In my opinion, the Democrats cannot address any issue until this issue addressed.

[shockey80]

Campaign Finance Reform.

How can you address climate change when the fossil fuel industry buys politicians?

How can you address healthcare when the Insurance companies buy politicians?

How can you address gun control when the gun lobby buys politicians?

How can you address anything when rich people buy politicians?

The fight in America is the fight against big money in our politics. That's what is fucking everything up.

[CurtEastPoint]

1. One big ball of wax: voting securely and unimpeded, campaign reform incl. Citizens United.

[TDale313]

5. Yes, this!

nothing else gets fixed until people can vote and their voices and interests aren’t drowned out by the obscene amounts of cash flooding the system.

[Hortensis]

38. How many of these ignorant threads are going to be posted?

And why? How is that everyone doesn't know by now that Democrats have been working on this and much more for months? Actually, years? Our candidates explained what they intended to do in 2016, many times over.

Maybe google "democracy reform task force." Most of us should be inspired and glad to know that our votes were instrumental in providing the power needed to get this going. How's public financing of campaigns for just one little item sound? As good as in 2016 when both Sanders and Clinton, plus dozens (hundreds?) running for congress, promised to make it happen?

Btw, although passion on this one, huge issue is worthy, what (or who) is behind the recurring, reposted notion that the 236 (and counting) members of our house caucus should focus on this and nothing else? Climate change, anyone? A refusal to tackle a very long list of compelling problems is not a winning idea.

To get an idea of what happens in the house, here's a list of the current 2018 house committees and subcommittees, 21 regular standing, 95 subcommittees, plus others! There may be changes, but as of 2019 every committee and subcommittee will be chaired and controlled by Democrats -- thanks to us. They will each be working on many issues specific to them, while those on our democracy reform task force and related committees will tend to campaign finance reform and other huge reform issues.

List of current United States House of Representatives committees
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_House_of_Representatives_committees

[KPN]

44. There's a history but what are the results?

Get off the high horse and at least try to understand the perspective of others who understand every point you make but are disappointed and unhappy with the results. If everything can be blamed or is because of the Republican, third party and non/voterswhat does that say about Democrats?

There is nothing wrong with people stating what is obvious and should have already happened anyway. It’s called venting, not ignorance.

[Hortensis]

53. This is about US. Answer your own question.

If most Democrats knew these answers and was proud of them we'd sweep the nation. Because when politics was discussed we'd be talking with conviction and excitement about what we're part of, instead of nodding and agreeing ignorantly that we're only less bad than Republicans and the nation's going to hell.

KPN, didn't you watch even one debate? Those are for the millions of people who only pay attention a few times during general elections, so they hit all the most important points as clearly as possible. And of course we were big on campaign finance reform, and Trump didn't know what it was.

Democracy reform. When you talk Democrats, talk democracy reform. But first learn what's in it. Clue: It's very big with several sections, bills for lists of issues that must be fixed in each.

[Roy Rolling]

66. Speak for yourself

The OP is saying exactly what your point "ignorant thread" is complaining about. Until Democrats succeed in this issue, it will continue to be a relevant topic, not an "ignorant thread". The proper response should be "Democrats are working on that issue, but have not had much success. Yet."

But, please, by all means educate me on what is ignorant and saving me the time of reading for myself. Sheesh.

[Hortensis]

67. When considering issues, our first thoughts should be

* WHAT is our party's position on this and what plans have they developed/are underway?
* After that comes finding out.
* After that finally comes our reactions to what we now know.

Those who take those simple first steps not only become wiser but usually significantly happier and more confident than before.

Win, win, win.

[certainot]

56. republican talk radio is worth about $5BIL/yr - fix that first and the rest is easy.

ignoring it continues to be the biggest political mistake in history.

dems aren't going to get any major reforms until they stop ignoring rw talk radio.

the usual assumption is that dems aren't successful with major reforms because they don't try hard enough, they don't care, they want the money too, they can't message, etc. so then we attack dems and don't vote.

talk radio is the only major medium with NO competition on the other side of the political spectrum. it is the only advantage the republicans have.

ignoring it makes every effort harder. if the R-cons paid $1000/hr for radio infomercial time, 1200 coordinated radio stations x 15 hrs/day are worth about $5BIL/year, $18 MIL/day, and unlike its little brother fox they can localize all that to every local election and issue they want.

if they only paid $200/hr it would still be worth about $1BIL/yr - and it's all free!

why can't dems get campaign finance reform? why do they get beaten every time they try? they've been howling for 30 years across 40 states with 80 senators that money is free speech, corporations are people, unions contribute as much as corporations, etc.

supreme court? liberals/left/dems just let limbaugh on 600 radio stations trash blasey ford for three weeks straight - and it worked exactly like it did 30 years ago when he trashed anita hill, got thomas on, and democrats had no fucking clue.

