Senate Democrats make democracy reform first bill of new majority
By: Jordain Carney (TheHill)
Where did this come from? Who decided democracy needed reforming?
After touting overwhelming evidence that the last election was secure, free of fraud, and allowed more people to vote than ever before, Democrats have unilaterally determined that the democratic process needs to be reformed as the first order of business.
If democracy prevailed, as Joe Biden has claimed, then why would enacting democracy reforms be the first thing on Senate Democrats' agenda?
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
"Senate Democrats are committed to advancing real solutions and fighting to uphold the core tenets of our constitution, which is why we are announcing today that the first bill of the new Congress will be the For the People Act," Schumer said in a statement.
The bill, which is endorsed by a wide swath of progressive and civil rights groups, includes, among other things, changes to voter registration requirements, more funding for election security, requirements for presidents and vice presidents to disclose their tax returns and new ethics rules for members of Congress.
The bill would also require a code of ethics for the Supreme Court, boost public funding for presidential elections and require new disclosures for online advertising.
The decision to make the bill the first offered by the incoming Senate Democratic majority comes after House Democrats made the bill "H.R. 1," underscoring its status as a top legislative priority.
Klobuchar said as incoming chairwoman of the Senate Rules Committee a "number one priority will be to make voting easier and more secure and to halt the flood of special interest and dark money that is drowning out the voices of the American people."
But the bill faces little chance in passing the Senate even after Democrats take over the majority. Most legislation will still require 60 votes to pass and Democrats will only have 50 votes plus incoming Vice President Kamala Harris to break a tie.
Democrats could nuke the 60-vote legislative filibuster, which would allow them to pass legislation with only 50 votes. But several members of the caucus are wary of taking such a step.
"It's too soon to say how we'll pursue this. I think that every American has received a message that the integrity of our elections is incredibly important and so in terms of accountability for the events of this past year there's probably nothing more important than passing the For the People Act," Merkley said when asked if the caucus would take action on the filibuster if Republicans block the bill.
Tags
Who is online
88 visitors
President Biden declared that democracy prevailed. Apparently that has motivated Democrats to reform democracy.
I think we'll see more legislation like this. Especially if the filibuster get's nuked.
Just because the burglars were prevented from stealing the items in the floor safe doesn't mean you shouldn't improve your overall security to prevent them from breaking into the house in the first place.
Dems control of the House and Senate is neither large nor permanent.
Stupid actions could result in unintended consequences for them.
Reform, those bastards!
Democrats could nuke the 60-vote legislative filibuster, which would allow them to pass legislation with only 50 votes.
Senate democrats aren't going to get much done unless they can come to an agreement on preserving the filibuster for the next two years.
"In the power-sharing talks, Senate Republicans want Democrats to agree to preserve the legislative filibuster —a longstanding rule that enables the minority party to block most legislation—for at least the next two years. Democrats say such demands don’t belong in an organizing deal. But without such a deal, Republicans technically remain in control of most Senate committees, despite now being the minority party.
“I think at the moment, it’s a little bit stalled out, but I hope they can get back on track,” said Sen. John Thune, the No. 2 Senate Republican. “We need to get an organizing resolution in place but, you know, obviously the big issue was the legislative filibuster.”
Sorry, Chuck you have to concede on the filibuster or those cabinet picks & any legislation will just have to wait!
The highest turnout in over a century in the middle of a pandemic and the Democrats still need to attack our electoral process to keep the base scared of ever looming "suppression" that never quite seems to happen.
So what are you trying to say?
That all this talk of the Election "being Stolen" is nothing more than sheer poppycock?
(Do you actually believe the Election was corrupt? Numerous results "tampered with"?)
the Democrats still need to attack our electoral process
Is that a typo? Perhaps you actually meant to say that it was the Republicans who have been attacking ther electoral process-- not the Dems???
Then there's this-- do you agree or disagree?
Repudiating Trump, officials say election ‘most secure’
WASHINGTON (AP) — It’s hard to put it any more bluntly: “There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes or was in any way compromised.”
Rejecting President Donald Trump’s persistent claims and complaints, a broad coalition of top government and industry officials is declaring that the Nov. 3 voting and the following count unfolded smoothly with no more than the usual minor hiccups.
It was, they declare, resorting to Trump’s sort of dramatic language, “the most secure in American history.”
The statement late Thursday by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency amounted to the most direct repudiation to date of Trump’s efforts to undermine the integrity of the contest, and echoed repeated assertions by election experts and state officials.
