terms, and election campaigns. Just because you can build a car that can travel faster than other cars does not give anyone the right to speed. To say this will be difficult is an excellent example of understatement. So was going to the moon, and trying to maintain a democratic style of government. We can do what we put our hearts and minds to.
The solution does not contain any ethnic tests. This is another problem to address.
Water, or rather the scarcity of water should have floated up to the top of the major problems to be addressed. Even Mr. Trump knows there is a problem… he acknowledged it… he has no solution and does not have the integrity, nor intellect to address this for our nation or the world.
Yes, 250 is a great place to start the great remodel.. I pray we can agree on what we want the end product to be.
“We have built cars that are very fast, yet we restrict their speed with limits.”
The problem is that the approach we took with this is that we’ve allowed the manufacturers to make cars that can do 140 miles an hour street legal. And then we hope that putting up a sign along the road will discourage humans from using that excessive power in their right foot.
If we wanted to actually succeed in addressing this problem, we would put a non-hackable governor restricting the top speed of all commercial and private vehicles.
If you need an education in this problem, tune into a few cop chase videos on YouTube. That’ll open your eyes. It’s insane. It’s carnage. It’s stupid what we’re doing.
"Get big money out of politics." This is key, IMO. In Canada, there is no legal way for a billionaire, a corporation, or a Super PAC‑type entity to put millions of dollars into a political campaign. Canada also limits what parties and candidates may spend during an election. SO: winning an election can't be bought.
Prof. Reich, this is a brilliant list. To this, I would add one more point, and this is not my idea. A good friend of mine proposed this, and IMO she’s spot on.
Whoever is running for a political office, but especially the President and Vice President, MUST work a regular job for at least 2 years. No investments to live off of. They need to work a 9-5 job, or 4 part time jobs, and see what it’s actually like to earn a basic wage. You know, in the area of $50K - $60K a year- and I know that for many people, that amount is utterly astronomical. But, I hope you get the idea. Let anyone running for the office of US President see what it takes to just keep a roof over your head; feed yourself and your family; pay your bills; pay a mortgage or rent; pay for your kid’s schooling, daycare, etc. The Prez and everyone else in the halls of government must have experience just being a normal person. No privilege.
I would add the Australian-style preferential voting system. This gives independents and small party candidates a chance to rise above the dominant major party, if enough voters favour them.
You list your preferences 1,2,3 etc.
The independent may be your four first choice, but your vote is not wasted, if he/she fails to reach the top two. Your no.2 vote will then be counted for that candidate, and so on.
Gives small parties etc a better chance in a duopoly.
I think what you are referring to is ranked choice voting. Here in Michigan, we have a petition circulating to amend our state constitution to allow ranked choice voting throughout all elections.
In my opinion, it would not only encourage more people to offer to serve in elected office, it would also encourage more voters to believe that their vote matters.
The ten are equally importentbut to prevent this of happing again bamning big money out of politics would be a priority. Next to set a time limit that judges are in the supreme coury, however 18 years is too long a time limit of 12 years is more appropriate. There should also be a clause that any misconductt by a judge leads to bannishment from his/ker podition.
I would replace #7, which is extortion and blackmail (already illegal), with severe restrictions on pardon abuse, especially for monetary gain by a president.
You set out a rather ambitious agenda Robert, but practically speaking is it realistic? Even if the Dems take control of Congress in the November election, will they be willing or able to do any of that? We shall see, but I have my doubts.
Correct. The problems have persisted. Democrats know what they could pursue but they aren't pursuing them and theres no assurance that reforms would pass or would solve the problems.. Plus sadly AI, now master of the universe, wasnt consulted to see how it was programmed even tho it is, sadly, a force to be reckoned with. Plus theres a hierarchy of solutions. They need to be prioritized. And the public needs to be mobilized.
I think AI has the potential to be of considerable assistance in the future, with regard to ending gerrymandering and designing and creating truly representative legislative districts. But my guess is that that is one of those nice things that we won’t be allowed to have. Too many of our senators and representatives are bought.
Tight. So how is reich planning to end gerrymandering. AI is one of many resources to be contacted, not the only source. There has to be bational outcry. Simply saying it should end is whistling in the wind since sup ct allows gerrymandering.
I have more, but the first legislative act I would introduce is to place all federal agencies under the control of Congress, removing the executive from that role. You know, EPA, CDC, FEMA, Dept. of ED., etc.
And we have federal laws that prevent politicians from profiting from crimes. When they do, their assets can be forfeited.
https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?params=/context/public_integrity/article/1077/&path_info=asset_forfeiture_in_public_corruption_cases___capi_practitioner_toolkit___august_2016.pdf
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/97-139?__cf_chl_f_tk=C_oFgBj8isbNXt8qRkxa73EtEH_6aLsT3mfRgs.gdoM-1783246695-1.0.1.1-U.9uK1b6I6M0FWqeSzLhZ4D0eixu6R6jEluFEgtOlMU
Reich said – we need basic meat-and-potatoes reforms of how our government functions — reforms that will be necessary to get anything done. The most important essential reform is to enforce the law against insurrection. Insurrection has stopped the proper functioning of the federal government.
For years, six justices on the Supreme Court led by John Roberts have been criminal felons engaged in a rebellion against the laws of the United States including the Constitution and have been working with their decisions to illegal assist in the installation of a lawless fascist autocracy with a power unlimited dictator as president who has immunity for official acts - but felony criminal insurrection is not an official act.
