Background on Government Reform

Issues in 2024 election:

Issues in 2020 election: Electoral College

Electoral College

Al Gore won the popular election in 2000, but George W. Bush won the Electoral Vote (via a Supreme Court ruling)
Hillary Clinton won the popular election in 2016, but Donald Trump won the Electoral Vote.
Only three other presidential elections had electoral winners who lost the popular vote: Benjamin Harrison in 1888; Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876; and John Quincy Adams in 1824. All three elections were widely considered corrupt and unfair.
FOR Electoral College: (Taegan Goddard): 5 Reasons to Keep the Electoral College
1. Maintain American Federalism
2. Tradition of Slow but Steady Institutions
3. Encourage National Campaigns
4. Clear and Decisive Outcomes
5. The Electoral College prevents systematic fraud
AGAINST Electoral College: This idea that somehow small states currently have a voice under the Electoral College system is the exact inverse of reality. The only states that matter are battleground states, and those are the states where the candidates spend virtually 100% of their time and money trying to win. (Vox.com) [Ed.: in the 2000's, most "small states" are also "red states" and most large-population states are "blue states." The notable exception is Texas, a large red state].
The National Popular Vote is an interstate compact that will go into effect when enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes--that is, enough to elect a President (270 of 538). All of this group of 270+ presidential electors will support the candidate who received the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC--thus making that candidate President. (nationalpopularvote.com) [Ed.: This "compact" is a means to get rid of the Electoral College without a Constitutional Amendment; an Amendment would never happen because the small states would have to vote against their own interest].
News on Electoral College (Candidates' recent excerpts)

Supreme Court

TRUMP: Delay, delay, delay on Supreme Court appointment. (Feb 2016)
BIDEN: Don't pack the Supreme Court. (Oct 2019)
PENCE: Voted YES on granting Washington DC a vote in Congress. (Apr 2007)
HARRIS: Lincoln, before 1864 election, left Supreme Court seat open. (Oct 2020)
News on Supreme Court (Candidates' recent excerpts)
Since the 2000 ruling in Gore v. Bush, the Supreme Court has been recognized as a partisan body as much as any legislature; judges are now described as "politicians in robes."
Since 2016, the Supreme Court nomination process has also been heavily politicized. (other early politicizations are described below).
In March 2016, Pres. Obama nominated Merrick Garland, but the Republican-majority Senate refused to hold a nomination hearing, waiting until after the November 2016 election to nominate Neil Gorsuch in April 2017 instead.
In September 2020, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, and the Republican-majority Senate quickly held a nomination hearing, despite calls to wait until after the November 2020 election, to seat Amy Coney Barrett in October 2020 instead.
Possible responses from Congressional Democrats (all described below) include ending the filibuster; packing the Court; and packing the Senate.
Packing the Court: Various Acts of Congress have altered the number of seats on the Supreme Court, from a low of five to a high of 10. Shortly after the Civil War, the number of seats on the Court was fixed at nine. (USCourts.gov) [Ed.: Most citizens assume that the 9-member Supreme Court is in the Constitution; it is actually up to Congress to change the number as they see fit].
Borking: In 1987, as head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Biden presided over the Robert Bork hearings, which transformed hearings for Supreme Court nominees into bloody ideological battles. Henceforth, all conservative nominees were subjected to "Borking." (TheHill.com) [Ed.: Biden's 1987 actions "politicized" nominations: prior nominations focused entirely on "judicial temperament" and legal abilities; now they focus on political opinions].
Anita Hill: In 1991, Americans were riveted by an all-white, all-male Senate Judiciary Committee questioning Anita Hill, the African-American law professor who had accused Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment, [History.com; during his Supreme Court nomination hearings]. Biden shared with Hill "his regret for what she endured" when, as the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee (NY Times). [Ed.: Biden was criticized for years for poorly treating Anita Hill in the 1991 hearings; but in 2020 Anita Hill publicly endorsed Biden for President].
Filibuster Reform: The Senate cloture rule--which requires 60 members to end debate on most topics and move to a vote--could pose a steep barrier to any incoming president's policy agenda. Opposition party senators can filibuster the majority's agenda (Brookings). [Ed.: Ending the filibuster has been dubbed "the nuclear option;" a simple majority would prevail, making it much harder to block nominations and other legislation].

