412 Comments

There's always Black-bean-Queen Ivanka.

Expand full comment

The people should demand that the filibuster be abolished in the Senate. The Senate is the heart of continuous Republican control over the government. It is undemocratic to the core.

If we are going to elect a Senate majority, and not kill the filibuster too, we might as well go home. It's not enough to put the Republicans in the minority. They play that game very well.

So, no. On the first day of the new Congress, majority rule has to be restored to all of its legislative functions. On the first day, the Senate Rules for the Congress can and should be adopted by a simple majority, without the filibuster.

If we don't do that, then the Congress won't be able to do Big Thing No. 2 on the first day: increase the number of Justices on the Supreme Court. I like the number 13. That would permit President Biden to submit nominees for four additional justices on his first day in office, whose confirmation in the Senate would require only a majority vote. It seems like Merrick Garland should be the first nominee, and the first confirmed.

By early February, a filibuster-free Senate Democratic majority can turn the Supreme Court from a 5-4 conservative majority to an 8-5 liberal majority. Without the filibuster, we can save the Court...fast. The day we have an 8-5 majority on the Court, the viability of anti-choice, anti-LGBTQ, religious freedom, and other right-wing litigation will be greatly damaged. In contrast, the path to overturning Citizens United and other outrages will become clear.

Democratic Senators will need help getting their minds right about this. An incredible mass of our problems emanate from the Senate, which has become de facto a fourth branch of government gone rogue. The root of all the devastation by Republican Presidents and Senate Republicans is this: in the Senate, ten states with total populations of 9 million people have 20 Senators to represent them, while California and Michigan, with 50 million residents, only get four. When Brett Kavanagh was nominated to the Court, the 10 million residents of Michigan got two votes, while Wyoming's 575,000 residents also got the same two votes, such is insane.

So it is, my friends, how eight little red states with about 7 million super-privileged residents make the other 325 million people do what Republicans want and get the government and judges they will allow.

Beyond all that, these small red states have abandoned the idea of an American Republic to get behind Trump's anti-republican (little "r") instincts instead. Under those circumstances, residents of Michigan would be reasonable in questioning any value from being in an equal union in the Senate with Wyoming and South Dakota.

One senator from both states is also in Senate leadership, to compound the outrage. John Thune, whose constituency is the size of a congressional district, exercises enormous power over the populations of all blue states while acting as Trump's stooge. Maybe that seemed like a good idea when SD was admitted as a state. Not so much now.

Expand full comment

they're all just desperately trying to justify their Republican stench, fuck all of them and the horses they rode in on

Expand full comment

canned clam/monster shortage coming to a grocery store near you!

Expand full comment

It won't happen, but I agree. in twenty years 70% of the Senate will be controlled by 30% of the population of the US. Because the way to make sure a proportionate legislative body (via the Constitution) goes through the Senate, the tinytowners in Wyoming and Vermont and North Dakota will end up the bosses of New York and California and places where shit gets done.

Expand full comment

No, this is them playing the long game, making themselves look independent of the party.

Expand full comment

We'll treat the Republicans as fairly as they treated Merrick Garland.

Expand full comment

At the beginning of the session, change that rule to say they could change the rule at any time in the session.

Expand full comment

ahem . . . that's "with the horses they rode in on."

[ the entire horse! ]

Expand full comment

and there are afew places that should have representatives, not the non-voting kind.

like Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the US Virgin Islands...

[ even without expanding the number of seats, PR would get three! ]

ETA - some states should be forced to share a rep (like if they have less than say, a million population alone).

Expand full comment

how about we keep them but reduce their power to a few cerimonial duties . . . like marching in parades on the 4th or naming Post Offices?

Expand full comment

Hopefully through the earth's crust. Doesn't matter, it was an incentive. If it fell through it was because it was exposed.

Expand full comment

Many, including me, have said it, but I'll do it again. We should have hung the leaders, and not readmitted the Confederate states until they ratified every amendment. Selling out reconstruction was a terrible mistake. The Lost Cause BS should never have been allowed to take hold. We have so many sins to repent of.

Expand full comment

Democrats might romanticize the filibuster as a tool for compromise but Republicans use it to ignore that Democratic presidents are ever elected.

Precisely. Put King, Synema, Manchin, Jones (Doug, you're breaking my heart!) and Tester on the Primary Them Outta There list.

Expand full comment

As a descendant of Confederates, I could not agree more.

Expand full comment

I prefer to set it at one rep=the population of the lowest populated state. Go up from there.

Expand full comment