Insurrection happened on January 6, 2021, but the violations of (18 U.S. Code § 2383) continued into 2025 and 2026 with Trump, members of his administration, Republicans in Congress, and six justices on the Supreme Court violating federal law (18 U.S. Code § 2383). According to the federal law (18 U.S. Code § 2383), a felony crime is committed by “Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office”.
If Democrats get elected in 2026 and 2028, they MUST enforce the law against insurrection and arrest, prosecute, convict and jail Trump, members of his administration, Republicans in Congress, and six justices on the Supreme Court.
Reich can eliminate the need for the Constitutional Amendment in 8. Get big money out of politics because a new Supreme Court with all justices appointed by Democrats after they win in 2028 will overturn Citizens United.
If we go with Robert's suggestion that we advance 18 year term limits for the SCOTUS, we will lose Thomas, Roberts and Alito. The court would then be 6-3 which is workable. But we also need a real and enforceable Code of Conduct and Ethics. Somehow we need to remove the oversight and enforcement from the parties. It needs to be done by a completely independent, non-partisan body.
I so totally agree with you Barbara that "Somehow we need "a real and enforceable Code of Conduct and Ethics done by a completely independent, non-partisan body". This is essential. Thank you Barbara for adding this.
What you are proposing Barbara is a rejection of the Constitution which requires enforcement of federal law.
Wise words. I hope we can achieve this goal.
Abd we have atty general that says laws dont prevent president from doing anything.
Make the DOJ and The Inspectors General stand-alone branches of Government.
A better approach is to make the Inspectors General a standing committee of Congress under its Constitutional power of investigation. Therefore, the president would have no authority or power over them.
But, they need to be able to investigate Congress and Congress Reps and Senators (and SCOTUS).
Congress does have oversight of SCOTUS but fails to act. The intent of the Constitution was for voter oversight of Congress' investigative body when self-policing fails, which is why the entire House stands for reelection every two years. For that to work, there is no alternative to an informed voting public. As Thomas Jefferson famously wrote, "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be".
A massive reform of media is called for. Local broadcast licenses must be locally owned and ownership of multiple licenses must be banned to stop the corporate consolidation of information channels.
How likely is that?
Hard. It will take one of the planks of a raft of Constitutional Amendments which I believe we need. But, nothing ventured, nothing gained.
Not.
Why do you shoot everything down?
Great idea. But it will never happen.
Nothing will change if we do not at least try.
True. But why pursue something that is pointless.
"The difference between fiction and reality? Fiction has to make sense." Tom Clancy
What a naysayer.
He must be fired and the law amended to prevent law breaking.
Fired by whom?
WE THE PEOPLE
Congress through the impeachment process. Of course it would require a responsible congress.
Impeachment has proven to be useless. Crimes in office must be specified and prosecuted by law, no exceptions or immunity.
We vote out the deadbeat Congress critters.
Agreed. I was of thinking post-regime consequences.
Which means that the next Dem president can fix the supreme court on day one. Just dismiss the liars.
Extreme measures.
What is likelihood of president just issuing order to change sup ct? Zero!.
Then we will have elected another Joe Biden. Someone stupid enough (or hubristic enough) to think we can reason with terrorists.
Someday tRUMP will be done, and the GOP is as popular as Ebola. Bashing Democrats is not very helpful, there are a few good ones running now.
You mean like tRUMP? He had the Taliban at Camp David. Biden never did that.
Some day we may not have said 'Attorney General".
Yes, apply penalties when politicians profit from crime and/or cheating. The USA already has measures that are supposed to protect against such crimes and the deterioration of a functioning democracy. Yet...?
You can have all the rules in place, but it's "useless" if those laws are simply ignored or overridden by criminals and cheaters. What has become very apparent to the rest of the world; trump, his fascistic cabinet, corrupt politicians and a compromised SCOTUS are flagrantly flouting the law every day, and NOTHING is or can be done to stop most of it. The lower courts are struggling.
There has to be some form of justice, "retribution," for all those complicit in the grift and destruction of your democracy. A corrupt regime, enabled by a billionaire cabal of greedy, drugged-addled morons with delusions of grandeur, must to be held to account. It's got to end.
The supreme court just ruled that the president controls agencies. Where are the democrats arguing against yhat? Ans. Theyre home raising money and pursuing handouts for social programs. The democrats pursue proposals that sound great but are utterly unrealistic. Plus they are not coordinated with other states. Sure, give money to Geeorgia. But what about Idaho and Montana. Senators ignore fact that legislation has to be national. And regulations have to be national and determined by agencies. Not one person.
I think we are going to have a multigenerational opportunity to reform the Constitution after 4 years of tRump or tRump-then-Vance. I like Bob's ideas but I'd take them a little further and make them Constitutional because given this Court's proclivity for pulling new law out of Alito's derriere, they will just declare any statutory fixes the Heritage Foundation doesn't like, unconstitutional. We really need to rewrite the Executive Branch into a technocratic executor of the laws Congress enacts and, eliminate the President as a civilian Commander in Chief, pardoner of last resort, redecorator of the Nation's Capitol. And make the President subject to all the laws of the Land! If he is not a unitary exeutive, he can just jolly well step aside if indicted and await adjudication. there is much more that we need to do to fix our foundational document.