Statehood for DC and PR

PENCE: Voted YES on granting Washington DC an Electoral vote & vote in Congress (Apr 2007)
Democratic primary contender Mike BLOOMBERG: Ensure equal status for Puerto Ricans; supports statehood (Jan 2020)
Constitution Party Nominee Don BLANKENSHIP: Oppose statehood for DC & Puerto Rico (May 2020)
News on Puerto Rico (Candidates' recent excerpts)
Adding a 51st state (or a 52nd) would change the balance of power in Congress, because both Puerto Rico and Washington DC are heavily Democratic -- statehood for both would add 4 Democratic Senators and 9 or 10 Democratic House members. Since Senators vote on all judicial nominations, this is known as "Packing the Senate" instead of "Packing the Court."
FOR DC Sstatehood: DC has 702,000 residents, and yet are denied representation. DC residents pay more in total federal income tax than residents of 22 other states but have no say over how those tax dollars are spent. DC elects a non-voting Delegate to the US House of Representatives who can draft legislation but cannot vote. DC residents do not have a voice in Senate committees or on the Senate floor. (DC.gov) [Ed.: The slogan printed on every DC residents' license plate is "Taxation Without Representation" based on this argument].
AGAINST DC Statehood: Why not give the land back to Maryland? The land can be returned to Maryland at any time with a simple Act of Congress. This would give D.C. residents a state to which they can belong and all the electoral and all state-related benefits that come from state citizenship. (Princeton Tory) [Ed.: This solution would gain Democrats one vote in the House, while avoiding gaining two votes in the Senate].
FOR PR Statehood: Since 1898, the US has ruled the island as a colonial power. All 3.3 million Puerto Ricans are nominally American citizens but have no representation in the federal government nor full constitutional protections. Puerto Rico residents don't even get to vote for president. (Washington Monthly)
AGAINST PR Statehood: While Puerto Rico officially speaks both English and Spanish, the primary language spoken there is Spanish. Although estimates vary, most seem to put the number of residents fluent in English at less than 20%. (National Review) [Ed.: Those who disagree with this argument point out that English is NOT the official language of America – leading to a push for "Official English" which we cover in our Immigration Background].
Politics of DC and PR: The GOP has no incentive to bless the creation of new states that Democrats would surely dominate. If the question of DC or Puerto Rican statehood were ever resolved politically in Congress, it would be a straightforward matter to admit them both. For that to happen [would require] sweeping Democratic majorities (Vox.com).

Voter suppression

OnTheIssues OpEd: Remember how first-time voters in Iraq and Afghanistan dipped their fingers in blue ink to show they voted? That was the only requirement -- show up, and dip your finger to avoid repeat voting -- who set up that system and why? Well, America set it up! And we set it up that way because we WANTED people to vote and participate in democracy -- so we made it as easy as possible! Anything harder than that is, in our view, voter suppression -- why Tuesday? why only 10 hours of polls? why require excuses for absentee voting? why not early voting and mail voting? Why not allow election-day registration? why require registering at all? why require ID? Those are questions asked by those who want to increase voter participation, instead of increasing voter suppression
TRUMP: It's scary that people can vote without ID. (Nov 2016)
BIDEN: Push plan to make voting machinery & process secure. (Sep 2020)
PENCE: Voted YES on requiring photo ID for voting in federal elections. (Sep 2006)
HARRIS: Automatic voter registration for all citizens. (Nov 2018)
Voter turnout is below 60% in presidential elections, below 50% in midterm elections, and below 30% in local elections. Some reasons: (BBC):
- 10-hour waits: Caused by a limited number of polls, understaffing or computer glitches.
- Strict rules: Requiring voters to print out a form can dissuade younger or poorer voters; requiring you to have your mail-in ballot signed by witnesses.
- Long drives: In rural parts of America, voters may have to drive for hours to reach an in-person polling station.
- ID laws: Supporters of voter ID laws say they make it "easy to vote but hard to cheat". But others say fears of in-person voter fraud are overblown and should not outweigh the harms caused by disenfranchising the poor, homeless, or disabled voters.
- Roll purges: Some states regularly purge voters names from lists of registered voters, which mean voters need to register all over again.
- Prison voting bans: Some states automatically restore voting rights after the sentence is served, while others wait until after probation and parole is served, and after all fines have been paid.
Paper ballots : Without a paper audit trail, it can be difficult to detect errors or breaches in the voting machine's software or hardware, possibly allowing an incursion into American voting systems to go unnoticed. (Brookings) [Ed.: Serious electoral security breaches are possible with SYSTEMIC problems like vulnerable voting software; a focus on INDIVIDUAL voter fraud is a political opinion, not a policy fix. Systemic problems can affect enough votes to change elections; individual fraud cannot change outcomes in most cases].

