[jameskilton]

No, the Constitution is fine.

We are failing to enforce the Constitution like we did in the past, and that is why America is falling apart.

[wvenable]

Failing to enforce the Constitution is part of the problem. The Constitution gives very few options for recourse and was not designed for the situation where two of three branches of government willingly abdicate their own power.

Even the government shutdown is an example of the failure of the US constitution. In most other countries in the world, the inability to pass a budget triggers an election.

[dragonwriter]

> In most other countries in the world, the inability to pass a budget triggers an election.

In many parliamentary systems, and some semi-presidential systems this would be likely or automatic. Basically no presidential systems do this, though some have optional safety valves that might be threatened to try to force resolution of a budget deadlock or invoked in response to one, like the muerte cruzada system in Ecuador (which allows the President to dissolve the National Assembly or the Assembly to impeach and remove the President, but either action triggers new elections for both the President and the Assembly.)

[johnnyanmac]

>In most other countries in the world, the inability to pass a budget triggers an election.

That's actually a wonderful idea. Our legistlature definitely needs more skin in the game, so I was privy to the idea that their salaries are also frozen during a shutdown (like 90% of federal workers). But having them ousted from their seats can be interesting.

Of course, the obvious counter argument is exploitation. Could a bitter party band together and try to force early re-elections if they feel they have the upper hand?

[watwut]

They did NOT abdicated the power. They, meaning their republican members, are actively using power to achieve or defend republican ideological goals. Democrats are not fighting as they should, they tend to be centrists seeking to accomodate.

But, there was no abdication. There is an intentional cooperation.

[unethical_ban]

The Constitution is not fine. You are correct that it is not being enforced properly, and IMO we have a coup being staged in real time.

We should have rolling term limits for SCOTUS.

We should have ranked-choice/multiple-choice mechanisms for all elections to facilitate a true multiparty system.

We should further regulate money and transparency in spending vis-a-vis political advertising.

We should ban gerrymandering.

The Senate should be weakened or entirely removed. I am aware that is theoretically the only thing that is not amendable, but it's a flaw that we have it in any case.

The Electoral College should be discarded.

And clearly, impeachment should be easier than it is - or else maybe we just have the dictatorship we deserve? Thanks, GOP.

That's just off the top of my head.

[anon291]

There is no dictator ship though.

These takes are insane. Hate trump as much as you want (I certainly dislike him).... He's the democratically elected president of the US

[Kim_Bruning]

Interesting choices. Some seem straightforward, others debatable. Can you explain them a bit more? (or link to a blog post?)

[0xDEAFBEAD]

Why weaken or remove the Senate? It seems like one of the few parts of the federal government which is vaguely functional.

[jleyank]

Yup. There were supposed to be 3 separate, contentious arms of the government: executive, legislative and judicial. The problem, and I honestly can't see a solution to it, is that the same party/group controls all three and nobody's willing to buck the trend. The "guardrails" are there, it merely turns out they're only weakly enforced.

[SlightlyLeftPad]

Nobody wants to say it.

Yes, the original dream of the U.S. is very clearly a failed experiment with both the legislative and judicial branches essentially extensions of the executive branch. The checks and balances that used to exist have almost completely disappeared. Whatever’s left of those branches are essentially extra entry points for lobbyists and billionaires to fully drive the knife deeper.

It wasn’t actually designed that way but it has slowly manipulated and shaped into that way over a hundred years of stacked up law bloat built with the sole intention to make challenging it impossible for anyone who’s not crazy wealthy.

[whynotminot]

I don’t know what the solution is, because a fourth branch of government also could be problematic. But it’s becoming a very obvious problem that the justice department is not separate from the executive.

[anon291]

Well... That's only part of the problem.

The real problem is that Congress delegated all its responsibility to the executive and judicial branches.

To the executive branch it gave the power to declare war (war power act), and to make new law (administrative law). Then it created a new branch, the federal reserve, to make monetary policy.

To the judiciary it handed the power of checking the president.

Now Congress does nothing as evidenced by how little actual legislation they've passed while Trump has just done everything via executive order.

But this entire system developed while one party held all three branches but also while the branches were held by different parties.

Since the house is up for election every two years, they have every incentive to delegate so they can wash their hands free of any decision.

[johnnyanmac]

well, it might be bucked. The problem is you can tear down a lot more in 2 years of reckless, lawless land than you can build in 20 years of gridlock. Even 5 years of unanimous cooperation may not be enough at this point to rebuild what's happened, and we're halfway to midterms.

Legistlative will bend and sway as it's been doing for 30 years now. the judicial is the much more concerning branch. EVen if Trump was ousted tomorrow, we're still stuck with a conservative majority for a good 20 years or so without major intervention. The long shot is that Thomas and Alito get convicted. But we'd need huge momentum for that to gain ground, and even then Breyer may pass sooner or later.

Adding to the courts would help, but not solve the underlying issue.

[sheikhnbake]

The trend has been bucked by the fascists currently in power.

[efitz]

What do you mean no one is willing to buck the trend? It’s almost a certainty that Republicans will lose the house this year and maybe the senate.

On the other hand we have federal district court judges in podunk deciding that they have the unilateral ability to stop the president from exercising executive authority. It wouldn’t be so comical if they didn’t ultimately lose in most cases; our judges are the real Constitutional crisis right now.

I have not seen the Trump administration fail to obey a single court order; I just don’t see Trump as a crisis. His policies, you could make a good case. His rhetoric, yes. His official acts, not so much.

[coffeemug]

What is the evidence that America is falling apart? From all my reading of American history, America has _always_ been this way. With a wide lens it appears as healthy as it's ever been. This is a genuine question-- I've read a lot of American history, but I'm still a dilettante. It's extremely difficult to tell if there are genuinely new conditions, or if we're engaging in a vigorous political process as we always did.

[pdpi]

We live in a world where the sitting president calls January 6 a day of love, and has pardoned the rioters, and then says that people protesting ICE are "domestic terrorists". We live in a world where federal prosecutors are choosing to quit rather than following his orders.

Remember John McCain defending Obama[0]? Do you genuinely believe that the people heading the Republican Party today would ever do that? Contrast McCain's humility and grace in his concession speech[1] with Trump's constant refusal to accept that he lost 2020, and his insistence on exacting revenge on the people who "wronged" him.

No, this is not a "vigorous political process" in action. It's something else entirely.

0. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIjenjANqAk

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5Mba8ncBso

[NoGravitas]

The Constitution provides no mechanism for its own enforcement other than impeachment (not just of the executive, but of the top officials of other branches as well), but the party system makes that essentially impossible today. It might become just possible if the Senate were eliminated, but FPTP and gerrymandering would still present problems.

[jrflowers]

I love clarifications like this. It is like “The Constitution is fine; Nicolas Cage never stole it. That was just a film. In any case even if he had, it is is documented that he eventually returned it unharmed”