I politely disagree with the need to reform or overhaul our Constitution. I do agree we must get rid of the electoral college and we need to pass the Equal Rights Amendment, but that’s it. The problems we’ve had with both Trump administrations boil down to one thing, rampant corruption—a corrupt Supreme Court, a corrupt Republican Party and a corrupt President and Cabinet. In other words, the problem is with the people, not our governing document.
There is no governing Constitution that can protect us from corrupt people. We do need more safeguards and Bob’s list takes care of many of them. As he said, his list isn’t meant to be comprehensive, but it would go a long way toward protecting us and it can be accomplished with legislation.
There are at least 3 main reasons for not reforming the Constitution:
1. People forget that our Constitution is what made the U.S. the most powerful and wealthy nation in the world. It was very carefully crafted by the Framers and when interpreted by people with integrity it works beautifully. There is no other Constitution on earth that is any better than ours and many countries have tried to emulate it.
2. When Trump and his Cabinet are gone, the corrupt Republican party will still exist and we will still have to fight with them over their corrupt values. Those people aren’t going anywhere, so it would be foolish to begin a process to re-write, reform, or whatever you want to call it, our Constitution, because it would give them a grand opportunity to manipulate voters yet again, convincing them we must overhaul the Constitution in a way that is deceptive, the same way people were deceived into voting for Donald Trump.
I’m not willing to take that risk because it would play right into their hands. There is nothing republicans would like more than an opportunity to re-write the Constitution.
At the very least, arguments over our Constitution would result in more divisive rhetoric among voters, and polarizing of political positions. That’s the last thing we need right now.
3. The process for reforming the Constitution
is lengthy and fraught with danger.(mostly from republicans.) It’s lengthy and difficult to change for excellent reasons. How good would a Constitution be if it were easily reformed? Answer—not very good. The Framers knew what they were doing.
The Constitution needs an update, badly. Some things need to be specified by law eg “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Launching an insurrection is a high crime that needs prosecution immediately. That means arrest, Miranda rights, indictment, etc. Forget impeachment. That is a political play that has proven to be useless.
James, we have a provision in the Constitution re insurrection and a federal statute that addresses insurrection as well. Both could use some tweaking, but even if tweaked, neither can save us from a corrupt majority on the Supreme Court. That’s why we need to expand the Supreme Court from 9 justices to 13 justices.
Susan thank you! Thoughtdul! Agree with expanding the court. Great idea. But not being proposed except by a few. How likely is proposal. No democrat is proposing it. And if there is republican majority expansion could produce more authoritarian judges. I think there is to be clear concerted coordinated reform plus democratic president to select judges. If court expanded with extreme republican judges it would be a disaster.
Impeachment is a powerful tool, but legislators must be willing to exercise it. In 2021 Mitch McConnell could have Trump impeached by both Houses of Congress, but he remained more loyal to his party than to the natin.
We shall have to disagree. That is what this Country is all about.
Susan, I agree with you. I have thought about this a lot. We have to deal with our monopolistic oligarchic media before we can get a lot of what needs to be done accomplished. Our media has fed people's fear, anger, resentment, and hatreds (which I refer to as the true "four Horsemen of the Apocalypse) because they are present in nearly all the media's propaganda and the SC rulings that have warped our Constitution. Greed would be the 5th Horseman and right now, our Republican Party and its oligarchic cohort is swimming in greed. There should be no monopolies or near monopolies in our media. A set of rules as to how many points of media one individual or corporation can own and how many pieces within that framework. I would rather see the various media close than see them run by too rich white men who use their media platforms to get even more power and money they don't deserve. We do need all the ideas we can compile because some of them are going to work and it is a challenge sometimes to find the best ideas. The more ideas the merrier!!
I would tend to agree with you, Susan. My fear is that because we are having such a terrible experience with the way this President and his team operate (total disregard of the law, belief in his ability to do anything without consequences, cult-like loyalty to personalities, etc.) we will create a whole set of rules, a new system, and multiple guardrails that will make it difficult for succeeding generations. In my opinion, we need to avoid any “knee-jerk reactions” and address the root causes of what has brought us to this point over the past 40-60 years. The beauty of our Constitution and the success of the adherence to the “rule of law” have been cast aside because of power, greed, tolerance for corruption, lack of concern about those less fortunate, racism, Christian nationalism, male dominance, etc., etc. We can never create enough laws that will guard against those. So….what do we do? Not at all sure.
Totally agree Barbara.
Barbara, I agree 100%. The beauty of our Constitution and how our government works is its adaptability to changing times and there are no laws or amount of laws that can save us from the kind of corruption we are dealing with right now. I am not in favor of over-hauling our
Constitution at all. In fact, I pointed out 3 reasons that’s a bad idea in an earlier post on this same thread. The way to cure this issue is
to get private money donations out of the picture by making them illegal. The money is the incentive for corruption.
I think we should allow only public money for
the purpose of campaigning. We also need to eliminate endless campaigning. We should have campaigns for 6 or 9 months prior to the election. We can do these things if we can get
people enthusiastic about it.
Another fear I have is that people advocating for a new or reformed Constitution may be
republicans pretending to be democrats insisting on a new constitution. Republicans will happily deceive us for any reason, because
they would love to get people riled up and
demanding a new Constitution, which they would undoubtedly rig in ways we don’t catch.
For that reason alone, I’m against reform of
the Constitution. In addition it would become another politically polarizing, long, drawn-out
exercise that will make everyone angry. We can’t afford that right now.
By that time the autocracy will be cwnebmnted. How likely will change be years from now? Not likely.