Artificial intelligence will force ad industry to kill RW radio. Dems can accelerate the inevitable.

[watoos]

61. Bingo!

Don't limit your discussion to Republican talk radio though. All of cable news pushes the corporate agenda.

Take away all of the campaign money and doing nothing about the corporate controlled M$M will do nothing.

The M$M is always underestimated in its influence on brainwashing people.

[certainot]

63. but radio presents the best opportunity for offense - since it has been

completely free and easy for them and it's basically operating outside the free speech spectrum with a 20 - 1 monopoly advantage

there are alternatives for cable a click away. and fox wouldn't last long without talk radio

[DownriverDem]

65. End Citizens United

That is on the beginning agenda along with restoring The Voting Rights Act.

[chowder66]

2. A DUer posted their agenda just a few days ago...link to post

House Dems' first bill includes:

-Automatic voter registration

-Restoration of the Voting Rights Act

-Public financing of elections

-An end to Congressional gerrymandering

-A constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United



https://upload.democraticunderground.com/100211427733

[CurtEastPoint]

9. YES TO ALL OF THE ABOVE!

[Pepsidog]

12. While we are at it, SC and Fed.Ct. term limits and staggered terms.

[erronis]

14. I rec'd this agenda before and I'm doing it again.

Such a good list of items to get done as soon as possible.

Wonder if they shouldn't be broken up into separate bills to get some/most of them through, tho.

[Fuzzpope]

27. Not so fast

Being realistic here, none of these things are going to pass the Senate, much less get signed by Trump.

What this is in practical terms is a selling point to the American people, as in, "you got us here, now this is what we can do if you follow through and help us retake the senate and white house."

They are voter incentives, and that's it, although incredibly important ones, because when they are shot down in flames by the adversaries, said adversaries will then be directly accountable to voters for not carrying their best interests as their agendas.

[Pepsidog]

30. Yea more like a progressive "wish list". Maybe someday.

[Pepsidog]

35. It's gonna take a Long time to get this done unless we get a Teddy Roosevelt type of personality.

Imagine a president with Obama’s brains and Trump’s balls or Pelosi’s ovaries. Trump could have been a transformational president. Imagine Trump as a progressive. Without a cent of political ideology to back him up, conservatives were fortunate to have such an ignorant, misinformed, dumb-ass for a candidate. I can’t believe I just wrote that sentence. if Trump ran as a Democrat and won, oh boy, what we could have gotten done. We could have wiped out the conservatives for good and transformed our political, social and legal institutions to make a truly great nation. We are already starting to see Trump suck up to Dems. When he sees the favorable press he gets he will suck up even more to Dems. What does he care about the country? The words Trump and Patriot are not synonymous. He is out for himself and oh how Dems could have used that if he was our ignorant, misinformed, dumb-ass candidate.

[Leith]

3. I Agree

The laws seriously need to be changed drastically.

To start with, nobody but American citizens can contribute to a candidate. No noncitizens, no corporations, no organizations. This includes issue advocacy advertising. 501(c)(3) attack ads have to stop.

Second, one may not contribute to a candidate that one cannot vote for.

Third, a person's total annual contribution amount must be limited. If you want to contribute to more than one candidate, the collect total given not exceed the limit. No billionaires outspending the rest of us.

[Garrett78]

4. I'd also like for there to be term limits. Congress shouldn't be a career.

And when a politician isn't running for re-election, they aren't as beholden to special interests (which is how this relates to the OP). The only Republicans who speak out against Trump are those who are retiring.

I'm inclined to support limiting Senators to 1 term, as 12 years is a damn long time.

[erronis]

15. But I do believe that the experience counts. Maybe making it easier to get rid of an incumbant?

A long time ago I proposed something like this:

- One person, one vote. All elections paid for by the taxpayer (common election fund.)

- Voting done over the Internet (couldn't be any worse than the fraud that goes on in other forms.)

