WASHINGTON–Elizabeth Warren called for a constitutional amendment to protect the right to vote and for ethics rules to be expanded to cover the Supreme Court. Beto O’Rourke floated an end to the Electoral College, called for a national ban on gerrymandering, and promised as president, he’d sign an executive order requiring his cabinet to hold monthly town halls. Bernie Sanders called for the public funding of federal elections and making Election Day a national holiday.
At the first major presidential cattle call of the campaign cycle Monday, many leaders in the Democratic presidential field fully embraced democracy reform as a key 2020 issue.
Those weren’t the only calls for democracy reform. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) called for a new voting rights act and a new national law guaranteeing former felons the right to vote. Former federal Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro called for an expansion of the Freedom of Information Act to cover Congress.
“The party’s starting to coalesce around these broader structural forms to democracy,” Ezra Levin, the co-chair of the progressive Indivisible Project, told TPM.
Some of these proposals are newer than others — Democrats have called for repairing the Voting Rights Act since the Supreme Court gutted it in 2013, for overturning the Citizens United Supreme Court decision that gutted campaign finance laws, and have fought voter identification laws for more than a decade. But candidates are putting these issues on equal footing as more traditional policies like climate change and healthcare for the first time.
Others were brand new: It was the first time O’Rourke called for an executive order “requiring every single cabinet member to hold a meeting every single month,” and the first time he fully embraced ending the Electoral College.
The We the People summit was cohosted by the Service Employees International Union, Communications Workers of America, Planned Parenthood Action Fund, the Sierra Club, and the Center for Popular Democracy Action, a democracy reform group.
Not every new left-wing proposal was embraced by the candidates — there was more hesitation from some on more bare-knuckled power fights like packing the Supreme Court or ending the Senate filibuster.
“If Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, and Donald Trump had two years like they just had [without the legislative filibuster]… we would have lost that battle, Obamacare would be gone,” Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) said, reiterating a previously stated position.
Sanders said he worried that some liberals’ proposal to expand the Supreme Court by two seats to respond to the controversial appointments of Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh would lead to Republicans doing the same thing, but floated another potentially major reform.
“My worry is the next time the Republicans are in power they will do the same thing,” he said. “What I do think may make sense is if not term limits, then rotating judges to the appeals court as well, letting them get out of the Supreme Court and bringing in new blood.”
The liberal organizers who’ve been pushing these reforms were thrilled at the debate, noting that some issues that were barely on the radar before this year are quickly becoming major debates in the primary — and some are moving towards the Democratic consensus position.
“If this event had happened two months ago, I would have said there’s been a lot of action on taxes, on healthcare, on environment, but we just haven’t seen the candidates talk about democracy very much,” Levin said. “Now, it’s the talk of the town — this is what everyone’s getting pushed on. … All the issues have moved faster than I thought.”
Mustn’t have that.
Not here!
I’m all in for all of those ideas.
There is a tendency for Democrats running in primaries to start creating laundry lists of positions that are popular with various restricted constituencies rather than focusing on key broad issues. This can be a problem.
So.
A constitutional amendment to protect the right to vote: Ok with me, but what is the text?
For ethics rules to be expanded to cover the Supreme Court: judges can be impeached already so it’s not clear this is necessary.
End to the Electoral College: ok but this would require a constitutional amendment and because it disempower a significant number of small states, it’s probably not going to fly
A national ban on gerrymandering: Not sure what that means but if it means creating a uniform means of algorithmically creating boundaries for congressional districts that is somehow immune to partisan political influence, yes that would be great. But this would require another constitutional amendment since now the boundaries are drawn by the individual states.
An executive order requiring his cabinet to hold monthly town halls: It’s not clear what this means, but it seems like that’s a bit much. Every month - does this mean the entire cabinet at once? Each agency separately? It is important to get input on agency regulations but that is already done in normal administrations. The logistics and expense of doing this every month add up to a dubious cost-benefit ratio.
Public funding of federal elections and making Election Day a national holiday. OK - this could be done legislatively. Both are good commonsensical ideas. But not to republicans, of course. Which is the point.
A new voting rights act: sounds good to me.
A new national law guaranteeing former felons the right to vote: not sure making “felons’ rights” a key plank in your platform is a great idea. I recognize the importance of acknowledging (in most cases) that people who have completed their sentences or released on parole should be granted a restoration of political rights (what is the justification of penalizing people for life when sentences are finite?).
Expansion of the Freedom of Information Act to cover Congress: OK by me but be careful what you wish for.
Repairing the Voting Rights Act since the Supreme Court gutted it in 2013: Great
Overturning the Citizens United Supreme Court decision: Also Great
(Fighting) voter identification laws: yes if they are discriminatory
The thing is, it would make more sense, to me, to talk about (and provide specifics about) more key general issues: the importance of funding for education, health care, childcare, infrastructure maintenance and improvement, scientific research; for developing a foreign and national security policy that seeks to stabilize the world, for the benefit of all mankind. The need to do this - the rationale for why it is good for the federal government to do this in the service of the citizenry and for a positive and progressive future for this country, that is what they need to be talking about.
Sander’s comments about SCOTUS make sense to me.
Yeah, I’ve been in favor of packing the Court to compensate for the GOP’s theft, but that’s a two-edged sword. Rotating justices off the Court is not an idea I’d heard before, but I’d be interested to learn more and think through it a bit.
Hey, Republicans. Let’s talk!
You know you want some of these things. Let’s try to help each other, instead of letting the politicians run up so much debt.