Orban was in 16 years and Hungary put him on the street.
Not bad for Europe's first fascist dictatorship (circa 1920s), which excited Hitler's admiration.
His proposals utterly impractical.
They did rule that absurdity but his clowns are already in place but they protected the Fed Reserve.... what they also did is allow the next president to fire all the monsters in place as well ... do you think they knew that with this ruling? Because if they said "no" would that mean the next president couldn't fire them? (if we are lucky enough to get a "next president" )
We need to get rid of all partisanship to get to a Government BY the People - NOT by Party.
I agree and disagree. Joining together to increase individual power and protection is not inherently bad. IMO what we need is to break the two party system.
Totally agree. But there are different factions of the parties. I think of myself as moderate republican. Can't stand hard right wing.
But the two-Party system is really just the Party in control against the Party not in control. Politics becomes nothin but a power struggle with no consideration to the Government By the People or Government For the People
Break the two Party system: That's what I was trying to say.
JBR, there are Democrats and Independents doing very good things and they will kick MAGA's Ass. Progressives too. Secretaries of state in Montana and Hawaii are working on getting obscene money out of our elections. States have rights to deny corporations and wealthy pacs and trillionaires like Elon Musk from using their vast wealth to buy seats in their state, and legislation that helps them. See Robert Reich's video about this issue. It is informative. No more Elon Musk jumping around in a cheese hat to buy a seat on the state Supreme Court in Wisconsin, with a huge "check " to buy it. we fight like Hell, just like Robert Reich and Bernie Sanders and AOC and more and more progressives do.
Good point.
I too don’t want to increase the list to an unmanageable number, but I do think the point you make about federal agencies is critical. AND how can we make sure Congress really represents US and not just a weird faction of their party?
I think we have to have a method which does not need candidates begging for money several times a day. Then they could be loyal to all their constituents.
We need to get rid of Government BY the Party and replace it with Government BY the PEOPLE
Barbara we can make sure Congress represents us by taking money out of the picture. We have to make ALL private donations illegal. That’s the incentive for their corruption—they’re working for corporations, not their constituents, because corporations can afford to give them lots of money and perks. If we pass a law saying if a candidate takes private money and is found out, they should have to forfeit their candidacy. If it isn’t found out until after they are elected, they should have to forfeit their seat in Congress—that is after a jury trial that finds they took private money.
Private money has corrupted our entire
system of democracy. Republicans helped
the corruption by actively supporting corrupt candidates or corruptible candidates. They
also actively pursued judges who could be corrupted and especially if they had an agenda—like if they were anti-abortion and/or very
religious. Today’s republicans are very anti-
female or misogynistic—however you want to say it.
Lance, the farther we're driven down Unitary Executive Road, the closer we get to Kingsville. Your proposal would be a U-turn that would head us back toward Coequal City.
Robert provides a great list. But unfortunately, before we can even think about implementing those wonderful ideas, we are about to face by far the greatest threat to our nation since the Civil War.
Trump will absolutely try every possible power play...legal and illegal... to prevent a free and fair election this November. Supporters of democracy must have a primary focus on doing whatever is possible to protect that election.
We already have majorities of public opinion for virtually every one of those 10 policies. The fundamental challenge will be to achieve an election that truly reflects those public priorities.
His various attempts to thwart the upcoming election have bothered me all along. By hook or by crook, he's going to louse it up, or at the very least call it rigged, crooked, or fraudulent, followed by endless review and argument. I agree that we must be extremely vigilant so as not to allow any of that to happen. Wish I knew just how to do that!
The fundamental challenge is to have a fair election. Period.
Those agencies should be independent staff only with people appropriate qualified. No more loyalists unqualified goons.
Place DOJ in a nonpartisan category.
That is what constitution says and that is the current structure. Slim majority of court perverted that system. Where is yhe outcry? Where is the push to correct that ruling? The democrats are mute. Hence Reichs recommendation is whistling in the wind.
That would be a good way of changing our Government to be By the People. Rather than by the Party.
Great idea. Please add CFPB to your list.
Excellent moves, and I agree, top-priority, politically.
One caveat: I think that you misread FDR's threat to expand the court. It worked, the standing Supreme Court stopped auto blocking him, and therefore he didn't need to engage the time and attention to follow through on it.
Culturally, we need to work on promoting sustainability and equity. A major reason these marauders have got into power is the Reaganite (and pre- and post-Reaganite) emphasis on a mythology of individualism and competition that pervades USians thinking and conceiving and modeling. It's not glamorous: it's shabby.
I'd say that anyone convicted of a felony should be disqualified from Congress, SCOTUS, or the Presidency. And age limits.
end presidential immunity
age limit the president, senate, house and supreme court
everyone needs to be responsible for their actions under all conditions
If the theory that no one is above the law was put into practice it would go a long way toward restoring faith in government.
We need people in high office who have skin in the game - people who have to live with the consequences of their actions.
Yes
Agreed!
I worry a little about age limits because I know many "elders" whose minds are sharp as a tack, and wisdom is undervalued in our culture. Yes, people of a certain age should think very seriously about their overall capabilities before jumping in, but you know, even if Joe Biden had stayed in the race and won a second term, he was the kind of president who relied on his expert analysts for advice... the country would have been just fine.
I agree. Likewise, Obama & Hillary sat and LISTENED to our military advisors instead of cracking threatening remarks such as Trump made to assembled generals last year: "If you don't like what I say you can leave the room. And there goes your rank. Your career......" Drawling slob voice trails off at that point, Mafia style.
