# Post-Trump reforms you'd like to see **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 23, 2018, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703 "2018-05-23T21:30:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![storyteller0910](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecae2f/32.png) [@storyteller0910](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/storyteller0910)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2018, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/121 "2018-06-04T22:34:35Z")
> [@Ashtura](#): > > I also think they should get rid of presidential pardons (I’ve thought this long before Trump). That just seems like a “king” type thing and I don’t like it. Yeah, I basically agree with this, in that I can’t see how the power - even as used by the President’s I’ve _admired_ - has been a net benefit to the country in my lifetime. It essentially amounts to a sort of judicial lottery ticket, but one only accessible to those fortunate enough to have unusual or high profile situations. What are the circumstances under which presidential pardon is a good thing? ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2018, 8:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/122 "2018-06-05T08:30:55Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#): > > Yeah, I basically agree with this, in that I can’t see how the power - even as used by the President’s I’ve _admired_ - has been a net benefit to the country in my lifetime. It essentially amounts to a sort of judicial lottery ticket, but one only accessible to those fortunate enough to have unusual or high profile situations. What are the circumstances under which presidential pardon is a good thing? My limited understanding is that presidential (and gubernatorial) pardons were intended as a check on the judicial branch, in the event judges and juries awarded excessive or unjust punishments. The extent to which this is working as intended is probably the same as everything else in the government: not very well. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2018, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/123 "2018-06-06T17:09:01Z")
> [@Jasmine](#): > > Bill Maher put it well. He pointed out that many more specifics are needed in terms of what a president can and cannot do. In the past, the “you just don’t do that” principle (tradition/decency/whatever) “controlled” the power of a president, but Trump is the first guy in the White House who will literally do ANYTHING to exercise his power and control everything around him. For example, he talks about things like “pardoning himself” (dictator) and being immune from an Obstruction of Justice charge because, as president, he supposedly is in charge of everything. > > I think it is time for the Constitution to go into far more detail in outlining and defining Presidential power and its limits. Trump has graphically shown that a president with the mentality of a dictator is a very dangerous thing. The real answer is for the voters to not elect an incompetent corrupt small-fingered vulgarian to the office of the fucking Presidency. If the voters can’t be trusted not to do that, then a long list of formal rules won’t help a thing, because those rules will just be ignored. ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2018, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/124 "2018-06-06T17:38:50Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > The real answer is for the voters to not elect an incompetent corrupt small-fingered vulgarian to the office of the fucking Presidency. > > If the voters can’t be trusted not to do that, then a long list of formal rules won’t help a thing, because those rules will just be ignored. I beg to differ. What you call “a long list of formal rules”, others may call “the Constitution.” It exists exactly for the purpose of checking and balancing and enumerating the powers of the branches of government. Recent experience shows that it needs tweaking, as happens from time to time. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2018, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/125 "2018-06-06T17:43:00Z")
The point is that a constitution works exactly because the people want it to, and won’t work if they don’t care about it, no matter what it says. There are even long-standing, successful democratic republics that don’t even have them. ---
**Author:** ![GargoyleWB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gargoylewb/32/199_2.png) [@GargoyleWB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GargoyleWB)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2018, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/126 "2018-06-06T18:46:14Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > I get what you’re saying… but up until now, relying on a President’s good judgment, humility, “tradition/decency” has worked. Trump is THE glaring exception. … If not checked with definable controls, instead of ‘sense of decency’, then Trump will become the new normal. He, along with Mitch McConnnell and a meek media, have demonstrated that there are no consequences (as of yet) to ignoring process and precedent. ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2018, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/127 "2018-06-06T22:47:01Z")
Here’s my idea: Per law, all persons appearing on the ballot in at least 45 states (e.g. no third party fringe candidates) are automatically subject to an FBI investigation following their nomination. Once completed, the FBI shall report the results to Congress, which is required to produce a bipartisan report for public consumption at least 30 days prior to the election. Now, in practice, the whole “bipartisan” part will have to be worked out, and the idea begs the question of what happens if the report is not finalized timely. The intent, though, is for this to be a comprehensive, “warts and all” exposure of the candidate before we all vote. Their finances; their personal life; their connections/friends and business associates. A full picture. This seeks to solve several issues: 1. Nobody can use the specter of an FBI inquiry to tarnish the other candidate. Everybody is going to be subject to an FBI investigation! 