A Newer Deal Part 6: Four MORE proposals - this time to fix CONGRESS... and why they'll work better than the Reich 'pledges'

Continuing my series about a proposed Democratic Newer Deal. 

Here I'll dive deeply into four more of the 30+ suggested reforms that were briefly listed here... organized in a way that both learns-from and satirizes the hypocritical but politically effective 1994 Republican Contract With America. 

But first some pertinent news. A couple of weeks after I started posting this series -- offering voters a clear agenda of positive steps -- economist and columnist Robert Reich issued a shorter list of “What Democrats Must Pledge to America.” And no, I am not asserting that my series triggered him to hurry his. 

Well, probably not. Though Reich's list overlaps mine in overall intent! We both aim to make progress toward better health care, aid to parents and children, and sound economics while limiting the power of oligarchies and cheaters and monopolies. Alas, Reich's 'pledges' also make up a wish list that might as well be directed at Santa Claus, for all of its political impracticality.

What distinguishes even very smart/moderate leftists like Reich from their centrist allies (like me) is not the desired direction, or even our degree of passion (you all know that I have plenty!), but awareness of one pure fact, that most of our progress across the last 250 years – even under FDR – was incremental. Each plateau building from the previous ones, like upward stairs of progress. Not letting the perfect be the enemy of the possible.

Alas, not one of Reich’s proposals satisfies the “60%+ Rule” that was so politically-effective for Newt Gingrich in 1994, and that Pelosi-Schumer-Sanders applied with terrific effectiveness in 2021-22.  

Start with steps that can be steam-rollered quickly, with 60%+ strong public support, right away! Only after that do you try for the long pass.

Big Gulp endeavors, like those tried by Clinton and Obama, always get bogged down and savaged by "Who pays for it?" and "They want communism!" Then, the GOP wins the next Congress and that's that - opportunity window closed. What we discovered in the 2021-22 Pelosi miracle year was that you can make great strides in multiple directions, if you start from that 60% consensus in order to push solid increments. Steps that then create those new plateaus!

Contrasting with Reich's "pledges," my list emphasizes restoring a functioning republic - civil service, reliable institutions, elections and rule-of-law - in ways that can't be withdrawn by future demagogues... along with incremental steps toward our shared goals (e.g. get all CHILDREN coverable under Medicare, in a single stroke, easily afforded and canceling every objection to Medicare-for-all.)

Look, I like and respect Robert Reich. But here he should have added an equally realistic 11th wish to the other ten... that every American gets a unicorn or pegasus, or at least a pony

== Those "Newer Deal" proposals we appraised last time ==

Could the news this month have better supported my list? If we had the Inspectorate right now, under IGUS (a totally independent Inspector General of the United States), Trump could not have fired or transferred most of the IGs and JAGs in the federal government. Honest scrutiny would abound when we need it most! And officers would have somewhere to turn, when given illegal orders. (I have recommended IGUS for fifteen years.)

The Truth & Reconciliation Act - discussed last time - would have staunched Trump's tsunami of corrupt pardons and the Immunity Limitation Act would clarify that no President is above the law. And yes, there are ways to judo-bypass the Roberts Court in both of those realms.

Some other proposals from my last two postings may seem obscure, like the Cyber Hygiene Act that could eliminate 90%+ of the 'botnets' that now infest tens of millions of home and small business computers, empowering our enemies and criminals. Or one that I personally like most... a simple House-internal reform to give every member one subpoena per year, which would likely transform the entire mental ecology in Congress!

But onward to more proposals! Most of which (again) you'll see nowhere else.

== Appraising another four "Newer Deal" proposals ==

I've mentioned the 1994 Newt Gingrich Contract With America several times and in so doing I likely triggered visceral, gut wrenching loathing from many of you! 

Well tough. You must understand how the 'contract' seemingly offered voters clear and crisp reforms of a system that most citizens now distrust. 

