A Newer Deal Part 9: Fix politics! And a (very) few people who seem to get it.

I'm close to finishing my Newer Deal series, a ten-part – (“tl;dr”) -- array of thirty-five proposals for Democrats and their allies, that might empower them to save America and the world, during the year ahead. 

(Folks who’d rather view it through Substack might start here.)

Yes, I waste time in forlorn hope that fresh ideas will influence a party that – while they are the good-guys in this era of vicious national strife – are arthritic/calcified in their tactical and polemical rigidity. Still, a few folks out there appear sufficiently immune to the Zorblaxxian Lobotomy Ray to actually read and comment cogently. 

Here’s one fellow whose Substack appraisal of my “Newer Deal” is not just coherently lucid. It riffs fresh perspectives about what's happened to American conservatism, plummeting from the erudite honesty of William F. Buckley to the clever hypocrisy of Newt Gingrich, to Sarah Palin's dizzy unsapience, to the vile purity of Trumpism. 

Heck, go read him instead of me. While flattering -- he calls me a "political gadfly with a blog that reads like Thomas Paine crossed with a frustrated systems engineer" -- the fellow is also incisive: "if you can’t get 60% of Americans to nod along, you’re not doing politics. You’re doing wishful thinking. And wishful thinking, however righteous, loses elections."*** There's even a short summary of some of my proposals that impressed him most. 

But on with this slog! I gave the full list of proposals in Part Three. Then, in parts 4-8, I dissect and appraise most of them - from IGUS (Inspector General of the United States) to subpoena powers for the Congressional minority, to sunsetting secrets and NDAs, to restoring in-Congress expertise that Newt Gingrich banned, so that uppity nerds could not utter the words that no Republican wants to hear: "Um, sir or madam, that's not true."

Now in Part 9 let's serve up a few more, so we can wrap up my year-end daydream... that anyone will listen.

 == Gerrymandering ==

By now we're all familiar with the desperately-evil way politicians steal powers that belong to the People. I cheered when Californians - urged by moderate GOP governor Schwarzenegger - ended the vile practice by popular referendum, as have a number of other blue states... but effectively no red ones. And those lopsided efforts put the absolute lie to Republican claims that 'everybody does it.'  (As it's been blue states leading the way in ending the damned Drug War.)

So, Maryland and Illinois gerrymander too? And now California has retaliated vs. the obscenely shameless voter rape by the Texas GOP? 

BFD. Just watch. If they ever get a chance, Democrats will ban it, nationwide! As I propose here:

END GERRYMANDERING!  We shall return the legislative branch to the people, by finding a solution to an indefensible cheat that lets politicians choose voters, instead of the other way around.  We shall encourage and insist that states do this in an evenhanded manner, either by using independent redistricting commissions or else by innovative and inherently fair means, like minimizing overlap between state legislature districts and those for Congress. 

 

Since in many districts, the majority party primary is the only election that matters, we shall act to see to it that all citizens in such a district may get to vote in that election, regardless of party registration.

 

Newly elected members of Congress with credentials from their states shall be sworn in by impartial clerks of either the House or Senate, without partisan bias, and at the new member’s convenience. 

The House may be called into session, with or without action by the Speaker, at any time that a petition is submitted to the Chief Clerk that was signed by 40% of the members. 

That last couple of paragraphs was added to address recent, outrageously turpitudinous behavior by "Speaker" Mike Johnson in the fall of 2025.

Note: 1) The Senate remains inherently gerrymandered to favor small states with extra power. (We needed TWO Dakotas?) Forget changing that, for now. Concentrate on reminding farmers why their grandparents loved Franklin Roosevelt.

2) John Roberts and ilk will continue concocting contorted rationalizations to allow continuation of gerrymandering's massive cheat. Hence, elsewhere I offer innovative ways to get around the "Roberts Doctrine" that wriggle-justifies letting state legislators rob their own citizens of voting power. See a general deep-dive ... and this never-seen-elsewhere proposal!

== Defend the enemy they hate most 

      -- their enemy called fact ==

Some years ago the Internet Caucus of the California Democratic Party asked me to write -- and publicly present -- a piece of 'futuristic legislation." While tempted to address changes in the Outer Space Treaty that we discussed at NASA's Innovative & Advanced Concepts program - (NIAC) - or at the Space Development Conference...

... I chose instead to try out something hugely science fictional... encouraging Americans to rediscover something called Objective Reality!  

Summarized and condensed, here it is.

