My point is that the executive branch of a modern government has a massive amount of power and Presidential system concentrates all that power in one person while crippling the ability of the legislature to rein them in.
Disagree. The lack of will to rein in the Executive does not constitute the lack of ability. Congress can severely constrain what the president does by what and where it appropriates, as but one example. That Congress chooses not to do this is regrettable, but not anything addressed by your proposal.
The accurate teaching of history will, by its nature, make people feel uncomfortable, guilty and perhaps ashamed. The Florida bill is clear - as I note in its text below, that any teaching that causes students to feel those emotions will be illegal under the bill.
The “should” is key, because it’s a restriction on preaching of norms rather than on teaching of facts.
Because this isn't language directing the teaching of norms:
(8)(a) Subjecting any individual, as a condition of
45 employment, membership, certification, licensing, credentialing,
46 or passing an examination, to training, instruction, or any
47 other required activity that espouses, promotes, advances,
48 inculcates, or compels such individual to believe any of the
49 following concepts constitutes discrimination based on race,
50 color, sex, or national origin under this section:
51 1. Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin are
52 morally superior to members of another race, color, sex, or
53 national origin.
54 2. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
55 or national origin, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive,
56 whether consciously or unconsciously.
57 3. An individual’s moral character or status as either
58 privileged or oppressed is necessarily determined by his or her
59 race, color, sex, or national origin.
60 4. Members of one race, color, sex, or national origin
61 cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to
62 race, color, sex, or national origin.
63 5. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
64 or national origin, bears responsibility for, or should be
65 discriminated against or receive adverse treatment because of,
66 actions committed in the past by other members of the same race,
67 color, sex, or national origin.
68 6. An individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex,
69 or national origin, should be discriminated against or receive
70 adverse treatment to achieve diversity, equity, or inclusion.
71 7. An individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or
72 any other form of psychological distress on account of his or
73 her race, color, sex, or national origin.
74 8. Such virtues as merit, excellence, hard work, fairness,
75 neutrality, objectivity, and racial colorblindness are racist or
76 sexist, or were created by members of a particular race, color,
77 sex, or national origin to oppress members of another race,
78 color, sex, or national origin.
or this:
3. The health education curriculum For students in grades 6
204 through 12, shall include an awareness of the benefits of sexual
205 abstinence as the expected standard and the consequences of
206 teenage pregnancy.
um no. What you are being told is some of this is cr@p, some of this is pernicious lies and some of it needs to be moved on from because the world has changed, and you keep throwing up your hands and saying you can't tell what's true and what isn't. And that telling is, generally coming from one side of the aisle.
When you vote for a politician who supports racist policies, you perpetuate a racist system even when you, as an individual, are not prone to acting in racist ways.
But if I had to pick a date when commercial television decided amassing corporate money and providing entertainment were its central mission, when it consciously chose to become a carnival act, it would probably be Feb. 25, 2003, when MSNBC took Phil Donahue off the air because of his opposition to the calls for war in Iraq.
Donahue had folks on to explain their views - but unlike Rogan he wasn't willing to present it as a "both sides are valid" sort of thing. He went after the bigots' nd the anti-vaxxers in a way Rogan would never dream of.
I have mixed feelings on the whole thing, since I think both misinformation and silencing of dissent can be legitimately dangerous
Where this debate - and many others - cross the line is misinformation has been rebranded by certain parts of the media as dissent or opinion. From there it's a lot easier to scream about being deplatformed or cancelled.
The Senate needs realistic rules. And states need a way to recall senators. Beyond that there is not much else that could be reformed if we are going to keep two per state.
If your objective was to make America into a UK style parliamentary democracy, then your proposal would be interesting. But we aren't - for good reason, and thus your proposal fails on a number of levels. Rather then push back on the language, I think that we can have a better discussion on your reasoning, and command of how the US government works (Or not):
As of the 2020 apportionment, Wyoming has 3.8 times as many electors per voter as California.