Yes, Newt and especially his replacement - the deeply-evil Dennis Hastert - betrayed every promise when they took power. Still, some (a minority) of those promises merit another look. Moreover, Democrats can say "WATCH as we actually enact them, unlike our lying opponents!

Among the good ideas the GOP betrayed are these:

 

•   Require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply to Congress; 

•   Arrange regular audits of Congress for waste or abuse;

•   Limit the terms of all committee chairs and party leadership posts;

•   Ban the casting of proxy votes in committee and law-writing by lobbyists;

•   Require that committee meetings be open to the public;

•   Guarantee honest accounting of our Federal Budget.

 

…and in the same spirit…

Members of Congress shall report openly all stock and other trades by members or their families, especially those trades which might be affected by the member’s inside knowledge.

Some members may resist some of those measures. But those are the sorts of House internal reforms that could truly persuade voters. Especially with the contrast. "Republicans betrayed these promises. We are keeping them."

Here's another one that'd be simple to implement. Even entertaining! While somewhat favoring the Party that has more younger members. Fewer creaky near-zombies. And so, swinging from the House to the Senate:

While continuing ongoing public debate over the Senate’s practice of filibuster, we shall use our next majority in the Senate to restore the original practice: that senators invoking a filibuster must speak on the chamber floor the entire time.

No explanation is needed on that one! Bring back the spirit of Jimmy Stewart.

Only now, here's one that I very much care about. Do any of you remember when Gingrich and then Hastert fired all the staff in Congress that advised members about matters of actual fact, especially science and technology? Why on Earth would they do such a thing? 

Simple. The Congressional Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) would often say to members: "I'm sorry (sir or madam), but that's not actually true."

Oh, no, we can't have that! Gingrich asserted that OTA said that dreaded phrase far more often to Republicans than to Democrats. And... well... yes, that is true enough. There's a reason for that. But true or not, it's time for this proposal to be enacted:

Independent congressional advisory offices for science, technology and other areas of skilled, fact-based analysis will be restored, in order to counsel Congress on matters of fact without bias or dogma-driven pressure. 

Rules shall ensure that technical reports may not be re-written by politicians, changing their meaning to bend to political desires. 

 

Every member of Congress shall be encouraged and funded to appoint from their home district a science-and-fact advisor who may interrogate the advisory panels and/or answer questions of fact on the member’s behalf.

Notice how this pre-empts all plausible objections in advance! By challenging (and funding) every representative to hire a science and fact adviser from their home district, you achieve several things:

1. Each member gets trusted factual guidance -- someone who can interrogate OTA and other experts, on the member's behalf. And this, in turn, addresses the earlier Gingrich calumny about "OTA bias."

2. Members would no longer get to wriggle and squirm out of answering fact or science questions -- e.g. re: Climate Change -- evading with the blithe shrug that's used by almost all current Republicans: "I'm not a scientist." 

So? Now you have someone you trust who can answer technical or factual or scientific questions for you. So step up to the microphone with your team.

3. Any member who refuses to name such an adviser risks ridicule; "What? Your home district hasn't got savvy experts you could pick from?" That potential blowback could ensure that every member participates.

4. Remember, this is about fact-determination and not policy! Policy and law remain the member's domain. Only now they will be less unconstrained in asserting false, counter-factual justifications for dumb policies.

And finally (for this time)... a problem that every Congress has promised to address, that of PORK spending. Look, you will never eliminate it! Members want to bring stuff home to their district. 

But by constraining pork to a very specific part of the budget, they'll have to wrangle with each other, divvying that single slice of pie among themselves. And it will lead to scrutiny of each other's picks, giving each pork belly a strong sniff for potential corruption.

New rules shall limit “pork” earmarking of tax dollars to benefit special interests or specific districts. Exceptions must come from a single pool, totaling no more than one half of a percent of the discretionary budget. These exceptions must be placed in clearly marked and severable portions of a bill, at least two weeks before the bill is voted upon. (More details here.)

