you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 2 days ago (6 children)

I'm not American so I'm not super well versed in American politics... but I didn't realize until reading your comment that there isnt really a chance at seeing sweeping changes as a result of this election.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

    Sweeping changes are incredibly difficult because the US Constitution intentionally made change slow. It was a purposeful attempt by the founders to prevent rapid policy changes and have some degree of stability.

    When passing laws, 2/3 of EACH house of Congress is required to overcome a veto. This is why passing laws is difficult when one party does not own both houses with the presidency or a super majority in both houses without. This also says nothing about the judicial and their ability to check either of the other branches, in terms of what is "constitutional" per their interpretation.

    Amendments to the US Constitution are even harder. 2/3 of each house of Congress or 2/3 of state legislatures must agree to a proposal and then 3/4 of the states must agree to the change for it to pass and the Constitution be amended.

    What happened last night is one step on the road to permanent change, since historically red states have shifted (for now), and those states are required for long term policy to be put into place. It's an important step, but tempered expectations are crucial. There is still a lot of good/harm reduction that can be done as a result.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago (3 children)

    Except president it seems. Super unstable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children)

    Are you able to clarify what you mean?

    Presidents don't have the power to make laws according to the Constitution, only the authority to enforce them. The executive branch controls the DOJ and other executive departments and over time, the legislative branch has ceded power to the executive. A president changing those departments as they see fit is unfortunately without meaningful guardrails and where most of the damage has been done. Sweeping changes here are only possible with compliance from other bodies of government. This current version of the executive branch was not intended by the Constitution.

    Unlawful executive orders (not laws) have mostly been deemed unconstitutional by the judicial, excluding when the supreme court becomes involved and chooses to make partisan decisions that disregard years of precedent. A compliant congressional majority has failed to curb overreach by the executive, especially regarding actions that would usually be considered acts of war. Compliant branches failing to provide checks and balances as intended allowed the damages to occur within areas governed not by laws but by traditions.

    It's incredibly easy to tear down components of the executive branch when the other two branches offer no resistance. Many things that were "understood" as the norm should have been codified into law and were not. There is now resistance in place with the power to resist, since one party no longer controls all 3 branches. Whether they will or won't is a different story.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (1 child)

    It's just an unnecessary amount of power and independence concentrated in one man. US president can enforce laws as he wishes or not enforce or enforce his own interpretation. No consequences unless a two third majority of Senate sees it as a political advantage to do so.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

    Agreed. It wasn't designed to be this way though and could only happen as it has with compliant politicians in other branches. Complete control across all 3 branches of government is not common and has only happened something like 3 times in the past 40 years.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago

    Correct. Best case scenario, we can be obstructionists to anything Mango Mussolini wants to do. Congress could pass really great stuff and let Fuckface go on record as vetoing it. Though he'd just blame it on Biden. I HIGHLY doubt enough Republicans would defect to override one of his vetoes. It requires 2/3 of both houses. The Democrats have a simple majority but do not have a veto-proof majority.

  • source
  • parent