The difference between supermajority thresholds for the Republicans and Democrats is truly shocking. It's unnerving to think what today's GOP would do with 60+ votes in the Senate. An all-out electoral reform seems like the only, unlikely way out to even the odds for both parties.
If Trump did what he did during the Nixon and Watergate era, he would almost certainly been convicted (he wouldn't have resigned).
There are two lessons that I see from both of Trump's acquittals.
1. Impeachment does not work. Congress will not hold the President accountable under any circumstance. I don't think 2/3 of the Senate will vote to convict a President. A future President will ignore Congress and the counts and claim vast executive power.
2. Impeachment may be used for partisan purposes instead of for real conduct issues. Senator Lindsey Graham suggested that Vice President Kamala Harris will get impeached if the Republicans regain control of the House. I'm not sure why Harris would be impeached. I think Graham is worried that impeaching President Joe Biden will backfire, so Harris becomes the person Republicans want to impeach. Graham's reasoning suggests that the Republicans would impeach Harris because she is a Black/Asian woman.
Re: 1. This is a good point. I tweeted a short thread today about how Trump's double-acquittal will ultimately weaken impeachment as a tool for accountability; presidents could come to think nothing of the political sanctions that come from a House impeachment. That seems bad in the long run.
You are right, in my opinion, to be fearful of what an unrestrained president could accomplish in the future. Especially if they are actually competent.
Good threads! This might be a "radical" idea, but I've come to the conclusion that we need to switch to a parliamentary system and get rid of the Presidency at least in its current form. The Presidency has too much power. We need a constitutional amendment to limit the President's power. While a Prime Minster is more accountable to the legislature, I'm not sure if we need to eliminate the Presidency. Of course, this is very very unlikely to happen.
So long as we're dreaming, I would support splitting executive powers between a more powerful Speaker of the House subject to biyearly elections, and a popularly-elected president on a staggered off-year term of 4 years.
The difference between supermajority thresholds for the Republicans and Democrats is truly shocking. It's unnerving to think what today's GOP would do with 60+ votes in the Senate. An all-out electoral reform seems like the only, unlikely way out to even the odds for both parties.
Arthur: Perhaps you will like this post from last week on thinking big about political reforms" https://gelliottmorris.substack.com/p/thinking-bigger-than-purely-political
Hi Elliott,
If Trump did what he did during the Nixon and Watergate era, he would almost certainly been convicted (he wouldn't have resigned).
There are two lessons that I see from both of Trump's acquittals.
1. Impeachment does not work. Congress will not hold the President accountable under any circumstance. I don't think 2/3 of the Senate will vote to convict a President. A future President will ignore Congress and the counts and claim vast executive power.
2. Impeachment may be used for partisan purposes instead of for real conduct issues. Senator Lindsey Graham suggested that Vice President Kamala Harris will get impeached if the Republicans regain control of the House. I'm not sure why Harris would be impeached. I think Graham is worried that impeaching President Joe Biden will backfire, so Harris becomes the person Republicans want to impeach. Graham's reasoning suggests that the Republicans would impeach Harris because she is a Black/Asian woman.
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1360963559820320773
Ultimately, I'm concerned about checks and balances failing and the growing power of the Presidency.
-Elliot
Elliot,
Re: 1. This is a good point. I tweeted a short thread today about how Trump's double-acquittal will ultimately weaken impeachment as a tool for accountability; presidents could come to think nothing of the political sanctions that come from a House impeachment. That seems bad in the long run.
On 2: Yep, I saw this too. See my thread: https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1361376171682889733?s=20
You are right, in my opinion, to be fearful of what an unrestrained president could accomplish in the future. Especially if they are actually competent.
—Elliott
Elliott,
Good threads! This might be a "radical" idea, but I've come to the conclusion that we need to switch to a parliamentary system and get rid of the Presidency at least in its current form. The Presidency has too much power. We need a constitutional amendment to limit the President's power. While a Prime Minster is more accountable to the legislature, I'm not sure if we need to eliminate the Presidency. Of course, this is very very unlikely to happen.
-Elliot
So long as we're dreaming, I would support splitting executive powers between a more powerful Speaker of the House subject to biyearly elections, and a popularly-elected president on a staggered off-year term of 4 years.