Notice that all four of the proposals that we covered this time are internal procedure reforms for the houses of Congress! Which means they would not be subject to presidential veto. 

These... and several others... could be passed if Democrats take either house of Congress in January 2027, no matter who is still in the White House.

There are other procedural suggestions, some of them perhaps a bit crackpotty! Like occasional secret ballot polls to see if members are voting the way they do out of genuine conscience or else out of fear or coercion... but you can find those here.

Next time, we'll get back to vitally-needed laws.

-------------

And this project continues... in Part 7.  Or refer to the overall summary again in Part three

A Newer Deal Part 2: Learn from your opponents' cleverest tactic! And turn it on them.

Aggressive agility. It's called judo, and Democrats stink at it.

Last time (in Part One), I described a clever tactic that Republicans used, in the 90s, to flip the entire Democratic coalition that was built by the Greatest (GI Bill) Generation onto its ass, commencing thirty years of all-out war against America by a newly-amplified and mutated GOP. 

That tactic - Newt Gingrich's Republican Contract With America - struck wavering U.S. citizens (just two years after overwhelmingly electing Democrats) as reformist and reasonable...

...in part because many of its provisions were reasonable-seeming! Whereupon, in classic bait-n-switch, the GOP flushed them all away. Getting power was all that ever mattered to them. Or that has mattered to them, since.

So, this time, let's dive into a historical document that I doubt any of you have ever read. Let alone studied for potential tactical lessons. And we have been suffering from that lazy neglect for more than a generation.

Part three that has all of the meaty proposals, summarized.  Then they are examined in some detail, in parts four through ten. Potential ways that Democrats and decent independents may stop trying to use sumo against judo users! Ways we can adapt. And win.

 

PONDERING A “NEWER DEAL FOR AMERICA"

 

Part Two

Examining the 1994 Gingrich “Contract”

 

Polls show that average American citizens tend to prefer mainstream Democratic policies, such as government transparency, accountability, science & energy research, improved efficiency, moderate environmentalism, assistance to poor children, tolerance of individual diversity, a far better track record of economic outcomes, and responsible attention to our alliances and international affairs. The rich paying their share. And did I mention science? All of them far more helpful to the nation and humanity than the symbolism obsessions of either the entire gone-mad right ... or a net-unhelpful farthest-left.

 

Nevertheless, the Republican Party has developed politically innovative tactics to overcome these policy disadvantages, in order to win one victory after another. These tactics range from open policy initiatives that sincere people might legitimately argue about... to maligning Rooseveltean liberals as “Marxists”... all the way to corruption of both mass media and voting processes and outright theft of trillions, to create wealth disparities worse even than pre-Revolutionary France.  

 Although many of their techniques are despicable – such as fomenting racism and culture war and attacking every fact profession – it is simply dumb not to study the tenacity and determination that these innovations represent! Indeed, a few of the less-dishonorable Republican tactics may merit the highest tribute -- imitation.

 

Take the Republican Contract with America, that we discussed in Part One. Newt Gingrich and the first wave of neocons used it with startling effectiveness, during their 1994 drive to seize control of Congress. By offering a primly laid-out “deal” to voters, they gave an impression that clearcut and measurable changes would be delivered, if only the GOP were given control. Implicitly implied: Democratic Party leadership had been degenerate and wicked.

 

Also implicit? A willing acceptance of punishment, if the Contract's promises weren’t kept! 

 

Given the “Contract’s” political effectiveness. Ought we give that prodigiously successful tactic attention and study?

 

 

II.   Let's examine the Republican Contract with America

 

Here it is. You may not have read the text, back then. But it merits study by anyone interested in the art of politics. Then compare it to my own proposed draft for a 2025 "Democratic Newest Deal" to follow.

 

The contract listed eight reforms that Republicans promised to enact within Congress itself, followed by ten bills they promised to bring to floor debate and votes to become laws. All were "60% issues" that garnered support from 60%+ of polled Americans, and thus they avoided divisive matters like abortion and school prayer.