- Snap recall votes can happen at any time when greater than 50% request one
--- If the incumbent garners at least 40% of the vote, no change
--- If the incumbent gets between 20% and 40% of the vote, a new election is held within two weeks
--- If the incumbent gets less than 20%, they are thrown out with no pension. (I used to call for immediate electrocution but think of the cleanup.)

[ZZenith]

54. Voting over the internet is the worst idea I have ever heard.

Ridiculous on its face and even more so at its core.

[Martin Eden]

18. I don't think term limits are the answer to the problem

The problem being corruption.

Longevity in the House or Senate is not in itself a bad thing. In any field, experience is a big plus when it comes to job performance. An elected representative, to truly serve the public interest, needs a wide range of knowledge on how government policies and budgets address critical issues, and also how to craft & pass legislation.

Term limits would kick representatives out of office just as they were becoming effective leaders, and it would discourage those interested in careers in public service because it's not easy starting over when you're not independently wealthy. On the other hand, the revolving door might attract those who are looking to procure lucrative rewards for their service to special interests after they leave office.

The real problem is the system of legalized bribery which serves the deep pocket special interests. Our elected representatives have to spend an inordinate amount of time meeting with lobbyists and raising campaign funds for their next election.

That's what really needs fixing.

[EffieBlack]

23. Thank you - you are dead on

Term limits would do nothing to take the money out of politics - in fact, it would make it worse because new, less experienced members would be more reliant upon lobbyists and professional staff. We shouldn't have a Congress filled with people with little knowledge of the fine points of governing.

Term limits would not address any problem, but would bring us more Ted Cruzes and fewer Ted Kennedys.

[Garrett78]

25. Good points. I concede.

[meadowlander]

22. Yes it should be.

And creating a revolving door between government and industry isn't going to create politicians that aren't beholden to special interests. It's going to create more former lobbyists who become politicians and more lame duck politicians hoping to get a cushy industry job when their term limits are up.

Becoming good at politics is a lifetime's work. There's no reason to turf out the experienced politicians. I don't even think we should have term limits on the presidency. Barack Obama would have squashed Trump if he'd been allowed to run again.

[Pepsidog]

31. True. Living in the DC bubble to long causes many of these politicians to lose touch with what real

Americans struggle with every day. We definitely need term limits for congress and federal bench. Especially the federal judiciary!!

[loyalsister]

49. I once thought term limits would be a good idea

Then they went into effect in MO. It has been a nightmare because serving in the state legislature now serves as a golden parachute to a lobbyist position. From there they write the bills and tell the next in line legislators to pass them.
There's also the problem of it being most costly to run for first term. That is why since they went into effect we have been cursed with an ever expanding, well financed, republican supermajority.
Elections are term limits. It's better to be involved in recruiting new candidates to run against incumbents than to trash the government with a revolving door of inexperienced lobbyists in waiting working at the behest of special interest groups.
Experience counts and there are jobs that are supposed to serve public interests should not be subject to exploitation for advancement to more lucrative professions.

[Garrett78]

55. Several replies to my post have convinced me term limits won't help, but...

..."elections are term limits" is merely a nice idea in theory. The re-election rate for incumbents is outrageously high, even this year. Congress has a lousy approval rating, but most people seem to think their Representative and Senators are just fine. Do away with corruption and "elections as term limits" can become a reality.

Being elected to Congress should not be a ticket to massive wealth, which it is with or without term limits. Members of Congress should not ever reap personal profits from legislation, nor should there exist a revolving door between public office and lobbying firms.

I'm definitely on board with public financing. That would go a long way toward addressing corruption.

[Power 2 the People]

6. +1000

[sandensea]

7. Well said.

Campaign finance reform is the sine qua non of any other reforms.

It's small wonder big business opposes this more staunchly than anything else.

[empedocles]

8. On the other hand, 'Campaign Finance Reform' is not going to happen with a 'con Senate,

there may be other issues which can be addressed in the next 2 years.

[I do absolutely agree campaign finance reform is crucial].

[NurseJackie]

64. Thank you! You're absolutely correct about that!

there may be other issues which can be addressed in the next 2 years.

Better to achieve what's possible instead of making unrealistic pie-in-the-sky demands.

A rational and real world approach makes more sense to me.

[Firestorm49]

10. Obama said when elected he would end or curtail lobbying.

Good fricking luck. I for one would love to see power returned to the people, but wow, that would be one hell of a fight.