2. We can get the nonsense scandals out of the way before the presidency starts. The president once invested (and lost) money in a land deal where he partnered with a friend who later got implicated in the Savings & Loan crisis? Eh, the people still voted the guy into office, so it’s a non-issue. Let it die, rather than wasting time and tax payer money. 3. If there are legit questions or concerns about somebody, they are thoroughly vetted. This is the most important job interview in America. We should all know if the person is possibly compromised by a foreign power. It can’t stop them from being a candidate (since the qualifications are set by the Constitution), but a law can, and should, empower the entire country to know when there is evidence that a person is an obvious crook. ---
**Author:** ![Silver\_lining](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aca169/32.png) [@Silver\_lining](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Silver_lining)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2018, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/128 "2018-06-06T23:23:30Z")
> [@jsc1953](#): > > Let’s envision a time in the not-too-distant future. Trump is gone, and Congress is in the hands of a reasonable and bi-partisan group of legislators whose primary concern is the national welfare (it’s my fantasy, just roll with it). > > What reforms should they put into place to ensure that our current national nightmare doesn’t happen again? > > The last 18 months have shown that putting your hopes in “norms” and “checks and balances” doesn’t mean squat, when faced with a complete loon in the White House and spineless enablers in Congress. So we need some legislation with teeth. My list: > > 1. The Emoluments Clause. Ideally through a court decision (I believe there are cases wending their way now); but if not, then through a constitutional amendment: an explicit definition of ways in which the president cannot enrich himself through his office. > > 2. FEC? ruling that all presidential candidates must release their tax returns. > > 3. Congressional committee structure: change House and Senate rules, so that committees concerned with national or homeland security are to be comprised of equal representation from both parties, with co-chairs. The House Intelligence Committee was a complete embarrassment. > > 4. Advise & Consent. The most egregious and infuriating abuse of power in US legislative history was Mitch McConnell’s ignoring of Obama’s SCOTUS appointment. Again, ideally through a court decision but an amendment if necessary – an unequivocal statement that the president’s appointment power extends to the last day of his term; and that the Senate has xx days to exercise their right to advise and consent. Failure to do so would result in the nominee’s appointment by default. > > 5. Move the DOJ. (I’m not sure how I feel about this but I’m throwing it out for debate). The DOJ becomes part of the Judicial branch. The Attorney General is appointed by the president to a 5 year term, and can only be removed by impeachment. January 2025 is not too far away… One reform I would like to see is foreign contributions to any USA campaign is illegal, or caped at a reasonable amount. To ensure the integrity of our elections, voter ID should be required. ---
**Author:** ![antechinus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/fbc32d/32.png) [@antechinus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/antechinus)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/129 "2018-06-07T04:48:44Z")
> [@Sunny\_Daze](#): > > Let’s deal with representation while we’re at it: > > snip\> > -End gerrymandering. Handle re-districting with balanced committees, with oversight by the DOJ or another neutral body. > snip\> A few observations from an outsider: - Re: Gerrymandering… Set up an independent Electoral Commission to determine and maintain electoral boundaries based on a neutral algorithm. - Run elections on a **weekend** , so that everyone can easily vote. Or have a national Democracy Day public holiday for this purpose. Have sausage sizzles at the voting booths. - Have one person = one vote, rather than basing national election on 6 states. - Greatly reduce political donations. ---
**Author:** ![Mnemnosyne](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mnemnosyne/32/3347_2.png) [@Mnemnosyne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mnemnosyne)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 7:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/130 "2018-06-07T07:29:09Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > This. > > The fact that presidential pronouncements should be made known through Twitter is absurd. It’s a shameful example of how we’ve all normalized and now take for granted that thump walks around with underpants on his head. > > He has steadily lowered standards of civility, decorum, morality, and proper conduct, and we’re just used to it now. Absolutely. Also, Presidential pronouncements should never be made over the telegram, telephone, radio, or television either. The only appropriate method is newspapers and the bellowing voice of a duly appointed town crier. I don’t really use most of these social media tools, not twitter or facebook or instagram or whatever else, but I think it’s