Note: actual verbiage from the 1994 Contract is in serif type face.

 

 

 

THE REPUBLICAN CONTRACT WITH AMERICA  

 

As Republican Members of the House of Representatives and as citizens seeking to join that body, we propose not just to change its policies, but even more important, to restore the bonds of trust between the people and their elected representatives. That is why, in this era of official evasion and posturing, we offer instead a detailed agenda for national renewal, a written commitment with no fine print.

 

(For the full preamble, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_with_America)

 

 On the first day of the 104th Congress, the new Republican majority will immediately pass the following major reforms (of Congress itself), aimed at restoring the faith and trust of the American people in their government.

PART ONE – They proposed to reform Congressional rules and procedures, in ways that sound virtuous:

 

* FIRST, require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply equally to the Congress; 

 

* SECOND, select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse; 

 

* THIRD, cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third;

 

* FOURTH, limit the terms of all committee chairs;

 

* FIFTH, ban the casting of proxy votes in committee; 

 

* SIXTH, require committee meetings to be open to the public;

 

* SEVENTH, require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase;

 

* EIGHTH, guarantee an honest accounting of our Federal Budget by implementing zero base-line budgeting.

 

 

PART TWO – Here they listed bills and new laws to enact Republican priorities, also in ways that sounded virtuous.

 

 Thereafter, within the first 100 days of the 104th Congress, we shall bring to the House Floor the following bills, each to be given full and open debate, each to be given a clear and fair vote and each to be immediately available this day for public inspection and scrutiny. 

 

 1. THE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT: A balanced budget/tax limitation amendment and a legislative line-item veto to restore fiscal responsibility to an out- of-control Congress, requiring them to live under the same budget constraints as families and businesses.

 

 2. THE TAKING BACK OUR STREETS ACT: An anti-crime package including stronger truth-in- sentencing, "good faith" exclusionary rule exemptions, effective death penalty provisions, and cuts in social spending from this summer's "crime" bill to fund prison construction and additional law enforcement to keep people secure in their neighborhoods and kids safe in their schools.

 

 3. THE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT: Discourage illegitimacy and teen pregnancy by prohibiting welfare to minor mothers and denying increased AFDC for additional children while on welfare, cut spending for welfare programs, and enact a tough two-years-and-out provision with work requirements to promote individual responsibility.

 

 4. THE FAMILY REINFORCEMENT ACT: Child support enforcement, tax incentives for adoption, strengthening rights of parents in their children's education, stronger child pornography laws, and an elderly dependent care tax credit to reinforce the central role of families in American society. 

 

 5. THE AMERICAN DREAM RESTORATION ACT: A S500 per child tax credit, begin repeal of the marriage tax penalty, and creation of American Dream Savings Accounts to provide middle class tax relief. (Bill Text) (Description)

 

 6. THE NATIONAL SECURITY RESTORATION ACT: No U.S. troops under U.N. command and restoration of the essential parts of our national security funding to strengthen our national defense and maintain our credibility around the world. 

 

 7. THE SENIOR CITIZENS FAIRNESS ACT: Raise the Social Security earnings limit which currently forces seniors out of the work force, repeal the 1993 tax hikes on Social Security benefits and provide tax incentives for private long-term care insurance to let Older Americans keep more of what they have earned over the years. 

 

 8. THE JOB CREATION AND WAGE ENHANCEMENT ACT: Small business incentives, capital gains cut and indexation, neutral cost recovery, risk assessment/cost-benefit analysis, strengthening the Regulatory Flexibility Act and unfunded mandate reform to create jobs and raise worker wages.

 

 9. THE COMMON SENSE LEGAL REFORM ACT: "Loser pays" laws, reasonable limits on punitive damages and reform of product liability laws to stem the endless tide of litigation. 