I stated years ago that national decisions should be voted on by the people like local referendums. How it could be efficiently implemented goes beyond my knowledge, but I see it as a way to let the voice of the people be heard. As of now, we’re only bozos on this bus, and I for one resent the premise.

[Jarqui]

11. As a part of that issue

I think gerrymandering, voter-id/suppression issues, voting machine issues, etc fall under that effort to get every possible vote fairly and get them accurately counted.

I do think the electoral college needs review.
Places like Puerto Rico need review

[stopbush]

13. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

And all roads lead to Rome. So I’m going to go ahead and disagree with your premise.

Dems have a HUGE agenda to address if this country is to get back to Square One, let alone move in a liberal direction. The absolutely worst thing Congressional Ds could do is to insist on some arbitrary “must do first” item before addressing everything. All that does is give the Rs an issue to focus on and to obstruct and defeat.

If Ds are smart, they will adopt the R way of doing things: attack on as many fronts as possible. Keep the targets in motion. Provide so many targets that Rs can’t focus on any one target. When the Rs do focus on a target, launch a new target.

We win the war by winning the most battles, not by constructing a political Maginot line.

[gristy]

46. This!

These are very good ideas!

[Fuzzpope]

16. Here!

Truer words, never spoken.

[Liberty Belle]

17. Get rid of paperless touch screen voting machines, which I suspect are still rigging votes

in some conservative bastions like Florida and Georgia.

We need to eliminate EVERY means of voter suppression but the machines are the most sinister, because if Reps control the voting machines, no matter how high the turnout, they can still change the outcome.

California does not allow touch screen machines anywhere, except for disabled voters. That's probably one reason why our entire state is so blue -- Dems control 100% of statewide offices here and 2/3 of both houses of the Legislature, as well as both US Senate seats and nearly all Congressional seats.

When votes cannot be hacked or rigged, look what happens!

[47of74]

37. I think voter suppression and electoral fraud should be punishable by death.

They are violent crimes that can cause so much death and destruction that there's only one proper punishment. The punishment for electoral fraud and voter suppression should be so God awful that no one will want to commit these violent crimes, much less take one for the team.

[question everything]

19. The irony is that insurance company embraced the ACA because it added more subscribers

It is important to suggest that the single payer is an option.

We should do what other nations do - each pays a tax to support national medical care, but each is free to purchase private insurance. After all, this is how our public education system works.

[vlyons]

20. Be careful what you wish for

to say that we can't address ANYTHING until campaign finance reform might mean that we don't get ANYTHING done. I agree that it needs to be itemized under "Very Important." I would like to see first raising the minimum wage--independent of tax reform. There are so many working people, who desparately need a raise. Plus a bigger pay-check will show working people that the Dems fignt for them and put them first.

[JudyM]

21. Corruption in general is the bane of our democracy. Campaign finance reform would be a great start.

Justices appointed for life are also corrupt. Our election infrastructure/processes are rife with corruption; we must have minimum standards for voting equipment. etc.

[PatrickforO]

24. In order to eliminate corporate corruption in our national politics, we must get at the root cause:

The current capitalistic 'market' economic principle of the primacy of the shareholder.

Let me explain: Right now, if you are CEO of a publicly held company, your ONLY job is to increase shareholder earnings. This is the fiduciary responsibility of any C-Suite corporate officer.

For workers, this means that if you can, you will bust unions, weaken safety measures in your physical plants, try to steal pensions, and drive wages and benefits down as far as you can.

For consumers, this means that you'll cut corners to get around regulations meant to keep consumers safe, decrease the size of packaging but charge the same price, renege on warranties if possible.

For the environment, you will try your best to never have to pay for any damage your company does to the environment. If you do damage the environment, you'll fight to escape any financial responsibility so it can remain an 'externality.'

And, of course, you will donate large sums of money to politicians that vote for policies that deregulate, privatize and redistribute wealth from the treasury to corporate profits.

All this ekes out the uttermost profits for shareholders.

Expand fiduciary responsibility to include the welfare of workers, consumers and the environment so these things, as well as shareholder earnings, must be addressed, and you solve much of the problem that has driven corporate interests to corrupt our politicians.