 THE FACT ACT: The Fact Act will begin by restoring the media Rebuttal Rule, prying open "echo chamber" propaganda mills so that assertions may at least be briefly challenged by opponents. 

Any channel, or station, or Internet podcast, or meme distributor that accepts advertising or reaches more than 10,000 followers will be required to offer five minutes per day during prime time and ten minutes at other times to reputable 'vigorous adversaries.' Until other methods are negotiated, each member of Congress shall get to choose one such vigorous adversary, ensuring that all perspectives may be involved. 

Those 535 groups will get equal numbers of subpoenas to forge forth and challenge echo chambers, so that they may then supply further material evidence on their public sites. And those adversary sites will be subject to this same rebuttal rule.

 

The Fact Act will further fund experimental Fact-Challenges, where major public disagreements may be openly and systematically debated and adversaries reciprocally confronted with demands for specific evidence.

 

The Fact Act will restore full funding and staffing and autonomy to both the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the executive Office of Science and Technology Policy (OTSP). 

Every member of Congress shall be funded to hire a science and fact advisor from their home district, who may interrogate the advisory bodies – an advisor who may also answer questions of fact on the member’s behalf. 

 

This bill further requires that the President must fill, by law, the position of White House Science Adviser from a diverse and bipartisan slate of qualified candidates offered by the Academy of Science. The Science Adviser shall have uninterrupted access to the President for at least two one-hour sessions per month.

^{And yes, I know parts of this will never pass. But notice the common theme for at least half of my proposals. Not only will they sound reasonable to 60%+ of average, voting people, but they are nearly all about ensuring the continuation of the 'secret sauce' of our enlightenment experiment.}

^{Accountability.}

                      ^{== VOTER ID ==}

^{STOP OPPOSING THIS! It's a trap to make us look bad.} 

^{Sure, confederates want to use Voter ID laws to repress voting by poor US citizens, as with their old tricks like poll taxes. (They have never shown appreciable evidence of significant non-citizen voting.) Still, blanket rejection of voter ID is just walking into a trap.  Stop reacting out of reflex!}

^{Instead, we must point to the hypocrisy! That these same states are currently closing DMV and state services offices in districts with Democratic voters.  The exact places to get that ID they need!}

^{Hence, the GOPper cheaters aren't aiming at honesty or verification, but repression!} Moreover, when it is put to folks this way, you can be sure that millions will grasp the difference. And give us that 60%+.

^{Also note, helping poor US citizens to get their ID resolved is a great way to help them stop being poor! Helping them to rise up in the world. And also, it will help protect U.S. citizens from abuse by ICE!}

^{Let's be seen as the ones offering fair and just solutions.}

 

THE VOTER ID ACT: Under the 13th and 14th Amendments, this act requires that states mandating Voter ID requirements must offer substantial and effective compliance assistance, helping affected citizens to acquire their entitled legal ID and register to vote. 

 

Any state that fails to provide such assistance, substantially reducing the fraction of eligible citizens turned away at the polls, shall be assumed to be in violation of equal protection and engaged in illegal voter suppression. 

If such compliance assistance has been vigorous and effective for ten years, then that state may institute requirements for Voter ID.     

     

In all states, registration for citizens to vote shall be automatic with a driver’s license, or passport, or state-issued ID, unless the citizen opts-out.

Any state that 'purges' its voter rolls must first attempt to contact affected voters, both via their registered address and, using modern technologies, conveying such notification to them via any accessible change-of-address process, such as used by the Postal Service.

Note that "compliance assistance" has long been a demand by Republicans, whenever a new regulation puts any kind of burden on corporations or rich individuals. There's ample precedent for insisting that the principle also apply, when burdens are imposed upon the poor.

Dig it again: do not fall for their traps!  They are the ones doing electoral cheating of all kinds. Don't give them a chance to point at us.

            == EQUAL VOTING RIGHTS FOR THE HOUSE! ==

As I said, there is an inherent 'gerrymander bias', imposed upon us by the Constitution, in apportionment of seats in the U.S. Senate. And while I'd amend that bias away, if I could, I can't... we can't... so stop whining about it. OR about the Electoral College!**

But the the House of Representative is a different story. As the Senate represents states, the House is supposed to represent the People with utter fairness. And it doesn't, because of a silly law (not in the Constitution) from the 1920s. Which was incidentally the heyday of the Ku Klux Klan.

 And so...