nonsense to act as though there’s something inherently wrong with the medium. It’s what is said, not the medium by which it’s said. While I disagree with almost everything Trump says or does, I actually think his personally sending messages on Twitter when he feels like it is a positive thing. If only the things he said were coherent and reasonable, as they would be under a reasonable president. > [@BobLibDem](#): > > 5- If the Speaker of the House or the Senate Majority Leader are of the same party as the president, the minority leaders of each house shall have the authority to call for votes on any piece of legislation. I’m not sure this should require all three to be of the same party. I think any individual Senator or Representative should be able to somehow insist on a vote. Whoever is in the majority shouldn’t get absolute control over what can even be voted on, because it gives the majority too much power. Even something that is bound to be defeated can be valuable to have voted on simply to force the Senators and Representatives to go on the record with their choice. In order to prevent such things from clogging up the legislative branch’s time, one possible control would be to give each one a limited number of such calls per elected term, or per year, or per legislative session. Whatever works to keep them from using such a system to clog the chamber’s business with frivolous votes but still allow them to periodically go ‘no, this is really important and I refuse to allow it to simply be buried and forgotten’. Also, I wouldn’t limit it to just legislation, either, because this would also resolve the problem of the Senate ignoring a nominee instead of voting on them. Any Senator could insist on holding a vote for a nominee. ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 11:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/131 "2018-06-07T11:36:40Z")
> [@Mnemnosyne](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by ThelmaLou > > This. > > > > The fact that presidential pronouncements should be made known through Twitter is absurd. It’s a shameful example of how we’ve all normalized and now take for granted that thump walks around with underpants on his head. > > > > He has steadily lowered standards of civility, decorum, morality, and proper conduct, and we’re just used to it now. > > Absolutely. Also, Presidential pronouncements should never be made over the telegram, telephone, radio, or television either. The only appropriate method is newspapers and the bellowing voice of a duly appointed town crier. > > I don’t really use most of these social media tools, not twitter or facebook or instagram or whatever else, but I think it’s nonsense to act as though there’s something inherently wrong with the medium. It’s what is said, not the medium by which it’s said. While I disagree with almost everything Trump says or does, I actually think his personally sending messages on Twitter when he feels like it is a positive thing. If only the things he said were coherent and reasonable, as they would be under a reasonable president. > … “Nonsense”? You read a lot between my lines there, Bubba. I didn’t say there was anything inherently wrong with social media. I never mentioned the word “newspaper.” I did not mention telegram, telephone, radio, or television either. You _reductio ad absurdum_’d my point. I said that he should not make presidential pronouncements known through Twitter. Maybe I should have inserted the word “official.” I think the fact that he urps out every stupid thought through Twitter is a good thing, too, because it reveals his ignorance. Every day. Are you okay with the president using Twitter as the official channel to announce, say, the firing of cabinet officials? Declarations of war? Nominations to the Supreme Court? ---
**Author:** ![guizot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guizot/32/3636_2.png) [@guizot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/guizot)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/132 "2018-06-07T11:47:31Z")
He uses Twitter precisely because fundamentally he doesn’t have anything to say. He just wants attention. The medium is the message. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/133 "2018-06-07T14:10:58Z")
> [@Mnemnosyne](#): > > I’m not sure this should require all three to be of the same party. I think any individual Senator or Representative should be able to somehow insist on a vote. Whoever is in the majority shouldn’t get absolute control over what can even be voted on, because it gives the majority too much power. Yes, your idea is better than mine. It drives me nuts that with something like DACA, there can be a solid majority for passing a bill but it can’t get a vote because the Speaker won’t allow it. That’s nuts. Any member should be able to force a vote. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/134 "2018-06-07T14:22:02Z")
There is a method. The discharge petition in the House is just two or three votes short. ---
**Author:** ![liljoe78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f1d935/32.png) [@liljoe78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/liljoe78)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/135 "2018-06-07T19:03:50Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > I get what you’re saying… but up until now, relying on a President’s good judgment, humility, “tradition/decency” has worked. Trump is THE glaring exception… a lot of people voting for trump did so explicitly to throw a “monkey wrench” into your democracy. this is the expected result. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/136 "2018-06-07T21:33:45Z")
> [@Mnemnosyne](#): > > While I disagree with almost everything Trump says or does, I actually think his personally sending messages on Twitter when he feels like it is a positive thing. If only the things he said were coherent and reasonable, as they would be under a reasonable president. This. It’s not what technology Trump uses to communicate (after all, Obama tweeted aplenty, too.) It’s how he talks. ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2018, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/137 "2018-06-07T23:50:40Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > This. It’s not what technology Trump uses to communicate (after all, Obama tweeted aplenty, too.) It’s how he talks. It’s the ubiquity of the technology AND how he talks. ---
