What Proposals From The "Progressives" Will Become Law

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,319
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
My point is that NONE are likely to get done. In that case, the progressives will be quite disappointed.

True, but that's politics for you. At any given moment, someone's probably burning you in effigy.

The progressives will get a few things, with a promise for more in the future, and they'll grumble about it not being enough -- business as usual.

That was somewhat true under Obama, but they seem to have more power now. I think that there will be intra-party fights, especially in the House.

Perhaps, but while the progressives may grumble and complain, Pelosi has done a good enough job of keeping them in line when it comes time to vote. Of course, that's easy enough when the main goal has been stopping whatever scheme Donald's trying to ram down America's throat. We'll see what happens in the new administration.

I wouldn't worry about the Senate -- McConnell won't allow any progressive policies; it remains to be seen if he'll allow anything off his desk.
 
Upvote 0

ArmenianJohn

Politically Liberal Christian Fundamentalist
Jan 30, 2013
8,962
5,550
New Jersey (NYC Metro)
✟205,242.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
The progressives seem to think that they have a chance for the passage of lots of legislation by the new Congress.

What do you think has a good chance of becoming law? I would remind folks that almost all legislation requires at least 60 votes in the Senate to pass.
================================================
Personally, I think that the answer is almost nothing. There will be lots and lots of changes by Executive Order and by changes in policies in the various Executive Branch agencies.

There will be some compromise legislation on such things as budgets and debt limits (that has to happen or the government closes down). I believe that there will limited compromise legislation on health care and other items.

But these won't please the left. Let me use the example of healthcare. We are not going to see Medicare expansion. More likely is protections for those with pre-conditions, allowing insurers to have policies that are offered in more than one state, purchases of drugs from Canada, and forcing Medicare to have competitive bidding for drugs. DACA folk may be given a path to citizenship, but even legal status by the Congress would help.
Nothing progressive will be passed. Absolutely nothing. The democratic party is 99% conservative on every issue except gay marriage and abortion. They are just about as much bought and paid for as the Republicans.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
The House is the judge of voting within the House. They are not in control of the rules of gerrymandering. I believe that legislation would need to approved the same as any other bill: by the House, the Senate and the President.
"The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators."

See Role of the States in Regulating Federal Elections | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress. That clause has been interpreted to include redistricting.

"Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members ..."

I believe this delegates to the House control of the elections for the House. They could refuse to seat anyone that comes from a gerrymandered district.

I'm aware that Democrats have done this in the past. That should be stopped as well. With computer programs, it's gotten a lot more insidious. However there are also now reasonable tests for assessing the degree of gerrymandering. It's time to do something about it. There are practical issues with having one house do it, so realistically it will have to wait for the first time Democrats control both houses.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: mark46
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
The Covid bill includes at least some environmental regulations, and also a prohibition of surprise medical billing.I think some progressive laws are possible. Nothing big though. A number of things were passed under Obama. Simply implementing them will also be progress.

"But contained in the bill are a number of provisions that represent a clear advance in the US stance on the climate crisis, at the end of four years of Trump administration attacks on environmental protections.

"By the far the most significant of those advances is the commitment to phase out hydrofluorocarbons, HFCs, which are widely used as coolants in air conditioners, fridges and cars.

"Under the terms of the relief bill, most HFC use would end by 2035. The overall global impact of such a firm gesture by the US could lead to 0.5C of avoided warming this century."

...

"Among other measures in the bill that have received praise from environmental groups are extensions to tax credits for renewable energy technologies. Offshore wind could enjoy a particular boost with the incentives lasting five years."

"A further area of significant reform is the pot of $35bn provided for research and development in a range of innovations designed to confront the climate crisis. They include the creation of more efficient batteries, carbon capture, and advanced nuclear reactor technology."

Environmental groups hail Covid relief bill – but more needs to be done
 
  • Agree
Reactions: mark46
Upvote 0

mark46

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 29, 2010
20,042
4,720
✟830,515.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
The Covid bill includes at least some environmental regulations, and also a prohibition of surprise medical billing.I think some progressive laws are possible. Nothing big though. A number of things were passed under Obama. Simply implementing them will also be progress.

"But contained in the bill are a number of provisions that represent a clear advance in the US stance on the climate crisis, at the end of four years of Trump administration attacks on environmental protections.

"By the far the most significant of those advances is the commitment to phase out hydrofluorocarbons, HFCs, which are widely used as coolants in air conditioners, fridges and cars.

"Under the terms of the relief bill, most HFC use would end by 2035. The overall global impact of such a firm gesture by the US could lead to 0.5C of avoided warming this century."

...

"Among other measures in the bill that have received praise from environmental groups are extensions to tax credits for renewable energy technologies. Offshore wind could enjoy a particular boost with the incentives lasting five years."