Fortunately Elizabeth Warren has introduced the "Accountable Capitalism Act" this August that would do just that. Here's a link, and I encourage all of you to read the article and support this legislation in the new Congress.

https://www.vox.com/2018/8/15/17683022/elizabeth-warren-accountable-capitalism-corporations

Here's a short excerpt:

Warren’s plan starts from the premise that corporations that claim the legal rights of personhood should be legally required to accept the moral obligations of personhood.

Traditionally, she writes in a companion op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, “corporations sought to succeed in the marketplace, but they also recognized their obligations to employees, customers and the community.” In recent decades they stopped, in favor of a singular devotion to enriching shareholders. And that’s what Warren wants to change.

<snip>

Warren wants to eliminate the huge financial incentives that entice CEOs to flush cash out to shareholders rather than reinvest in businesses. She wants to curb corporations’ political activities. And for the biggest corporations, she’s proposing a dramatic step that would ensure workers and not just shareholders get a voice on big strategic decisions.

Warren hopes this will spur a return to greater corporate responsibility, and bring back some other aspects of the more egalitarian era of American capitalism post-World War II — more business investment, more meaningful career ladders for workers, more financial stability, and higher pay.

[beachbum bob]

26. Can't do anything with GOP control in senate and whitehouse.

[Fuzzpope]

28. Exactly.

And even then, we have the SC to contend with.

The ugly truth is, Citizens United spelled the end of non-corporate/big doners/pac control over government.

It's all but impossible to reverse, and we don't have a fraction of the political power and capital to make it happen. For now. Until then, the American voting public is effectively locked out until we have 360 degrees supermajority of all three branches.

There has to be a path forward, somehow. I don't see it, but I'm nobody.

[NCcoast]

29. Bullseye!

We have a winner. And I'll rank it above term limits for those of you who are proponents of that.

And here's what will be a very unpopular idea. Pay congressman and senators well, very well. Why would you pay them less than they could make in a law practice back home? But don't let them take another dime, from anyone. Make sure they can live very comfortably without taking money from other sources and don't allow them to go out and sell themselves.

[brooklynite]

32. So, you're saying we shouldn't do anything?

Campaign finance reform of the type you want requires a change in the Constitution or the Supreme Court.

[AllaN01Bear]

33. campaign finance reform has been one of my big sticks , we need to get corperate moneies out

[Amimnoch]

34. Education - Courses in critical thinking added to require high school.

Attack the problem at the root.

A better educated electorate, armed with critical thinking skills, trained in researching for truth will kill off the power that soft money, corporate money, and misleading advertising posesses.

The money from those industries cannot buy politicians that are held to account by those who vote for them.

The money put into advertising and campaign finance has no power if those targeted scrutizine and cut through the bullshit.

Corporations don’t have a vote, citizens do.
Money has no vote, citizens do.

Improve the citizens education, and their power goes away.

[DallasNE]

36. And That Takes A Constitutional Amendment

To nullify Citizens United. With 5 far right Justice's on the Supreme Court this will take decades as 4 of the 5 are young and Thomas is still only in his 60's.

[lastlib]

42. Thomas turned 70 this year.

But your point is valid regardless. Support for a constitutional amendment to overturn it must be THE litmus test for EVERY candidate for public office, from POTUS to city dog-catcher.

[violetpastille]

39. Restore and Strengthen The Voting Rights Act

We still have a partial democracy, let's focus and leverage the hell out of what representation we can get to restore voting rights.

How can we address big money in government if the stalwart base of our party is denied the right to vote?

[lastlib]

40. THE litmus test for EVERY candidate for public office,,,,,

from President to city dog-catcher, MUST be support for a Constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United.

The Democratic Party MUST become the party that advocates this from top to bottom. Without it, we're just twiddling thumbs against the big-dollar donor class.

[Volaris]

41. Agreed.

Publicly Funded elections, via a small national sales tax, and everything else will follow naturally from that.

[luvtheGWN]

47. Please allow a Canuck's 2 cent's worth:

The greatest problem the U.S. faces is that you all (y'all) have been convinced from the cradle that the USA is THE BEST at everything and if I hear one more politician or pundit have the NERVE to state that "Only in America does true democracy exist/thrive" there goes my TV screen.

No, here's the facts, folks: You all refuse to look at how how other democracies manage to flourish and thrive; how most have very short election "seasons"; how the equivalent of your Reps or Senators do not spend 75% of their time fundraising; how your judges are NOT chosen based on their right/left leanings; how there is no such thing as "corporations are people too" nor anything resembling Citizens United; how federal elections are actually run by a NON-partisan federal elections commission and that federal districts are drawn up by the same commission; how maintaining and parsing a Constitution written well over 200 years ago for a country that has changed so very much requires annual updating to fit the needs and solve the problems of today's society.