THE WYOMING RULE: Congress shall end the arrangement (under the  Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929) that perpetually limits the House of Representatives to 435 members. Instead, it will institute the Wyoming Rule, that the least-populated state shall get one representative and all other states will be apportioned representatives according to their population by full-integer multiples of the smallest state's population. The Senate’s inherent bias favoring small states should be enough. In the House, all citizens should get votes of equal value. 

Note a few things. The newest members would be tight for office space! But technology should let up to 600 representatives vote, just fine. It would bring reps closer to their now-fewer constituents. And yes, urban voters would see some relief from their wholly unjustifiable under-representation in the House.

Oh, and yes, this would affect the Electoral College. By a bit. Not tons. But some.

** And there are things we can do about the Electoral College other than the silly National Popular Vote Compact. We can discuss those elsewhere. But they do not fall under the 60%+ Rule.

          == Housing and Rural Citizens ==

 

THE RURAL AMERICA AND HOUSING ACT: Giant corporations and cartels are using predatory practices to unfairly corner, control or force-out family farms and small rural businesses. We shall upgrade FDR-era laws that saved the American heartland for the people who live and work there, producing the nation’s food. Subsidies and price supports shall only go to family farms or co-ops. Monopolies in fertilizer, seeds, machinery and other supplies will be broken up and replaced by competition. Living and working and legal conditions for farm workers and food processing workers will be improved by steady public and private investments.

Cartels that buy-up America’s stock of homes and home-builders will be investigated for collusion to limit construction and/or drive up rents and home prices and appropriate legislation will follow. 

These final two are pretty much self-explanatory. And heck yes, the Rural America Act is a blatant effort to persuade farmers and such to ask their grandparents about FDR.

The next one speaks for itself. If expressed right, sustainability can come under the 60%+ rule.

                      == Sustainability ==

THE SUSTAINABILITY ACT will make it America’s priority to pioneer technological paths toward energy independence, emphasizing economic health that also conserves both national and world resources.  Ambitious efficiency and conservation standards may be accompanied by compromise free market solutions that emphasize a wide variety of participants, with the goal of achieving more with less, while safeguarding the planet for our children.

        == Getting near the end ==

Okay, enough for this session. But me reiterate a core point...

... that our biggest problem right now is to patch the damage done to America's systems of accountability, deliberation, negotiation, resilience and pragmatic problem-solving! Problem solving by the People and by honest representatives, who are adults and sincere citizens.  And hence, most of these proposals are about that...

..while passing the 60%+ test. Reforms that are so blatantly reasonable that they might bridge simplistic partisan chasms and draw nods of support from most decent folks.  And hence... their votes.

Do we want more?  You'll get more! As in the miracle year of 2021-22, when Pelosi+Schumer etc. allied with Bernie, Liz, AOC and their wing to pass some really excellent bills!  They concentrated mostly on governing -- infrastructure and taxation, better bureaucracy and bringing home domestic manufacturing. All of them great priorities!  And if you get all children under Medicare (one of these proposals) then the rest becomes inevitable.

Only, alas...

...what we need right now, above all, is a heap of reforms to save the very notions of democracy and accountable law, themselves... and even the very concept of things called facts.

Hence, those aims have been our top emphasis, here.  We'd be weathering the Trumpian psychotic episode far better, if some of these simple measures had been in place, when a perverted tyrant-toddler took over the helm of our great ship-of-state, steering it toward rocks.

 In Part Ten we'll round out some of the last items from the agenda that I've offered in this series. Including -- yes -- some of the stuff you hyper-liberals want on the agenda.

And sure. Some of those things are pretty urgent, too. Just as soon as we cement-in the survival of any sort of decent republic, at all.

======================================

======================================

*** When "Mongoose" says that you need 60% to 'do politics' he's talking about now, amid phase 9 of the US Civil War, when we have deeply opposing 'sides' and the art of negotiating has long been shredded by one of those sides. And one of those sides is entirely responsible. Look up Dennis "friend to boys" Hastert, the criminal perv whom Republicans elevated to head of their party and Speaker and two heartbeats from presidency. The "Hastert Rule" forbade any Republican officeholder from ever again negotiating in good faith with a Democrat, or even having one as a friend. And politics - as an art of listening, negotiating and occasional compromise - died that day in America.

Perhaps someday we'll return to the maturity of when Americans with just 40% support will be heard and get to make practical tradeoffs with their neighbors in positive sum ways. It may take a space mission to destroy that Zorblaxxian Lobotomy Ray that's been shining down on this country for some time, now.

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