Saw this on Twitter last night and had to take a screen shot so I could share........
And BTW, I redacted the posters name to spare her any grief from "here"
Why does the 'most secure' election suggest that the first priority for Senate Democrats is a need to reform democracy? There are a lot of issues that need to be addressed. Why would a 'most secure' election require immediate attention?
Either the election was not as secure, fair, and open as has been reported - or - Senate Democrats are wasting time on do nothing legislation while there are bigger problems that need to be addressed.
Is Chuck Schumer fiddling while Rome burns?
I've said it plenty of times. There is no evidence that the election was stolen. Biden won.
People pushing the suppression angle are the mirror image of those pushing the stolen election narrative.
Because we all saw what the last four years of conservative Republican lies, violent rhetoric and an administration only worried about the optics of showing faux strength resulted in which was the violent seditionist attack on our nations democracy January 6th. The attack showed us all how fragile our democracy has become and was a reminder that we can no longer take it for granted. We have to work hard to earn it and this bill is a good first step towards those ends. Why would any America not support a Presidential candidate being open and transparent about their finances by showing their taxes? The lame excuses of this last Presidential loser claiming he couldn't show them because "people wouldn't understand them" or that he was "under audit" should never be accepted by either party when we are vetting the next Presidential candidate. The American people deserve to know who that candidate may be beholden to and who they may owe millions to. We deserve to know where the candidates money has been coming from and what they paid in taxes on their profit so we never again have a President paying more in taxes to China than to America or a billionaire President paying less in taxes than many Americans making under $30k a year.
We also need to address the many States that were intentionally trying to disenfranchise eligible voters though unnecessary added rules cutting polling places, stopping early voting, trying to prevent vote by mail, Sunday voting and other ways minorities often use to exercise their right to vote. When courts found that Republican legislators had requested data on voting patterns by race and, with that data in hand, drafted a law that would "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision," we should all recognize that one party is trying to tear down democracy simply because they are desperate for a win. Anyone other than the rabid white supremacists and vile piece of shit bigots are appalled at such Republican tactics and are working to make minority voting easier, not harder.
And how is more election security a bad thing? Obviously we had millions of dumb shit conspiracy theorists claiming the 2020 election was somehow "stolen" with zero evidence, why would making it even more secure with more oversight allowing more people to trust the results be a bad thing? Perhaps that alone in this last election would have prevented the attack on the capital, though slimy dicks like Trump and company in the future may still lie to their poorly educated gullible supporters regardless of how secure the elections are, but still better security would have made it easier to debunk those lying losers.
I have always said that anyone writing tax law should have to be open and transparent about their own finances.
So to you, my comment is "racist" because I acknowledge the different voting patterns that exist among minority communities but the Republican legislators who had requested data on those voting patterns by race and drafted a law that would "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision," was not? Sounds like someone determined to ignore the real problem while attacking those who admit systemic inequality exists.
Oh no! Ethics rules for congress! Surely the Republic will fail!
What does ethics rules for the Senate have to do with democracy?
BTW, ethics rules for the Senate does not require legislation. Congress imposing a code of ethics on the Supreme Court may not be Constitutional because of the separation of powers. And states are responsible for conducting elections as was demonstrated this past election cycle.
It has to do with it as it was part of the bill.
Which suggests Chuck Schumer either doesn't understand how the Senate conducts business or the bill is a political stunt.
So far the House is impeaching a President that is no longer in office, the Senate is pursuing political stunts, and the President is offering thoughts and prayers, issuing executive orders, and pushing a politically correct immigration bill to Congress.
Not an auspicious beginning for a government controlled by Democrats.
Seems to me, the House already impeached.
Did you complain about donald's EO's?
Why? Most of Trump's EO's were undoing Obama's EO's.
Biden already set a record of 25 EO's on his first day; more rapidly coming today and this week The left bitched constantly about Trump's EO's; but Biden is breaking all norms. Since he has the almighty D behind his name the left is just fine with that.
Seems the left still hasn't learned that EO's are not laws. Biden can sign a billion EO's; and they won't be worth the paper they are printed on once the next Republican president takes office. Unless the courts fuck up again; and grant an EO/EA the same status as a law; like they tried to do with Obama's DACA.
The only thing I bitched about his EO's was on the hypocrisy of others. After years of saying Obama was doing illegal things and had illegal EO's, all the sudden cheered or were silent on donald's.
And Biden's EO's are undoing donalds.
Around and around we go as congress plays partisan games.