After Toto pulls back the drapes, revealing "The Great and Powerful Oz", the Wizard yells: "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain”
Could it be that, while the focus is on the President and his actions, the Secretary of Defense decimates the command structure of our military. To what end? Could it be the total control of what, and where. the “restructured” military is used in this country?
I so agree with you Dorothy about age limits. We need to think carefully and cautiously about including strict generally imposed age limits. Thank you.
Term limits would be better than age limits. My Dad was in wheelchair the last three years of his life but had full mental capacity until he died of a heart attack at 89 years 9 months. FDR was in a wheelchair too and look at all of the great things he headed up for the American people. Don't be so quick to count us old folks out. Institutional knowledge and life-long experience is valuable.
Cheers... Vote Blue... GH
I'm 81, and most of my friends are around my age. Even though we are very active and politically involved, and we all have homes and families to take care of, we know that we are facing physical and mental challenges. I can't work in my yard as long as I used to, my reaction times are slower, I don't dare climb ladders anymore, I take longer to think of a particular word or someone's name, etc. Although I do great in my aerobics classes, I look around and see so many others who are faltering. I know that for me, it's just a matter of time.
Being a president or a legislator or a judge is not only mentally demanding, it's also physically demanding. I can be as smart as a whip, but that isn't the full requirement of the job. It takes a lot of physical activity, quick thinking, the ability to handle great amounts of pressure, the necessity to recover quickly from jet lag, etc.
Age limits are common sense. They aren't discrimination.
You cannot own a firearm with a felony but the nuclear codes, no problemo.
Mike, there's another proposal for the Professor's list somewhere in that comment of yours.
Right!
I can't help reflecting that I'd vote for Bernie or Liz Warren, if it came down to it. For four damn more years! They would do the right thing if something did happen.
🎯 No convicted felons on any ballot in the country! This seems so obvious, and yet it seems we must put in writing and make it the law. Felons can't even vote in most states until they complete parole and probation. Only 2 states and DC allow prisoners to vote.
No felons, first and foremost. But I would accept Bernie in the Oval Office, age or no age.
Agree Judith! Thus, we must consider cautiously whether to use a strict age limit imposed for all those in office as we all age differently, especially as we get older. I too Judith "would totally accept Bernie in the Oval Office" in a minute at 84 and also RR who just turned 80. They are both more than qualified both cognitively and also morally as they have the necessary moral values which should be a prerequisite qualification to lead a country and which is equally essential imho. Wisdom usually comes from having lived through many years of a wide range of experiences and having learned, changed and grown from those lived experiences. We need wise leaders with good moral values. We are "whole" humans beings with a head AND a heart. This is why critical thinking skills is not enough for leadership without empathy. So wisdom must include the heart which necessitates the development of moral reasoning so that a wise leader would propose policies that would benefit all of the people to live lives with dignity and integrity. We need leaders with what has been referred to as "heart/mind". We can and should be learning a lot from watching and listening to the voices of those currently in power who have totally lost their hearts and souls. We have to wake up and learn from our experiences so we can eagerly and with steadfast determination vote for changes. Thank you Judith for your comment.
At 81 years old, I am still sharp and I pass mental agility tests with no problem. (I'm part of a couple of brain health studies.) But... jobs like this require physical endurance, as well. And the ability to recover quickly from stress, travel, staff management issues, competing priorities, sleep deprivation, late-night meetings, and that ever-present issue of a potential stroke, fall, heart attack, pneumonia, and any number of things that could bring us down quickly. "Smarts" and "wisdom" are only part of the job.
Amen!
Fully agree.
Most people agree with you, Donna, this is why SCOTUS did not want to convict Trump.
Donna, I agree with all but one item you mentioned. The exception is age limits simply because we need people like Bernie Sanders in Congress. Not everyone ages in the same ways, and definitely, some of the elected people have experienced mental decline. In those instances, I see the importance of not having them hold the positions. However, I do not know how we could keep the valued, highly functioning, older people if we had age limits. I see the need in certain situations, but not in each person.
Bernie is not president. He may do well in Congress, but he is the exception. Being president requires not only mental agility, but also physical endurance. We can point to a few older people who still do well, but they are the exception rather than the rule. (By the way, where is Mitch McConnell lately? His sudden health issue is something we should wonder about.) I'm 81, and although I'm sharp and physically active, I'd never consider that I could have the stamina to serve in such a high-pressure environment. I can see and feel what's happening to me and to my friends. I'm sure even Robert would agree that he's not the same as he was even ten years ago.
My goodness, have you noticed how "Communism" and "Commies" and Marx are the new (OLD!) bugaboo? I'm having flashbacks! Kruschev is at the door once again! Like Marley dragging his chains he comes with shrill women burning their bras in tow, along with lazy hippies spitting on returning vets and look! the (black) Welfare Queen! Eeek! You hit a nerve with "mythology of individualism and competition," all right. Here's the "AI brief" when you Google "provide for the general welfare:" To "provide for the general welfare" refers to the core purpose of the U.S. government outlined in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution. Congress is granted the power to collect taxes to fund programs that benefit the country as a whole, such as infrastructure, public health, and disaster relief. That's what Trump is talking about when he goes on about Communism. Exactly Constitutional founding principles THAT!
