5 ms·
You can expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court via a bill passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the president. So we'd need the presidency, a
by tmountain 6y ago
You can expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court via a bill passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the president. So we'd need the presidency, a majority in the House, and a supermajority in the Senate to invoke cloture to end the inevitable legislative filibuster from the Republicans. So even with a blue wave in November, that's not possible because it is extraordinarily unlikely that we gain a supermajority in the Senate.
The only other option to pass such a bill in the Senate would be to gain a Senate majority and use that Senate majority to end the legislative filibuster, which is the last filibuster anyways. With the filibuster out of the way, we'd just need the presidency and majorities in both houses of Congress.
- ncallaway 6y ago> The only other option to pass such a bill in the Senate would be to gain a Senate majority and use that Senate majority to end the legislative filibuster, which is the last filibuster anyways. This is what I call for in another comment. There's no way to get a supermajority in the Senate, so the legislative filibuster would have to die.
- kenjackson 6y agoBut then get rid of the legislature filibuster after they've used it. The Senate will probably tend GOP, so make sure it is weaker.
- liquidise 6y agoWho is "we" in this comment? Democrats? Not Republicans? Progressives? While your comment is both technically and strategically correct, this sort of binary "us vs them" mentality has caused america such harm and always strikes me as somewhat reductionist. I wish more focus would be on policies and individuals instead of D vs R (as if greens, libertarians, socialists, etc simply do not exist in america's 300M+). Perhaps i am just romanticizing an impossible future, though.
- ncallaway 6y agoI strongly agree with your desires, but I've also been sucked into the D vs R world lately. While I've always been politically left, I despise the 2 party system. I'm of the opinion that a first past the post and winner take all voting system will almost always produce a 2 party outcome. As such, until we change the voting system I've decided to stop considering myself independent and throw in with the party most closely aligned with my views. I don't think your imagined future is impossible, though! I just think it's heavily discouraged by our voting system. We can change our voting systems, though. I'd really strongly encourage you to check out and support Ranked Choice Voting (or other proposed voting systems). I don't think it's a silver bullet, but I think RCV would go a long way to breaking down the 2 party system
- goodluckchuck 6y agoI think I’ve seen that movie before; Gaining control of two branches and then using that power to cement absolute control by seizing the third is what the bad guys do.