"A further area of significant reform is the pot of $35bn provided for research and development in a range of innovations designed to confront the climate crisis. They include the creation of more efficient batteries, carbon capture, and advanced nuclear reactor technology."

Environmental groups hail Covid relief bill – but more needs to be done

Oh, I strongly agree that improvements to the law will happen. My doubts have to with the progressive agenda, those items they want that are to the left of the views of the Democratic Party.
 
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2012
25,027
23,937
Baltimore
✟551,752.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
When I was young many years before the age of voting I heard about gerrymandering and the democrats in my state controlled things and gerrymandered it big time for decades and now we have the opposite happening and I'm not going to be sympathetic to democrats being the "victim" of something that IMO they initiated far far before republicans got into doing it. Nobody in the courts stopped it back then why suddenly are they obliged to stop it now that the republicans and no longer the victim of it?

Better data has enabled the gerrymandering to become a lot more effective than it was. Republicans also do it a lot more than anybody did in the past.
 
Upvote 0

Richard T

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2018
1,447
965
traveling Asia
✟61,346.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
The progressives seem to think that they have a chance for the passage of lots of legislation by the new Congress.

What do you think has a good chance of becoming law? I would remind folks that almost all legislation requires at least 60 votes in the Senate to pass.
================================================
Personally, I think that the answer is almost nothing. There will be lots and lots of changes by Executive Order and by changes in policies in the various Executive Branch agencies.

There will be some compromise legislation on such things as budgets and debt limits (that has to happen or the government closes down). I believe that there will limited compromise legislation on health care and other items.

But these won't please the left. Let me use the example of healthcare. We are not going to see Medicare expansion. More likely is protections for those with pre-conditions, allowing insurers to have policies that are offered in more than one state, purchases of drugs from Canada, and forcing Medicare to have competitive bidding for drugs. DACA folk may be given a path to citizenship, but even legal status by the Congress would help.

There are some good ideas in these posts. You are right too that it is the bureaucracy that implements past laws that can make changes quickly. On packing the Supreme Court, Joe Manchin from West Virginia said he would never vote for that, so I think that is off the table.

The biggest issue is economic assistance from the covid lockdowns. Biden will restrict the economy more, and the voices for more money will be very loud. A focus on state and local government bailouts, followed by more business bailouts and finally more rent, food and cash assistance. The number could be so big that we will see higher interest rates and inflation from the dollar receding.

Higher spending will be accompanied by higher taxes. Capital gains will go up, as will taxes on higher income groups.

I think we may see something on gun control. More background checks or waiting periods, to restricting certain types of weapons and magazines. Possibly tax on ammunition or something along those lines. Some of this might be unconstitutional but that will take awhile to find out.

We will see something on policing. Either making police more personally responsible for their actions and/or some sort of increase of federal penalties for abusive behaviors.

We will see expanded obamacare. They will continue to try and get more states to participate in medicaid expansion and offer more money in this area. They may try to pass another bill to address the failings and court challenges of the past.

We should see some type of social security reform, mainly lifting the exclusion of ss taxes for those making over 100k plus.

There is going to be something done on the environment. Not only will Biden sign some international treaties but definitely increase regulation on polluters, possibly even some type of carbon credit and taxing system beyond what we have today.

In education, Biden will try to do whatever the unions want. Stopping school choice whenever possible and limiting charter schools as well. He has proposed a modest 10k of forgiveness in student loans too and that could possibly pass.

Foreign policy will be different as well. Lots of carrots and few sticks. Biden will try and buy the favor of countries that hate us just like Obama did. I will go out on a limb and suggest that China may take Taiwan and Biden will not defend it.

Where the rubber hits the road, is if the change in government will really affect individual lives in a meaningful way (positive or negative). Usually, the answer is no for me. Only a major war would make a huge difference, even the Iraq wars made no difference in my life, though it certainly impacted my thinking. I have yet to have a single President or Congress make a large impact on my life. The closest has been the covid response, Trump's under-reaction likely has forced me to be far more careful but I am in a very high covid state, and the Governor has a bigger affect. I suppose any future, lockdowns and potential inflation would impact me as well.

Unlike others, I do not see Biden as destroying America. There will be some positive things I like. If he is too far left, the House will change in two years, it may anyway, and the Senate is almost certainly going to be Republican in two years, even if the Georgia runoffs are both won by democrats.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

disciple Clint

Well-Known Member
Mar 26, 2018
15,258
5,990
Pacific Northwest
✟200,679.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Courts have gotten used to acting quickly on Trumper court challenges. The reality is that both Obama and Trump shown just how much can be done through Executive Order.
I think a few tricks of the trade have been learned along the way so expect all future executive orders that do not appeal to the conservatives to be taken to the courts. Also expect the court to be selected base on its perceived standing on the issue.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mark46

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 29, 2010
20,042
4,720
✟830,515.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
.
Unlike others, I do not see Biden as destroying America. There will be some positive things I like. If he is too far left, the House will change in two years, it may anyway, and the Senate is almost certainly going to be Republican in two years, even if the Georgia runoffs are both won by democrats.