The GOP appears to be pandering to a group with an average age of over 70. Either that or they think voters are extremely stupid. "Commies", really? There's about 3 dozen communists left, all in faculty positions at universities you've never heard of. Most people in the US probably couldn't tell you where the Berlin Wall used to be, but the "commies" are coming? Pathetic.
It's the same old con. "The commies will seize your homes and put you out on the street." Last time I looked, there are growing numbers of US citizens out on the street and nary a communist or socialist in sight, unless you consider food bank workers communist agents.
The venture capitalists are the ones doing that.
Yeah. The irony of it.
Mmerose, "provide for the... general Welfare of the United States" has been twisted over the last fifty years or so to mean "provide for the welfare of corporations and their owners."
I would make an addition to the 9th proposal on the Professor's list to turn that situation back around to how it's supposed to be: Not only tax the hoarders of monumental wealth as per the professor (I would've gone further than Professor Reich - something along the lines of "tax the pants off of them"), but tax their corporations in the same way. Those corporations should be made responsible to help provide for the welfare of all American citizens. After all, it was the citizens who granted the corporations their charters so they could exist in the first place. Or at least, that's how it's supposed to be...
A proposal that includes severe wealth-hoarding taxation of corporations as well as way-too-rich individuals would set America on a path that puts people before profits, ends corporate welfare, and closes the wealth gap. What a game changer that would be... It would reorient America toward caring for its citizens the way that the rest of the developed world does - you know - all of those countries who have evolved beyond the "mythology of individualism and competition" that have strong social safety nets and public services.
I would suggest beefing up the Professor's 9th proposal to include taxation of corporations along with way-too-wealthy individuals, taxation that's well past their squealing point.
There is standard taxation, and there is windfall profit taxation, and there is capital gains taxation, and ordinary income taxation, because there are different kinds of wealth. Getting taxation right is key to a healthy society.
There are no actual communists, certainly not here, not even in Russia, China, North Korea or Cuba. There are simply authoritarian states that claim an origin story. There are no Communists except here and there a scruffy guy who puts out pamphlets and runs old movietone newsreels through his aging head.
Fossil fuel hacks now claim that advocates of sustainability are communists.
Mimerose, I immediately thought of Joe McCarthy, and his hunt for communists in the 1950's. People being blacklisted and even executed for being "spies". an ugly time. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg left their children in 1953.
I am not convinced that Trump understands communism enough to know that the constitution sounds communist to some people. I think he just says “commies!” because it has been a rallying cry during his earlier years and it produces the response he wants. Like “antifa,” it’s just a word and his followers jump on it. He wants a response from MAGA and he gets it.
"Shrill women burning their bras" did absolutely no harm to you or anyone else. Spitting on vets by anyone -- lazy or totally engaged -- was and is wrong.
Trump and Vance are getting desperate.
Absolutely.
Mary Ann Dimand— Absolutely agree: "a misguided emphasis on the value of individualism and competition". This is just the first base, not the goal.
Currently reading Andy Borowitz’s Age of Ignorance — and realize I never knew how stupid Reagan was. I loathed him for his policies.
Not stupid, willfully ignorant, as in: "What I don't know isn't WORTH knowing."
The thin line of narcissism?
Jeepers, that sounds familiar, and current!
Are USAnian's sane? The world wants to know.
I’m not but I can’t speak for the MAGA cult—people without adequate language skills, empathy, or foresight, and who for years have been smacked upside their heads and inside their wallets by Trump’s spectacular corruption of everything decent and worthwhile. (Of course, I was born British.)
Glad to see you put SCOTUS reform at the top of the list. I do not share your pessimism about expansion; expansion is vitally necessary at this point. More justices can do more work. This might help shrink the "shadow docket." And the justices need to be subject to an enforceable code of ethics.
I would add to your list the necessity to bring back the inspectors-general and other "watchdogs" that Agent Orange and his sycophants summarily dismissed or hire new ones. Also, expand the IRS budget and staff to investigate fraud.
I'm praying that 20 Jan 28 becomes our nation's real Liberation Day, and that I'm here to see it.
It would also be useful to re-hire White House event planners.
I unearthed this tidbit about Franklin & Eleanor's White House. If invited to a White House dinner, savvy guests would eat their "real" meal beforehand, because Eleanor had installed Henrietta Nesbitt as WH cook, NOT chef, and following a hearty salted cod dinner would arrive a dessert of canned fruit floating in a red jello mold. The Roosevelts were too busy pulling the nation out of financial ruin and facing off with the Axis powers to worry about fine dining.
I suspect Trump is much the same only with hamburger and ice cream.
There's a difference. Trump provides cheap eats, but squanders millions to drag us all into debt slavery, whilst "redecorating" DC and welcoming battalions of masked goons:
https://steveschmidt.substack.com/p/the-photograph-that-convicts-the?img=https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F280880c0-8f27-4961-b468-0daa0880fdd3_1619x1100.jpeg&open=false
Totally agree.
In other words we need a Project 2028. Democrats need to have a plan. Republicans have been working on Project 2025 since Reagan. Years of careful brainwashing by right wing media and the NRA allowed them to implement it. So many things to do like seize that damn plane and sue for all the taxpayer money he has grifted from the taxpayers. Go after his family and friends too. And release the Epsoein files. Prosecute those who are named as attackers.
YES. I keep getting donation requests from DNC, Senate Majority PAC, DSCC, DCCC, but none of them show me a plan.
We need a list of actions that can be done to address the rest of tRump's term given his ability to veto legislation and the fact of his control of the Repukelican party. That might begin with the Epstein investigation. Publicly proving perversion and child sex abuse might losen his domination.