Which is precisely why this will never fly in the US – the rural states don’t want and will never accept the more urban states dictating policy to them. We have seen that in where, when and how resistance sprang up to mask and vaccine mandates.
Also, I’m hoping that proportional representation puts nomination more into the hands of the party leadership than voters. Ranking candidates would be hard to do with a primary system, so hopefully that will increase the power of party bosses.
You have been paying attention to all the state and national party bosses censuring Republican politicians for not towing the Trump line haven’t you? Good, solid, moderate conservatives are being drummer out of the Republican Party left and right by the Party, through its support of ever more hard core candidates in the primaries. The Party is serving the voters the candidates it wants, and voters (at least in the primaries) are not bucking that service.
Section 4 is where I make bigger changes. This is where I eliminate Presidential Elections. I think the evidence is pretty clear that parliamentary systems (where the Executive branch is explicitly subordinate to the legislature) have held up better than Presidential systems.
Hard pass. Parliamentary systems aren’t all that and two bags of chips (American or British). They gave the UK both David Cameron and Boris Johnson, neither of whom has covered themselves in political or economic glory over BREXIT (or Covid parties). It’s a different system, but its not better.
The Founders couldn’t have seen the modern administrative state coming, but it’s here nevertheless and a system that entrusts the President with diplomacy, the Navy and the Post Office has different requirements than one where the Federal Government is intimately involved in the daily affairs of every resident of the country.
Some form of administrative state has to exist, in order to “Take care that the laws shall be administered.” The UK has quite the administrative state too, and at least according to the punditry it doesn't function any better. Its what is required of any government in a modern, multi-cultural democracy.
Section 5 puts federal territories on par with states in a similar manner to Washington DC, but adjusted for the new apportionment formula.
In terms of representation, territories and DC are on equal footing already – they are represented in the House by non-voting Delegates who are allowed to sit on and chair House Committees. Unlike DC, however, territories are not presently governed directly by the House, though DC has some limited home rule thanks to legislation in the late 1980’s. Frankly I’d rather we simply allow those territories that wish to to become independent nations.
I would expect that Presidents would be routinely removed if Congress changed sufficiently mid-term, and I consider that acceptable.
Most of America’s oligarchy wouldn’t in as much as this would create massive economic instability. And frankly, from inside the permanent civil service, we’d get even less done then we do now, because we’d be spending most of our time retraining yet another Administration, instead of providing the services Congress mandates through federal statute. That constant retraining would certainly constitute waste . . .
It is only a matter of time before Neil Young’s statements, behavior, and past associations offend someone. While Young is at best guilty of situational inconsistency, he’s at worst advocating for the marketplace of ideas to be cleansed of ideas he personally finds intolerable.
You are aware of all the bills currently underway in Republican's state legislatures that seek to ban teaching anything to kids that "might" cause them discomfort? If you really support thoughtful engaged debate then, yes, the Joe Rogan debate is a complete misdirection.
I think that is what I miss: the restraint of my upbringing and a decades-gone society. The ability to resist weighing in with agreement, condemnation, outrage, or judgement, and discovering a certain virtue through apathy.
That same period of restraint saw women, Blacks, Hispanics, and LGBTQ+ people treated - at best - as second class citizens. That restraint allowed racism, sexism, misogyny and whole host of other moral degradations to grow and flourish in the US. That restraint laid the foundations for today's growing anti-democratic crisis in the US precisely because not all opinions, beliefs or experiences had an equal seat at the table. Back in that day you, as a woman, wouldn't have been encouraged, much less platformed, to write opinion pieces.
We can't and shouldn't, stuff that genie back into any bottle.
Did you really try to debate the existence of racism in the US by resorting to anti-Semitic tropes? Wow. That's one of the most ballsy things I've seen around here.
Complex situations can often be better handled with fewer rules and greater personal interaction.