Well, I could go on and on, but really and truly the USA could learn so very much by looking outward to see what works and, especially, recognize and ADMIT what is not working for its citizens. As NPR's Jack Beatty said before the 2016 election -- "The US has returned to the gilded age and until we admit that, we're doomed." Your country has been blessed to have great natural resources, an intelligent and hardworking workforce, innovations that help the entire world. You have so much, and yet the most surmountable problems have you in such a bind.

[LBM20]

43. Yes, needs to be addressed. And they will. Remember, the R Senate and Trump have to approve.

[libdem4life]

45. With all due respect, pretty sure they can multi-task. It's not a one- or first-trick pony.

But it is of high importance, to be sure. My take is that the Republicans first need to be stymied by our capable Adam Schiff... with constant attacks on The Cretin's malfeasance. Having control of the House is great, and the Committee Chairman switching to Democrats, but it's not a blank check like the Republicans had with both House and Senate.

Harder then we think to get true change done, due to The Turtle, until the American people SEE...on their TV with public hearings, the trainwreck and imposter he is. And the solid Red Wall starts to crack a bit...worrying about their own re-election. Because that is first and foremost...always their concern.

Of course not the30% or so who would support The Cretin shooting someone on 5th Avenue, but the Independents, the first time voters, the Blue Wave of support we saw in the Midterms. The Base Base will always be with us...sadly. But their percentage goes down, as the voter registrations and voter participation goes up carried by the Blue Wave, and by the aging out...i.e. old white men...dying off.

This will take awhile, but to go charging into serious battle with them, knowing that in the end they may have the upper hand getting anything passed, let alone not Vetoed. Also full well knowing that campaign rigging and illegal processe, etc. is how they got some of the big wins they did, we need to be judicious and cagey...calling Nancy Pelosi...about how we progress. I trust she'll know what is best, what is achievable and will have no problem carrying it out.

Also, to make them even more rabid about it, many in Congress would not have been there without these illegal acts and may not get re-elected were it successful in putting in new regulations.

To me, the greatest problem at this time, is the dimwit newcomers challenge to her leadership. What we don't need is egomaniacs learning on the job. Let's talk about her in two years, while she trains her successor. I'm hoping for Beto, myself. He's got enough state rep experience to go on a steep learning curve...which it will be.

We've waited 8 years for this. We have to get it right the first time. And again, although I'm not that especially fond of her, Nancy is our Ace in the Hole.

[Gothmog]

48. ActBlue has equalized the fundraising issue to a large degree

ActBlue allowed Beto to raise $70 million and for Democrats to out raise republicans in many house races

Link to tweet

[NCcoast]

57. For now...

But I wouldn't count on that as an ongoing way to finance elections. It took a moment of near hysteria to reach that leave of giving. It won't always be that way. The right/GOP always has one huge advantage, money. And when you have millions/billions it's mostly discretionary income. When the economy sours very little of what the working class has will be discretionary.

We need to strike now while the iron is hot. We need publicly funded elections, and an end to voter suppression, gerrymandering, insecure voting equipment and any partisan meddling in elections. Reforms like these will help prevent either party from putting it's thumb on the scales in the future. That is, until the systems are eroded and corrupted again. Rust never sleeps.

[pdsimdars]

50. E X A C T L Y ! ! ! ! ! Get it at the root or it will never go away.

[JI7]

51. We needed a President Al Gore so the Supreme Court would not rule different campaign finance

[Raven123]

52. Not sure they can do much with this SCOTUS

[rwsanders]

58. Well just voting reform in general...

It is a right.
Fair representation is a right, not being gerrymandered into a district that dilutes equal representation in congress.

Money is not speech, corporations are not persons.

[SergeStorms]

59. And scrap the Electoral College.

It's totally outdated and gives the dumb red states too much say in electing a president.

[pnwmom]

60. The Supreme Court's Citizen's v. United decision stands in the way. n/t

[disillusioned73]

62. On point.. unfortunately some ignore this problem

[ehrnst]

68. More immediately - healthcare and gerrymandering, and they are both on the agenda.

Health care is an emergency, and if Dems are unable to win districts that would give us the house, then we can't pass any sort of legislation.