I agree. I think a lot of his actions are diversions having to do with the Epstein files. I've heard nothing about Judge Sullivan granting the 60 days that Blanche requested when he went to court on the deadline the judge had given him to release the Epstein files in full and to explain the redactions in what was released. Did Judge Sullivan grant the extension? If not, why isn't somebody sitting in jail for contempt until ready to comply? It's mind boggling to me that so much of this Trump second term seems to be court appearances... How do we get away from that?
The Trump cultists could not care less what's in the Epstein files. The only way to get at Trump is to put the fear of God into the plutocracts that control the GOP senators.
Some surveys say otherwise and that child sex abuse is one thing that they do care enough about to act.
Really, it all comes down to term limits on the Supreme Court, 12 would be better than 18, and removal of the money corrupting politics. Getting rid of gerrymandering is also critical. It's not obvious how any of this can be done.
How about just some enforceable ethical standards on the Supremes? The litany of perjury in confirmation, conflicts of interest, non-disclosure and even tax evasion is shocking! For some reason, Thomas's "forgiven" loan on his motor home, then not reported as taxable income, was on my mind today. Along with Rehnquist's two sons working for the Bush campaign when he voted on "Bush v. Gore." (How would you like to go into court in front of a judge who had a couple of kids that were employees of the guy on the other side?) The only last-ditch remedy now is impeachment, and the Senate wouldn't impeach Jabba the Hut with an R next to his name.
Its really hard to enforce ethics rules, actually hopeless under current law, but at least term limits gets rid of the crooks on a schedule. Guillotines and/or public caning for the real crooks might raise the ethics of the temptable also. The nonstop examples of blatant corruption going unpunished throughout the government are corrosive to democracy.
I have had an idea: take the case back to the Bar that originally licensed the scofflaw. With a provision, if found ineligible to practice in any State, disqualified from office as Justice. Those are the people who judge ethics cases all the time.
I was actually thinking of public stocks. But caning works too.
I did not know that story about Rehnquist... simply unbelievable.
I agree that amending the SCOTUS is of the most importance. The Republicans on the bench have given Trump, what he believes is Carte Blanche, to completely amend the constitution. The immunity ruling has to be removed or at least amended. 6 justices on the Supreme Court have created another Frankenstein monster.
I agree wholeheartedly with every single thing you have listed, Professor Reich! I believe I would work on them in a specific order. I would first begin by getting the Department of Justice in order and out of the clutches of that man in the White House. We must ensure the DOJ is able to carry out their mission of upholding the rule of law and keeping our country safe. Immediately pass a bill that provides term limits and a code of ethics for Supreme Court justices. Follow through on anyone holding a seat on the high court for over 18 years immediately step down and move to other courts. I also believe expanding the court is not out of reach. Protect press freedom and independence from being run by anyone having close ties or connections to the man in the White House! Getting big money out of politics is essential for preventing these oligarchs from controlling our country and end gerrymandering by any party. Eliminating the Electoral College and reviving voting rights for everyone is an absolute must so that ALL Americans have a voice in our government. Taxing the wealthy is so important as it has been proven that if these wealthy oligarchs paid their fair share in taxes, our programs would never have to worry about running out of money. The freedom of inquiry should never be held hostage by some wannabe dictator in government. Researchers provide truthful information that helps us. No one in the government should ever withhold truthful research just because it does not jive with their beliefs. There is one additional I would like to add, and for me, it is so very important. We absolutely must reverse the damage that has been done to the Department of Education! Making any of the above necessary changes won't be worth a thing if we do not have educated people in this country! It has been proven time and again that uneducated people are more gullible and can be conned more easily. We need a strong Department of Education that ensures Civics is returned to the classroom. Truthful history is taught. Guidelines for every level of school needs to be clear and educators must be allowed to teach their students! Education is key as far as I am concerned. If we do not make fixing the Department of Education a priority, nothing we do will matter as eventually another Hitleresque person will try and take over again.
Agree wholeheartedly. Watered down education caused by lack of funding is how we are in this trouble. School funding should not rely on real estate taxes alone.
Also a necessary change is to return to the Fairness Doctrine. Most media are monopolies which produce propaganda. We need truth in all media.
Absolutely, Diane! We need these tv broadcasters to return to reporting the news and NOT putting their spin on it! All we seem to ever get is what these people want you to believe rather than reporting actual facts and letting viewers decide how they want to digest the information. Lies, misinformation and propaganda is all these news agencies seem to be reporting anymore. They are trying to "normalize" this orange idiot and that does not sit well with me!
Living in a less populous state makes me value my vote more. Getting rid of the Electoral College will make me feel like there’s no reason to get out and vote because my vote will have little or no effect on who becomes the winner.
Jan, if we were to move to the national popular vote, it would seem to me that your vote would count more. Each state would determine the winner for that state and your vote would go far in determining who that would be.
Your list, Peggy, is excellent. You make strong points backing up your priorities. And revision of the Dep't of Education is essential as long as it incorporates what you say. But there is more, the DoE needs to revise it's priorities. Constant testing (I'm not saying all testing has to go) doesn't accomplish a whole lot. The results will be self evident when graduates understand and exemplify the civics and budgetary (as well as others) lessons they learned.