You, Chip, and me actually agree here - a lot of this requires long term professional support to reverse. While some larger religious charity organizations are up to parts of the task (Catholic Charities in some major metro areas) it really does take government agency intervention and stable tax funding to achieve this objective because of the long term nature of the problem.
One of them any reasons I detest gerrymandering, including by Democrats. Thankfully, democrats don't really do it anywhere other then New York state right now, and so its a lot easier to point out, condemn and try to undo. As we are seeing over and over elsewhere, Republicans are using it as an organized practice, and ditching non-partisan and bi-partisan alternatives. The Courts, so far, are calling them out for it.
New York should not be read as anything in the way of national trend - its been a solidly blue state for some time, and while Republicans do have some representation, Democrats don't need to gerrymander to keep their majorities.
That aside, no this isn't the hardball democrats need to play. Dismantle Republican gerrymandering, win elections through strong and consistent messaging, and deliver for constituents. Its a formula that actually works.
On “A Proposal for the 28th Amendment”
Disagree. The lack of will to rein in the Executive does not constitute the lack of ability. Congress can severely constrain what the president does by what and where it appropriates, as but one example. That Congress chooses not to do this is regrettable, but not anything addressed by your proposal.
"
The best way for us to get ride of the unitary executive is for the Legislative Branch to get back to legislating.
On “Of Phil Donahue and Joe Rogan: Leaning into the Shrug and Carrying On”
The accurate teaching of history will, by its nature, make people feel uncomfortable, guilty and perhaps ashamed. The Florida bill is clear - as I note in its text below, that any teaching that causes students to feel those emotions will be illegal under the bill.
"
Your smuggness is showing. Its not winning you any friends, but its easy to see.
"
Because this isn't language directing the teaching of norms:
or this:
https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/148/BillText/Filed/HTML
"
um no. What you are being told is some of this is cr@p, some of this is pernicious lies and some of it needs to be moved on from because the world has changed, and you keep throwing up your hands and saying you can't tell what's true and what isn't. And that telling is, generally coming from one side of the aisle.
"
Because you don't think those corporately controlled editorial boards would do that absent government direction?
On “Suspicious Persons, Fed Ex drivers and White Entitlement”
Equality of opportunity. Which doesn't yet uniformly exist in this country.
On “Of Phil Donahue and Joe Rogan: Leaning into the Shrug and Carrying On”
Yes they can. Or so our legal system tells us.
On “Suspicious Persons, Fed Ex drivers and White Entitlement”
When you vote for a politician who supports racist policies, you perpetuate a racist system even when you, as an individual, are not prone to acting in racist ways.
On “Of Phil Donahue and Joe Rogan: Leaning into the Shrug and Carrying On”
Hardly:
https://billmoyers.com/2013/03/25/the-day-that-tv-news-died/
"
Donahue had folks on to explain their views - but unlike Rogan he wasn't willing to present it as a "both sides are valid" sort of thing. He went after the bigots' nd the anti-vaxxers in a way Rogan would never dream of.
"
Where this debate - and many others - cross the line is misinformation has been rebranded by certain parts of the media as dissent or opinion. From there it's a lot easier to scream about being deplatformed or cancelled.
On “A Proposal for the 28th Amendment”
The Senate needs realistic rules. And states need a way to recall senators. Beyond that there is not much else that could be reformed if we are going to keep two per state.
"
If your objective was to make America into a UK style parliamentary democracy, then your proposal would be interesting. But we aren't - for good reason, and thus your proposal fails on a number of levels. Rather then push back on the language, I think that we can have a better discussion on your reasoning, and command of how the US government works (Or not):
Which is precisely why this will never fly in the US – the rural states don’t want and will never accept the more urban states dictating policy to them. We have seen that in where, when and how resistance sprang up to mask and vaccine mandates.
You have been paying attention to all the state and national party bosses censuring Republican politicians for not towing the Trump line haven’t you? Good, solid, moderate conservatives are being drummer out of the Republican Party left and right by the Party, through its support of ever more hard core candidates in the primaries. The Party is serving the voters the candidates it wants, and voters (at least in the primaries) are not bucking that service.