 

 10. THE CITIZEN LEGISLATURE ACT: A first-ever vote on term limits to replace career politicians with citizen legislators. (Description)

 

 Further, we will instruct the House Budget Committee to report to the floor and we will work to enact additional budget savings, beyond the budget cuts specifically included in the legislation described above, to ensure that the Federal budget deficit will be less than it would have been without the enactment of these bills. 

 

 

 Okay, there it is, the ingenious document that set in motion a dramatic turnaround in fortunes for the Republican Party. Yes, some - (many?) – parts were despicable dog whistles! But if you are only able to look upon it with loathing, incapable of appreciating its artful skill… or the reasons why it appealed to American swing voters in 1994 … then you have only proved that you are too politically blinkered -- too channeled by reflex hostility -- to see things in a broader perspective.

 

There is so much to examine!

 

Take the first section on Congressional rules and procedures. Here, the majority party in each house has almost total power, constrained only by tradition… and by knowledge that someday they will take their own turn as the minority. Twin constraints that – as of autumn 2025 – no longer seem to concern the House GOP in the slightest. But Speaker Mike Johnson’s complicity with despotism is not the topic here. Rather we are talking about the Contract. Its terms and execution.

 

Of the eight proposed reforms, items labeled THIRD and SEVENTH are rightwing ideological. Number THREE was a continuation of Newt’s banishment of the Office of Technology Assessment and all in-house experts who might say the words that GOP politicians hate most to hear: “That’s not actually true.” A campaign against all facts and fact users that continues to accelerate, today.

 

Number SEVEN accurately reflected Conservative wishes, hoping eventually to shift Social Security into buying stocks that are held mostly by rich Republicans. In order to make them much, much richer.

 

The other six were things that almost any decent citizen might deem reasonable…

 

…and not one of the eight was passed or enforced with any degree of alacrity. Every single one of the in-house reforms was betrayed. And Dems never made an issue of that betrayal.

 

The second section of the Contract was a mélange of attempts at legislation. And hence, the Republicans needed not just a House majority but – for Senate passage – either a filibuster-proof 60 votes, or else a compromise achieved by negotiation with Democrats. Note that Hastert’s “Never Negotiate!” rule was still a year or two in the future. But there was one more obstacle… the veto pen of President Bill Clinton.

 

I won’t go into details here. You can see capsule summaries of the aftermath, the vetoes – with some over-rides – and yes, some negotiated compromises (since the GOP Speaker was still Newt) – in the Contract’s Wikipedia page.  

 

Again, these bills ranged from things that I (and most Democrats or decent/thoughtful people) would deem detestable… all the way to some that aimed in general directions that one could reasonably negotiate. Indeed, as I said earlier, Newt did negotiate a bit with Clinton, amid volcanic partisan-tirades, and there were several effective reforms... that resulted in Newt's ouster by his own party! 

And that’s not the point! The point is that most of the ten were either aimed at augmenting oligarchy… or else betrayed, just like the in-house rule reforms. The net-overall effects were pretty damned meagre.

 

A pause to acknowledge that both parties have since then rushed through major omnibus ‘reform’ bills. The 2025 Republican “Big Beautiful Bill” was a heaping mountain of oligarchic gifts and outright treasons. The 2021-22 “Pelosi Bills” like the Infrastructure Act were vastly more admirable and I deem it borderline criminal the way our own left treated her – and mainstream Dem-pols – after they accomplished so much. (See this!)  And yes, I sure am partisan. I hate the fact that I am compelled to be! But like the 1860s earlier phase of the same civil war, I choose blue because it is the only side with sanity and decency. 

 

Right now, all I ask of you is to squint and consider the tactical effectiveness of the “Contract.” Its gambit at feigning sober-pragmatic sincerity and making plausible promises, while implying the other side is a corrupt morass.

 

Next time in Part Three let’s ponder what it might look like, if we actually study the adversary’s best tactics, so we can use even better ones! And offer our own list of priorities that we intend to fulfill. For the sake of us all.