I wholeheartedly agree with you, Gin! Testing has gotten completely out of hand! The constant testing causes more problems than solves them! Students will learn when teachers are allowed to teach them! The way I see it, teachers are so overloaded with paperwork, they do not have time to actually interact and teach their students! Yes, the DoE does need to re-evaluate their mission. Is it to ensure our students are getting the absolute best education possible, or is it to just monitor teachers and only rely on test results.
Agree… however none of this will be accomplished if we don’t address the money . There must be a limit on how much can be spent on any election. Local,!state and national. We have built cars that are very fast, yet we restrict their speed with limits. We having zoning to protect property. We have codes to protect consumers. We need limits on election spending, terms, and election campaigns. Just because you can build a car that can travel faster than other cars does not give anyone the right to speed. To say this will be difficult is an excellent example of understatement. So was going to the moon, and trying to maintain a democratic style of government. We can do what we put our hearts and minds to.
The solution does not contain any ethnic tests. This is another problem to address.
Water, or rather the scarcity of water should have floated up to the top of the major problems to be addressed. Even Mr. Trump knows there is a problem… he acknowledged it… he has no solution and does not have the integrity, nor intellect to address this for our nation or the world.
Yes, 250 is a great place to start the great remodel.. I pray we can agree on what we want the end product to be.
“We have built cars that are very fast, yet we restrict their speed with limits.”
The problem is that the approach we took with this is that we’ve allowed the manufacturers to make cars that can do 140 miles an hour street legal. And then we hope that putting up a sign along the road will discourage humans from using that excessive power in their right foot.
If we wanted to actually succeed in addressing this problem, we would put a non-hackable governor restricting the top speed of all commercial and private vehicles.
If you need an education in this problem, tune into a few cop chase videos on YouTube. That’ll open your eyes. It’s insane. It’s carnage. It’s stupid what we’re doing.
Quality comment, thankyou.
"Get big money out of politics." This is key, IMO. In Canada, there is no legal way for a billionaire, a corporation, or a Super PAC‑type entity to put millions of dollars into a political campaign. Canada also limits what parties and candidates may spend during an election. SO: winning an election can't be bought.
I would add: eliminate first-past-the-post in favor of proportional representation.
Prof. Reich, this is a brilliant list. To this, I would add one more point, and this is not my idea. A good friend of mine proposed this, and IMO she’s spot on.
Whoever is running for a political office, but especially the President and Vice President, MUST work a regular job for at least 2 years. No investments to live off of. They need to work a 9-5 job, or 4 part time jobs, and see what it’s actually like to earn a basic wage. You know, in the area of $50K - $60K a year- and I know that for many people, that amount is utterly astronomical. But, I hope you get the idea. Let anyone running for the office of US President see what it takes to just keep a roof over your head; feed yourself and your family; pay your bills; pay a mortgage or rent; pay for your kid’s schooling, daycare, etc. The Prez and everyone else in the halls of government must have experience just being a normal person. No privilege.
I hope that the spirit of this is understood.
I would add the Australian-style preferential voting system. This gives independents and small party candidates a chance to rise above the dominant major party, if enough voters favour them.
You list your preferences 1,2,3 etc.
The independent may be your four first choice, but your vote is not wasted, if he/she fails to reach the top two. Your no.2 vote will then be counted for that candidate, and so on.
Gives small parties etc a better chance in a duopoly.
Colleen:
Good on ya, mate!
I think what you are referring to is ranked choice voting. Here in Michigan, we have a petition circulating to amend our state constitution to allow ranked choice voting throughout all elections.
In my opinion, it would not only encourage more people to offer to serve in elected office, it would also encourage more voters to believe that their vote matters.
\Vince S
The ten are equally importentbut to prevent this of happing again bamning big money out of politics would be a priority. Next to set a time limit that judges are in the supreme coury, however 18 years is too long a time limit of 12 years is more appropriate. There should also be a clause that any misconductt by a judge leads to bannishment from his/ker podition.
good point on term limits for judges
I would replace #7, which is extortion and blackmail (already illegal), with severe restrictions on pardon abuse, especially for monetary gain by a president.
You set out a rather ambitious agenda Robert, but practically speaking is it realistic? Even if the Dems take control of Congress in the November election, will they be willing or able to do any of that? We shall see, but I have my doubts.
Correct. The problems have persisted. Democrats know what they could pursue but they aren't pursuing them and theres no assurance that reforms would pass or would solve the problems.. Plus sadly AI, now master of the universe, wasnt consulted to see how it was programmed even tho it is, sadly, a force to be reckoned with. Plus theres a hierarchy of solutions. They need to be prioritized. And the public needs to be mobilized.
AI is definitely not the "master of the universe," nor is it a "bare essential" needed to replace one of the 10 listed.
I think AI has the potential to be of considerable assistance in the future, with regard to ending gerrymandering and designing and creating truly representative legislative districts. But my guess is that that is one of those nice things that we won’t be allowed to have. Too many of our senators and representatives are bought.
Right. But it can be consulted. Use the super technology against the tech giants if possible.
Tight. So how is reich planning to end gerrymandering. AI is one of many resources to be contacted, not the only source. There has to be bational outcry. Simply saying it should end is whistling in the wind since sup ct allows gerrymandering.
Right. Not tight.
Trump will still be president and can veto, plus there will still be plenty of Republican sheep in Congress.
Roght, which is why forceful arguments have to be made showing how the country is damaged by the decisions, ie how many millions of people are hurt
I agree. If Trump's excesses cannot stir them into action then surely nothing will.