If proposed legislation is too far left, it won't pass the Senate where 60 votes is needed to overcome the filibuster.
 
Upvote 0

wing2000

E pluribus unum
Supporter
Aug 18, 2012
20,772
17,074
✟1,389,243.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
These come to mind. There are lots more

$15 national minimum wage
Medicare for those over 50, or even Medicare are for all
climate legislation, including banning of new coal plants or major overhauls to coal plants
reparations
marijuana legalization
legalization of abortions (rather than just a court ruling)
ending the filibuster
increasing the number of Supreme Court justices
tax legislation increasing corporate rates and those on the rich, lowering rates for the middle class

I agree there will only be incremental legislative achievements - except, perhaps, with climate legislation. It's clear Biden is making that a priority - from his appointments in the cabinet - to his repeated comments on the subject.

.
 
Upvote 0

Richard T

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2018
1,447
965
traveling Asia
✟61,346.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
If proposed legislation is too far left, it won't pass the Senate where 60 votes is needed to overcome the filibuster.
I assume they are going to toss that rule or at least suspend it on certain legislation.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Good point, I hope you are right that the GOP win at least one of the Georgia races.
I hope they don’t. We have to get rid of McConnell, and that’s the only way.

I wouldn't normally mind a majority of the Senate being Republican. If the Democrats want to do something decent, some Republicans should go along. The problem however is that if they are in the majority, they'll elect McConnell as speaker. He won't allow a bill to be considered unless he approves of it. That's just protection against Democratic overreach. It's one person with more power than even the president with a veto.

The senate needs to change its rules so the parties aren't so important. A one-person change in party balance shouldn't cause a reversal in policies. An obvious change would be to allow the minority leader some ability to schedule bills.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: ArmenianJohn
Upvote 0

CyberPaladin

Veteran
Dec 2, 2005
2,948
202
44
✟53,287.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
The question was what will become law. Several of those are very unlikely to pass, even with a Democratic Senate. I’ve marked the ones I think have a reasonable chance. I doubt the specific Medicare plan you suggest will happen, but probably some expansion of government aid to health care. Also, like a big infrastructure bill. With Democratic Senate control, the Equality Act, though the Supreme Court seems to be doing that anyway. Some kind of police reform, I guess, though that may be more a matter of enforcement, so it will be a priority for the Justice Department. Further attempts to reduce prison population.

With a Republican Senate, maybe some climate change rules and an infrastructure bill. Likely nothing else.

I’ve put a minus next to things that are dangerous enough politically that Democrats would be unlikely to try. Marijuana can be removed a schedule 1 by administrative action. Since it's clearly not schedule 1 (there are therapeutic uses) that should be easy.

I'm not sure legislation is needed to handle immigration policy. That's largely left to the administration.

I'm not clear what the situation with abortion legislation. I'm not sure whether Federal law can actually prevent states from making it illegal. If so, Democrats would in principle like to do that. However I doubt if it practice it will happen. Even with a 50/50 Senate, so that it can get scheduled, I'm skeptical that there would be enough support among Democratic Senators to pass it.

I'd also put a minus to the $15 minimum wage would wreck many areas of the country's economy and look I get that living in NYC and LA it probably is needed but there is alot of country in between where it isn't. I'm guessing that probably alot of people in government realize this.
I mean really I just looked at my local classifieds there is a 1 bedroom apartment for $ 423 and efficiency apartment for $ 314. So it really does depend where live and agree that the minimum in many parts and maybe everywhere needs over hauled but the cost of living varies to much for a one size fits all fix from Federal government is not a good plan.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
I'd also put a minus to the $15 minimum wage would wreck many areas of the country's economy and look I get that living in NYC and LA it probably is needed but there is alot of country in between where it isn't. I'm guessing that probably alot of people in government realize this.
I mean really I just looked at my local classifieds there is a 1 bedroom apartment for $ 423 and efficiency apartment for $ 314. So it really does depend where live and agree that the minimum in many parts and maybe everywhere needs over hauled but the cost of living varies to much for a one size fits all fix from Federal government is not a good plan.
Perhaps. It makes sense for minimum wage to depend upon cost of living.
 
Upvote 0

CyberPaladin

Veteran
Dec 2, 2005
2,948
202
44
✟53,287.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Perhaps. It makes sense for minimum wage to depend upon cost of living.

Yeah I've always felt it should be handle more at the state level and even then if you have something like NYC or Seattle you might need to adjust it regionally. Also think sometimes people kind of have the wrong attitude about it since by design it's suppose to be a starting amount to prevent extreme exploitation not be an average wage people are shooting for as there long term income.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums