Four More Urgent Proposals for a 'Newer Deal' to Save our Great Experiment

Our series on a Newer Deal for America has offered 30+ proposed actions that Democrats and their allies should consider now -- and work out kinks -- so they can hit the ground forcefully when they retake Congress, in (or with defection of a dozen Republican patriots, before) January 2027.  

Some of the concepts have been around a while, like canceling the Citizens United travesty. Others are my own originals, like establishing the office of Inspector General of the United States (discussed here.) And some, e.g. giving every Congress member one peremptory subpoena per session, might seem obscure, even puzzling to you, til you slap your forehead and go of course!

And yes, we'd not be in our current mess if some of these -- like IGUS -- had been enacted sooner.

This is not to say that Democratic politicians aren't learning. When Clinton and Obama were president for 8 years each, they only had the first two in which to work with Democratic Congresses, and those two years were pretty-much squandered trying desperately to find Republicans willing to negotiate -- a hopeless wish, after Dennis Hastert banned all GOP politicians from even talking to Democratic colleagues.

That all changed when Biden got in. Immediately in 2021, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer -- aided vigorously by Bernie, Liz and AOC etc. -- leaped into action, giving us a year of miracle bills like the Infrastructure Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, the CHiPs Act, and Medicare drug price negotiation... all of them spectacular successes that disprove every insipid far-left sneer about 'ineffective DNC sellouts.' 

Though now we know that those bills went nowhere near far enough!

Hence, while I despair that these proposals will ever receive even a scintilla of attention or action, it is still my duty as an American to offer whatever my talents allow. 

So, let's take a closer look at four more from that list of ideas!

 == Four more ideas ==

History shows that Americans are suspicious of grand prescriptions for sweeping change. They like progress and reform! But in increments. Steps forward that prove themselves and thusly can't be taken back, and thereupon serve as a new, higher plateau, from which new steps can be launched. Bernie, Liz, AOC, Pete and the rest of the pragmatic left know this.

And so, let's change the argument over healthcare!  Let's increment forward in a way that will surely pass. One that makes further progress inevitable. We'll do this by taking a big step that can easily be afforded under present budgets and thus cancel the "how will you pay for it?" argument.

A step that will prove so popular, only political morons would oppose it.

THE HEALTHY CHILDREN ACT will provide basic coverage for all of the nation's youths to receive preventive care and needed medical attention.  Should adults still get insurance using market methods? That can be argued separately... 

 

...but under this act: all U.S. citizens under the age of 25 shall immediately qualify as “seniors” under Medicare. 

Such a bill might fit on a single sheet of paper. Possibly just that one sentence, above! Ponder how elegantly simple it will be to add a quarter of the U.S. population to Medicare and ignore howls of "who pays for it?"  

While overall, young people are cheap to insure and generally healthy, when they do need care it is SO in society's interest to leap upon any problem! And hence a national priority, if only as an investment in the future. 

A great nation should see to it that the young reach adulthood without being handicapped by preventable sickness. It's an affordable step that will relieve the nation’s parents of stressful worry. 

 

Moreover, watch how quickly the insurance companies would then step up to negotiate! Especially if they face a 'ratchetting squeeze.' Like if every year the upper bound of Medicare goes down by a year -- from 65 to 64 and then 63... while the lower bound rises from 25 to 26 to 27...

Oh, they'll negotiate, all right.

And now another no-brainer that's absolutely needed. 

It was needed yesterday.

THE PROFESSIONALISM ACT will protect the apolitical independence of our intelligence agencies, the FBI, the scientific and technical staff in executive departments and in Congress, and the United States Military Officer Corps.  All shall be given safe ways to report attempts at political coercion or meddling in their ability to give unbiased advice. 

 Whistle-blower protections will be strengthened. The federal Inspectorate will gather and empower all agency Inspectors General and Judges Advocate General under the independent and empowered Inspector General of the United States (IGUS).

Yes, this correlates with the proposed law we discussed last time, to establish IGUS and the Inspectorate, independent of all other branches of government. (A concept once promoted by the mighty Sun Yatsen!) And boy do we need this, right now.

Again, this one doesn't require much explication. Not anymore. Donald Trump has seen to that.

The final pair (for today) do call for some explanation... before their value ought to become obvious!

THE TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION ACT:  Without interfering in the president's constitutional right to issue pardons for federal offenses, Congress will pass a law defining the pardon process, so that all persons who are excused for either convictions or possible crimes must at least explain those crimes, under oath, before an open congressional committee, before walking away from them with a presidential pass. 

 

If the crime is not described in detail, then a pardon cannot apply to any excluded portion. Further, we shall issue a challenge that no president shall ever issue more pardons than both of the previous administrations, combined.

If it is determined that a pardon was given on quid pro quo for some bribe, emolument, gift or favor, then this act clarifies that such pardons are - and always were, by definition - null and void. Moreover, this applies retroactively for any such pardons in the past.

 

We will further reverse the current principle of federal supremacy in criminal cases that forbids states from prosecuting for the same crime. Instead, one state with grievance in a federal case may separately try the culprit for a state offense, which - upon conviction by jury - cannot be excused by presidential pardon.

Congress shall act to limit the effect of Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)that squelch public scrutiny of officials and the powerful. With arrangements to exchange truth for clemency, both current and future NDAs shall decay over a reasonable period of time. 

 

Incentives such as clemency will draw victims of blackmail to come forward and expose their blackmailers.

 

I'm not sure how to make that one any clearer than the wording itself. 

Again, when I first proposed these reforms, years ago, people shrugged with "Why would we need that?"

But now? Can anything make the case for these acts better than the news that we see every... single... day?

The next and final one (for today) makes a good partner to the Truth & Reconciliation Act.

THE IMMUNITY LIMITATION ACT: The Supreme Court has ruled that presidents should be free to do their jobs without undue distraction by legal procedures and jeopardies. Taking that into account, we shall nevertheless – by legislation – firmly reject the artificial and made-up notion of blanket Presidential Immunity or that presidents are inherently above the law. 

 

Instead, the Inspector General of the United States (IGUS) shall supervise legal cases that are brought against the president, so that they may be handled by the president’s chosen counsel in order of importance or severity, in such a way that the sum of all such external legal matters will take up no more than ten hours a week of a president’s time. While this may slow such processes, the wheels of law will not be fully stopped. 

 

Civil or criminal cases against a serving president may be brought to trial by a simple majority consent of both houses of Congress, though no criminal or civil punishment may be exacted until after the president leaves office, either by end-of-term or impeachment and Senate conviction.

Again, could anything be more clear? And so, why have we not seen these two enacted yet? Because of flawed assumptions!  Like assuming that nothing can be done about corrupt presidential pardons. Or that NDAs are forever. Or that nothing can be done about the Supreme Court's declaration of Presidential Immunity.

But the Court - suborned as its current majority may be - felt it necessary to issue that ruling based on a rationalization! That the elected chief executive must do the job without undue harassment by legal vexations. Indeed, this bill would solve that! Only without creating a wholly new and wholly loathesome notion of presidential immunity above all law!

Just like the Roberts Rationalization for excusing gerrymandering, this immunity justification can be logically bypassed. Please do ponder how.

Oh but I suddenly realized... we need to add one more paragraph to that bill! 

One that deals with something that came up recently. Might a president evade impeachment merely by shooting enough House members to prevent a majority from acting to impeach him? 

Trump's own attorney argued that he could! And that he would be immune from prosecution for doing so Until he was actually impeached and convicted, which he just prevented via murder!

 This added paragraph attempts to seal off that insane possibility.

In the event that Congress is thwarted from acting on impeachment or trial, e.g. by some crime that prevents certain members from voting, their proxies may be voted in such matters by their party caucus, until their states complete election of replacements.

That may not fly past today's Court. But the declaration of intent will resonate, still, if we ever need it to. 

      == Add judo to the game plan to save America! ==

Can you honestly assert that ANY of these four would fail the "60%+ Rule?"  

The initial tranche of reforms should be ones that get sixty percent approval from polls or focus groups, so that they can pass quickly, clearing away the most vital things, building further support from a growing American majority. Saving the harder political fights for just a little later. 

That was the persuasive trick of Newt Gingrich's "Contract With America." A clever ruse, since he and his party later betrayed every promise that they offered in their Contract! Still, sticking to that rule made the Contract an ingenious sales pitch.

Democrats run a gamut, but they truly are generally different! As Pelosi, Schumer, Warren, AOC, Sanders et. al. proved in 2021, Democrats can act hard and fast, when they put their minds to it. 

So now, let's fill their minds with innovative and bold ideas! So that when the nation rises up against the current mad administration, we'll be ready for a genuine Miracle Year.