Instead of throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks, immediately get rid of the gerontocracy (Schumer, Pelosi), regroup, find a leader with some balls and declare open warfare on Republicans. It's not like there isn't any ammunition.
Exactly, the conservatives have spent the last 40 years gradually doing exactly this and the Democrats have spent the last 40 years denying that reality and laughing off the right wing, talk show type populists while they slowly took control of the GOP and the court system.
Way too little, way too late.
That would have been useful and a great idea over a decade ago.
Now it's just "let's do this" and nothing will happen. Its too late.
Yeah even if they did actually repeal it, which they won't, it's really closing the stable door after the horse has bolted at this point IMO.
Because with the current administration, you can say it's illegal to accept money from so-and-so, and they'll just go "fuck you" and do it anyway and nobody will will stop them or bring consequences, so ... yeah. This is kind of doing time, not talking time.
This is one of the single biggest changes we can make to our current electoral system.
Should’ve done this in 2021. This could’ve changed the 2024 election entirely.
It should have been done immediately, when the ruling came down in 2010, when the Democrats had a majority in the House and Senate, and Obama was the President.
I was one year away from graduating college at the time, getting simultaneous bachelor's degrees in Econ and Poli Sci, trying to explain to people how bad the situation was, and how this may be our only shot at fixing it.
But uh, nope, Obama had already won, the Dems had already swept the House and Senate to near, but not quite super majorities, and most Dem voters were too busy gloating over these victories and pretending that they meant Republicans would never have power over the Federal government again, and actually? you're an asshole for implying Obama and the Dems aren't perfect, in fact you sound racist, get away from me.
Instead, that was indeed the highwater mark for Dem control in the Federal government (in the last 20 years), and they squandered it, then lost some House and Senate seats, then doomed us all by ratfucking Bernie to run the perfect encapsulation of their sanctimonious and haughty elitism, Hillary, who lost to a rapist, racist, fraudlent fascist.
cue curb your enthusiasm theme
Oh gee, another Dem exercise in futility. What a bunch of feckless losers.
Do not waste time talking about a non-starter.
You need 290 votes in the House, you have (at most) 215. You need 75 Republicans to flip.
If, miracle of miracle, that happens, it goes to the Senate where you need 60 votes to end a filibuster, you have (at best) 47. You need 13 Republicans breaking rank to end cloture + 7 more to pass it.
Then it goes to the states for ratification, you need 38. In 2024 19 states went to Harris which means you need all of them +19 Trump states.
Yeahhh...
The biggest issue is that Dems get rich from this shit too. Even if they had a massive majority it wouldn't pass.
Check the comments, 75% of the people here don't believe the simple fact that the Democrats have not had a supermajority to pass such an amendment since 1979, 30 years before the infamous Citizens United win at the Supreme Court became the current interpretation of law.
They don't know that the legislation discussed in this post has been brought to vote multiple times by Democrats over the years under different names, and that this is just the latest instance.
They just want to complain that Democrats 'don't do anything good when they have power, and wont even try when they know they cant win' - handwaving away reality.
So this will pass and we're all wrong?
The thing is, at the very least this forces the Republicans (and for that matter Democrats) to pick a side on the issue.
Citizens United is extremely unpopular with the Republican base, as it is with the Democrat base. If a Republican voter sees that their Congress person voted to maintain citizens United, they might be upset.
The GOP will just lie and blame everything on "radical leftists". Which don't really exist in the US.
Yeah, the sole reason they're suggesting it now is because they know it's too little too late. It will go nowhere and we all know this, them Dems will be like 'oh but we tried!' Fucking useless.
Read the article.
Do this and keep doing it until it works. This isn't a moonshot. It's normal, sensible change. Everybody shut your fucking mouths with all this secondary "it isn't going to work now" bitch energy. Get behind the shit you want, loudly.
I hate to say it but proposing a constitutional amendment is just virtue signaling at this point. There isn’t a snowballs chance in hell this passes even with 100% democrat support.
I appreciate the thought and effort but put forth legislation that actually has a chance at passing.
Would have been a lot cooler if Biden did this as a executive action. But you know spinless Democrats and all that...
would have been more useful when you had any kind of power to get a bill passed, but thanks anyway i guess
Stow that shit. This is exactly what they need to be doing. They need to make the argument to the American people that they have better ideas and a better plan for America, and then create a voting record for Congress so they can beat them in the next election. Of course it won't pass, but if they give up without even trying, then the Nazis can act like they are the only option.
Now they ask for this? After having zero majority in either house? Acter letting a nazi waltz into the white house?
The Democrats have a long history of waiting until Republicans hold a majority in both houses to propose milquetoast change.
Keeps their name in the papers without actually having to do anything.
The Democrats have a long history of waiting until Republicans hold a majority in both houses to propose milquetoast change.
Every time. Legalizing weed? Only when Republicans control. Making abortion federally protected? Only Republican control. Raising the minimum wage? Only when Republicans control.
When they are in office? Never one of those, but pushing for bills that get everyone in congress paid more by their handlers called lobbyists.
Nice idea, but you're a decade late and billions of dollars short.
OTOH, it has always been important to keep introducing bills showing what you stand for even when they have no chance of passing, which (theoretically) builds public support over time (by getting press coverage and talking about it in interviews and on the campaign trail). For example Repubs have introduced bills to kill all or parts of the ACA over 50 times since it was passed, and they do that with lots of other issues--they just push and push and push their agenda regardless of whether it can pass.
But Dems don't. It's hard to take this effort by Dems seriously when the first time they've attempted to do this is only after the effects of the Citizens United ruling have come to full fruition. I know the only time they've had the majority again since the ACA was passed was the first half of Biden's term and they did get some good things done during that time. But the idea is to relentlessly try to do what you're sent there by your voters to do. So I guess it's a ... start?
Yes. Suture up that corpse.
Yep, now that it's far too late and the damage is done and they don't have a majority.
Do the people in these comment sections not grasp how Constitutional amendments work?
It requires two thirds of the Senate. Which Democrats have not had in the past half century.
That is why Democrats didn't try it when they had a majority. Because it would not work.
People really just want an excuse to blame Democrats for everything.
It's far more complicated than that to get an amendment passed including a route that doesn't require Congress.
Second, there is value in trying things that will fail. It sends a signal to the citizenry that this isn't acceptable. This can be a good just as much as it can damage their reputation. In my opinion, the Dems need to rebuild a reputation that is connected to the people in some meaningful way. I don't get the sense that Democratic leadership see that as the core issue
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News