Hard pass. Parliamentary systems aren’t all that and two bags of chips (American or British). They gave the UK both David Cameron and Boris Johnson, neither of whom has covered themselves in political or economic glory over BREXIT (or Covid parties). It’s a different system, but its not better.
Some form of administrative state has to exist, in order to “Take care that the laws shall be administered.” The UK has quite the administrative state too, and at least according to the punditry it doesn't function any better. Its what is required of any government in a modern, multi-cultural democracy.
In terms of representation, territories and DC are on equal footing already – they are represented in the House by non-voting Delegates who are allowed to sit on and chair House Committees. Unlike DC, however, territories are not presently governed directly by the House, though DC has some limited home rule thanks to legislation in the late 1980’s. Frankly I’d rather we simply allow those territories that wish to to become independent nations.
Most of America’s oligarchy wouldn’t in as much as this would create massive economic instability. And frankly, from inside the permanent civil service, we’d get even less done then we do now, because we’d be spending most of our time retraining yet another Administration, instead of providing the services Congress mandates through federal statute. That constant retraining would certainly constitute waste . . .
On “Of Phil Donahue and Joe Rogan: Leaning into the Shrug and Carrying On”
You are aware of all the bills currently underway in Republican's state legislatures that seek to ban teaching anything to kids that "might" cause them discomfort? If you really support thoughtful engaged debate then, yes, the Joe Rogan debate is a complete misdirection.
That same period of restraint saw women, Blacks, Hispanics, and LGBTQ+ people treated - at best - as second class citizens. That restraint allowed racism, sexism, misogyny and whole host of other moral degradations to grow and flourish in the US. That restraint laid the foundations for today's growing anti-democratic crisis in the US precisely because not all opinions, beliefs or experiences had an equal seat at the table. Back in that day you, as a woman, wouldn't have been encouraged, much less platformed, to write opinion pieces.
We can't and shouldn't, stuff that genie back into any bottle.
On “Suspicious Persons, Fed Ex drivers and White Entitlement”
Did you really try to debate the existence of racism in the US by resorting to anti-Semitic tropes? Wow. That's one of the most ballsy things I've seen around here.
On “Of School Lunch, Farm Bills, Free Riders, and Book Clubs”
You, Chip, and me actually agree here - a lot of this requires long term professional support to reverse. While some larger religious charity organizations are up to parts of the task (Catholic Charities in some major metro areas) it really does take government agency intervention and stable tax funding to achieve this objective because of the long term nature of the problem.
"
A good many. Some communities are trying to house then help but as Chip notes above that's not a silver bullet; it takes money; and it takes time.
"
Private prisons are a $4 Billion per year business. I'm guessing they lobby like a $4 Billion a year business segment.
"
Bingo!
On “Are Democrats Finally Learning How to Play Hardball?”
As opposed to the "Ends justify the means" scorched earth approach from Republicans?
On “Of School Lunch, Farm Bills, Free Riders, and Book Clubs”
We forcibly institutionalized the mentally ill, drug addicts, and pretty much anyone who wasn't neurotypical (and a fair number of LGBTQ+ folks).
On “Are Democrats Finally Learning How to Play Hardball?”
One of them any reasons I detest gerrymandering, including by Democrats. Thankfully, democrats don't really do it anywhere other then New York state right now, and so its a lot easier to point out, condemn and try to undo. As we are seeing over and over elsewhere, Republicans are using it as an organized practice, and ditching non-partisan and bi-partisan alternatives. The Courts, so far, are calling them out for it.
"
New York should not be read as anything in the way of national trend - its been a solidly blue state for some time, and while Republicans do have some representation, Democrats don't need to gerrymander to keep their majorities.
That aside, no this isn't the hardball democrats need to play. Dismantle Republican gerrymandering, win elections through strong and consistent messaging, and deliver for constituents. Its a formula that actually works.