**Author:** ![guizot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guizot/32/3636_2.png) [@guizot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/guizot)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2018, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/138 "2018-06-08T00:16:22Z")
> [@liljoe78](#): > > a lot of people voting for trump did so explicitly to throw a “monkey wrench” into your democracy. this is the expected result. Yes, a lot of people fell for his bullshit dog-and-pony show straight out of reality television, thinking that they were somehow how going to make a statement by voting for him. There’s always someone running on this conceit–there was nothing new about the narrative that Trump was selling. This time, however, there were more gullible dumb-asses duped than ever before–that’s what was different. That’s what happens when you have a whole nation that increasingly is doing nothing but sitting on its lazy ass watching TV or dicking around on Facebook. They have no critical thinking ability. ---
**Author:** ![pantom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/34f0e0/32.png) [@pantom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pantom)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2018, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/139 "2018-06-08T00:53:08Z")
The pardon power needs to stay. It is meant to function as a last resort check against unjust judgments. EVERYTHING is subject to abuse. That’s not a reason to destroy it. The direction to go in is towards more, not less, checks. The list of abuses of Executive power is long, very long. There is one thing that will go a long way towards curbing those abuses: paring down the military. Federalist Number 8: “It is of the nature of war to increase the executive at the expense of the legislative authority.” That’s the US problem in a nutshell. To some extent it’s inevitable and comes with global success: the national interest of the US is to keep its supply lines open, and you can’t do that without a large navy and, these days, Air Force. China’s rapid ramping up of its military is for the same purpose, as they are now the primary buyer for most global commodities. But ours is crazy expensive and dominates the national budget to an extent that is nuts. As Dubya showed with the Iraq War, moving the existing standing army into place creates a fait accompli that makes war momentum irresistible. So, first thing, eliminate the standing army. Force the President to have to federalize and call up the National Guard if he wants to wage war, or make a call for volunteers or institute a draft. Lots of good things will flow just from that. ---
**Author:** ![Mnemnosyne](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mnemnosyne/32/3347_2.png) [@Mnemnosyne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mnemnosyne)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2018, 8:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703/140 "2018-06-08T08:12:37Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > “Nonsense”? You read a lot between my lines there, Bubba. I didn’t say there was anything inherently wrong with social media. I never mentioned the word “newspaper.” I did not mention telegram, telephone, radio, or television either. You _reductio ad absurdum_’d my point. > > I said that he should not make presidential pronouncements known through Twitter. Maybe I should have inserted the word “official.” I think the fact that he urps out every stupid thought through Twitter is a good thing, too, because it reveals his ignorance. Every day. > > Are you okay with the president using Twitter as the official channel to announce, say, the firing of cabinet officials? Declarations of war? Nominations to the Supreme Court? Yeah, actually, I don’t see anything wrong with using Twitter as an official channel, as long as the announcement is of something that is reasonable in itself. Would you raise an eyebrow at the President (any President) announcing such a thing via a televised announcement? If not, what makes Twitter different than other mediums of communication that you find it inappropriate? The only difference I see is that it is comparatively new, just as those other mediums were at one time, new. I suppose I just react harshly to the idea because it feels like because it’s Trump doing it, it’s ‘tainting’ the means of communication in people’s minds, even though I see nothing wrong with using the medium for official announcements. If a reasonable president announces their nomination of a reasonable candidate for the Supreme Court via Twitter, that doesn’t seem like a problem to me. Or the firing of a cabinet official, depending on how much detail he wants to give the public. One does have to take into account the limitations of the medium, after all. But if he would stand up in front of a podium and basically say “I hereby announce the nomination of X” and have it broadcast by radio or television, I see no reason not to make that same announcement over Twitter. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-trump-reforms-youd-like-to-see/814703.md?page=8)