Vote-by-mail & coronavirus rules

TRUMP: Solicited mail-in ballots ok; unsolicited ballots are fraud. (Sep 2020)
BIDEN: Mail voting works for military; should work for civilians. (Sep 2020)
HARRIS: Mandate paper ballots. (Jul 2019)
Absentee voting: Absentee voting allows you to vote by mail. Though every state has absentee voting, rules on who can take part vary. Your state may require you to have a valid excuse to vote absentee. (USA.gov) [Ed.: In states which require valid excuses, proponents call for their removal as "no-excuse absentee voting", meaning that voters need not provide a reason to request an absentee ballot].
Pandemic voting: States are making it easier for citizens to vote absentee by mail this year due to the coronavirus. Because of the coronavirus, your state may automatically send you an absentee ballot or a form to fill out to request one. (USA.gov)

Whistleblower rules

The Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA) protects Federal employees and applicants for employment who lawfully disclose information they reasonably believe evidences a violation of law,; a gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial danger to public safety.

Issues in 2016 election cycle

Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia passed away on Feb. 12, 2016, leaving a vacancy on the Supreme Court.
The Constitution instructs that the president "shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint ... Judges of the supreme Court."
President Obama nominated Merrick Garland on March 16, 2016, but the Constitution is silent on the timing of the Senate process.
Republicans prefer to wait until after the election, in the hopes that a Republican presidential victory would mean a more conservative appointment.

Voting Reform

The voter registration issue has been brewing since 2000, and may result in legislation prior to the 2016 election. Republicans favor “Voter Identification” requirements, on the grounds of ensuring the integrity of the vote. Democrats respond that individual fraud is extremely rare and has not ever affected an election outcome. The partisan reason for these stances is that voter identification discourages voting by youth, minorities, and the elderly, all of whom disproportionately favor Democrats.
As of 2015, a total of 31 states have active voter identification laws. In 2013 and 2014, courts struck down voter ID requirements in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Arkansas. Many state with voters identification laws also allow those who cannot afford one to obtain a valid government ID for free.
HAVA, the Help America Vote Act, passed Congress in 2002, largely as a result of the 2000 presidential election results in Florida. HAVA requires the replacement of outdated voting equipment, and establishes national standards for administering elections. HAVA also created the concept of “provisional ballot”: if a voter is excluded from voting, that voter can cast a ballot on election day anyway, for later determination of eligibility.

Same-Day Registration

Jesse Ventura

Executive Orders

Executive orders are written by the president without going through Congressional legislation. Many Republicans accuse President Obama of over-using executive orders to bypass Congress, but Obama's use of executive orders is typical. When the presidency changes party, the new president routinely overturns his predecessor's orders, too (which can't be done with Congressional legislation).

    President           Number of executive orders
    =========           ==========================
    Barack Obama                226 (as of early 2016)
    George W. Bush              291	 
    Bill Clinton                364	
    George Bush Sr.             166	
    Ronald Reagan               381

Obama's opponents complain that Obama has over-used executive orders on issues such as immigration, where Obama stopped enforcing the deportation of children who entered America illegally as minors. Obama's opponents claim that Obama should go through Congress on issues like that.

However, presidents bypassing Congress is not new to President Obama -- many presidents have bypassed Congress when they thought executive action was important and/or that Congress would act too slowly. For example, President Abraham Lincoln issues the Emancipation Proclamation, freeing the slaves, as an executive order, when it was unlikely that Congress would have even passed such a law.

Campaign Finance Reform

‘PAC money’ means donations to political action committees, which is used for issue ads which typically favor one candidate, but do not count in federal spending limits.
‘Soft money’ means donations to the national party rather than to a particular candidate ($193 million in the 1998 election, for example).
‘Hard money’ is subject to less reform proposals -- it means cash donations to a particular candidate, which must be fully reported to the FEC.
Individuals may donate a maximum of $1000 to one candidate, but may donate any amount of soft money, and any amount to PACs.
Candidates who voluntarily limit their campaign spending qualify for federal matching funds of about $100 million.
Supporting campaign spending limits in 2016 implies opposing Citizens United or replacing McCain-Feingold.
"Citizens United" refers to a 2010 Supreme Court case which allowed unlimited spending by "'super-PACs" on behalf of any candidate, as long as the TV ads are not coordinated with the campaign itself. Super-PACs dominated the spending in the 2012 presidential primaries and 2014 midterm elections, and will continue to do so in the 2016 elections.
News on Campaign Finance Reform (Candidates' recent excerpts)

Privatization

“Privatization” is a politicized word that means the same thing as term “out-sourcing” in the business world.
The EPA, for example, is largely “privatized”: most federal environmental work is implemented by private contractors selected through a competitive bidding process.
The NIH, in another form of “privatization,” provides grants for scientific research and development, also selected through a competitive application process. The EPA and NIH focus on enforcing regulations and overseeing contract and grant completion.

Earmarks

“Earmark Reform" refers to changing the rules of Congress to restrict “earmarks," which are currently legal and ethical.
“Earmarks" means line items in legislative bills which allocate specific monetary resources to a specific purpose (or to a specific company), usually in a specific congressional district.
An example is a highway improvement project in a House member's district, buried in a 1,000-page spending bill.
Earmarks have become controversial because, in theory, members of Congress could quietly allocate an earmark that would benefit a campaign donor (known as “pork-barrel spending").
Proposed reforms range from full disclosure (showing every earmark and its originating legislator on a public website) to the Line Item Veto (allowing the President to veto earmarks without vetoing the entire spending bill).

Czars

The term "czar" refers to a powerful presidential appointee who is not confirmed by the Senate. In other words, a "czar" is answerable only to the President, unlike normal Cabinet secretaries and other appointees, who must pass the Senate confirmation process.
"Czar" is an informal title used by the press and sometimes by the appointee. For example, Elizabeth Warren was known as the "Consumer Czar," but her formal title was "Special Advisor for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau."
Czars were popularized by Pres. Clinton and the czar count increased to several dozen under Pres. George W. Bush and Pres. Obama, but the practice goes back to the 1930s.

Term Limits

The Constitution limits the president to two terms, or a total of 10 years. There are not limits for the US House or the US Senate.
In March 1998, the Supreme Court let stand term limits for state lawmakers, but previously ruled that establishing such restrictions nationally would require amending the Constitution. Efforts to limit federal Congressional terms died out in early 1997.
18 states have laws limiting politicians' terms, and in 1998, more than 200 state legislators were forced to retire.
The latest push is for term limits for judges. The purpose would be to limit ‘Judicial activism,’ which means establishing new laws from the bench rather than from Congress.
News on Term Limits (Candidates' recent excerpts)

Balanced Budget Amendment

In 1998, the Senate defeated by one vote a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) to the Constitution. It would have mandated an end to deficit spending unless 60% of Congress voted to override.
State budget balancing requirements typically only apply to the operating budget (ongoing expenses), but not to capital expenditures (one-time investments). The proposed BBA restricts both.
The ‘Line Item Veto’ would be another Constitutional Amendment intended to reduce budget growth, by allowing the President to selectively veto particular spending items.
‘Corporate welfare’ restrictions are often addressed in the context of a BBA or Line Item Veto. However, most federal corporate subsidies are embedded in the tax code rather than in the spending side of the budget.

Deregulation

‘Unfunded Mandates’ mean that the federal government requires states to undertake activities without providing funding for them.
‘Block Grants’ mean that the federal government gives states funds to spend as each state sees fit.
‘Devolution’ means the federal government should close departments and agencies, transfer functions to the states, or otherwise yield control over policy which is now federally controlled. The philosophy behind devolving power to the states is based in the 10th Amendment. It is currently applied primarily to welfare reform, but ‘block grants’ are proposed to devolve power to the states in many areas.
‘Deregulation’ in general means the federal government should have less control over private businesses. Conservatives push for deregulation because they believe the market works more efficiently than the government. Liberals push for government regulation when they perceive a problem that can’t or won’t get addressed by non-government methods. Deregulation worked well with telephone deregulation and airline deregulation in the 1980s, resulting in greater consumer choice and lower prices. Deregulation applied to banks and insurance companies in the 1990s are generally blamed for the economic crisis beginning in 2008.
News on Deregulation (Candidates' recent excerpts)

Reinventing Government

‘Reinvention’ has been the official policy of the federal government since 1993. The basic concepts are:
Government should steer rather than row (provide a framework for non-government action rather than operate institutions).
Government should focus on outcomes (desired results) and needs of customers (service recipients), rather than inputs (dollars and jobs) and needs of bureaucracies (rules).
Government should decentralize and address problems from the lowest level of government possible;
Public agencies should compete with private agencies, and should adopt a market orientation;
Government which work betters also costs less.

Election Reform

The GOP proposed a plan in May 2000, that small states would have primaries first, progressing to larger states over a four-month primary season.
An older proposal is a system of regional primaries with a rotating right to go first.
A constitutional amendment would be required to modify the Electoral College, but not to modify the primaries; many states in 2012 switched their GOP primaries from 'Winner-take-all' to 'Proportional'.

Amendment X to the US Constitution

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. (1791)

Click here for Amazon books on Government Reform; and below for citations from background info:

USA.gov, "Presidential Election Process", downloaded 10/20/2020
ElectoralVoteMap.com, "Electoral Vote Map", by Taegan Goddard, Sept. 2020
Vox.com, "A definitive case against the Electoral College", by Sean Illing, Oct 16, 2020
The National Popular Vote, "Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote"
USCourts.gov, "About the Supreme Court"
The Hill, "Joe Biden, the father of 'Borking'," Op-Ed by George Neumayr, 9/23/20
History.com, "How Anita Hill's Testimony Made America Cringe--And Change," by Sarah Pruitt, Sep. 26, 2018
NY Times, "Joe Biden Expresses Regret to Anita Hill, but She Says 'I'm Sorry' Is Not Enough," by Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Carl Hulse, April 25, 2019
Brookings Institution, "What is the Senate filibuster, and what would it take to eliminate it?", by Molly E. Reynolds, Sept. 9, 2020
Statehood.DC.gov, "Why Statehood for DC," 2019
The Princeton Tory, "The Case Against D.C. Statehood," by Akhil Rajasekar, March 6, 2019
Washington Monthly, "The 52-State Strategy: The Case for Puerto Rico," by Rebecca Pilar Buckwalter-Poza, July/August 2018
National Review, "A Conservative Case against Statehood for Puerto Rico," by John Hawkins, March 28, 2019
Vox.com, "The US almost tore itself apart to get to 50 states. Can DC make it 51?," by Alan Greenblatt, Jun 5, 2020
BBC News, "Why it can be hard to vote in the US," by Robin Levinson-King, 10/21/2020
Brookings Institution, "Why paper is considered state-of-the-art voting technology," by Raj Karan Gambhir and Jack Karsten. August 14, 2019
USA.gov, "Absentee and Early Voting"
CPSC.gov, "Consumer Product Safety Commission: Whistleblower Protection Act", downloaded 10/10/2020


*Other candidates on Government Reform:*	*Background on other issues:*
*2024 Presidential Nominees:* Pres.Joe Biden (Democratic incumbent) V.P.Kamala Harris (Democratic nominee) Chase Oliver (Libertarian Party) Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (Independent) Dr.Jill Stein (Green Party) Pres.Donald Trump (Republican nominee) Sen.JD Vance (Republican V.P. nominee) Gov.Tim Walz (Democratic V.P. nominee) Dr.Cornel West (People's Party) *2024 Presidential primary contenders:* Gov.Doug Burgum (R-ND) Gov.Chris Christie (R-NJ) Gov.Ron DeSantis (R-FL) Larry Elder (R-CA) Rep.Will Hurd (R-FL) Gov.Nikki Haley (R-SC) Gov.Asa Hutchinson (R-AR) Perry Johnson (R-IL) Mayor Steve Laffey (R-RI) V.P.Mike Pence (R-IN) Rep.Dean Phillips (D-MN) Vivek Ramaswamy (R-) Sen.Tim Scott (R-SC) Secy.Corey Stapleton (R-MT) Mayor Francis Suarez (R-FL) Marianne Williamson (D-CA) *2024 Presidential primary also-ran's or never-ran's:* Ryan Binkley (R-TX) Howie Hawkins (Green Party) Joe Maldonado (Libertarian Party) Sen.Bernie Sanders (D-VT) Kanye West (Birthday Party)	Abortion Budget/Economy Civil Rights Corporations Crime Drugs Education Energy/Oil Environment Families Foreign Policy Free Trade Govt. Reform Gun Control Health Care Homeland_Security Immigration Jobs Principles Social Security Tax Reform Technology War & Peace Welfare