1 Boost
0 Likes
I think these are important, but I also think that the vote margin in this election is huge -- ~13% or more popular vote, and something like 80 votes in the House and 10 in the Senate. So, for me, the question is, is that enough of a signal that the Congress actually has a mandate to propose and pass positive legislation that actually helps Americans?
@evan
If the Dems don't take advantage of their majority, they will not be in power after the next election. It's that simple. They must work for ALL Americans, not just the rich ones.
They don't have a record of being any better than the GOP when it comes to sucking up to the very wealthy, or getting much of anything done, beyond revenge.
Take a look at Fetterman. DINO.
Especially in the Trump era, the legislative branch as an originator of policy seems ridiculous. The legislative branch barely gets anything done -- filibusters and vetoes lock up almost all legislation, except for the annual budget bill which can be negotiated between the chambers through reconciliation.
I think one of the big disappointments with the Biden Administration is that it was also blocked in this way. Every time progressive legislation like climate change work was proposed, it was locked up by filibuster and other procedural blocks. What did get through, like the Inflation Reduction Act, was unique and rare.
But that's not what the legislative branch is designed to do. It was designed to pass legislation. That's what we elect representatives for; that's what democracy is about.
One of the blockages to passing legislation -- an extremely tight vote margin in the legislative bodies -- is gone. A Democratic House could lose 30 or 50 votes from its own caucus, and still pass a bill. The Senate is tighter, but it can handle a defection or three from modern-day Joe Manchins or Kirsten Synemas and still pass a bill.
@evan Yes, but not in that centrist self-serving way that they’ve done implementing neoliberalism since Bill Clinton and even, to a certain extent, Jimmy Carter (he started the deregulation game).
A mandate to keep the president in check, but to govern? That's tricky.
@evan Yes in the states where they won the Governorship. The other wins are a mandate to legislate.
@Chigaze legislating is governing. They are part of the government.
@evan Fair enough but then I think the question loses meaning because what is getting elected other than a mandate to govern.
@Chigaze what a good question! I think one model for the midterm elections is that they are elected to oppose or slow down the administration. Refuse funding, do investigations, maybe even impeach officials. But maybe there's a point in which the electoral margin is high enough that it's not just a mandate to oppose, but a mandate to lead. That's the context of my question; you can answer in whatever framework makes sense for you.
@evan Not as I understand the american system. The power rests with the president.. they just get to oppose it.
@evan they have a huge margin and a lot of real power, but I understand the vote to be mostly against Trump rather than for whatever he Democrats were running on.
(Foreign and cynical; I hope for the best for y'all)
@LyallMorrison I guess the question is, at what point does the margin define them as the governing party, rather than the opposition?
@LyallMorrison It's probably worth noting that the US doesn't have a parliamentary system of government; the executive and legislative branch are supposed to be equal in power.
@evan sure, I was thinking more from the British perspective where Labour at least will wring their hands and plead lack of mandate to avoid making any changes they didn't campaign on in the last election.
I find the concept of mandate quite interesting, although usually a hobble on left leaning parties which the right ignores.
@evan If they stop fucking up.
Maybe a miracle will happen and they will run somebody who is competent and not geriatric for president.
Hey, everyone. So, I asked this question because the priorities of the next Congress are being talked about right now, and a lot of the discussion is about the agenda: investigations, authorizations or lack thereof, oversight.