Two Questions

[H2O Man]

There isn't a "right" or "wrong" answer to anyone's opinion. It's just about what people think now, while recognizing that Good People can change their opinions over time. This is based upon something my younger son said to me today. I appreciate any responses.

(1) Should President Biden attempt to expand the number of Justices on the Supreme Court?

(2) If President Biden does try, will the effort be successful?

[pwb]

1. Sure

If we win big. He should.

[H2O Man]

2. Thank you!

I appreciate it.

[Wounded Bear]

3. 1. Yes, though I think he opposes it...

2. Probably not, unless we kill the fillibuster and not until we get a bigger Senate majority.

[H2O Man]

4. Thanks!

[TreasonousBastard]

5. Yes to #1...

Who knows? to #2

I've thought for years that a nation that didn't even have calculus or the typewriter yet, couldn't really plan a nation that has expanded from a few million farmers and fishermen in 13 colonies to the millions in 50 states now. Most of what they left us has worked, but there is one glaring flaw with a tiny Supreme Court.

Too many would be cumbersome, but nine is just too few.

[H2O Man]

10. Thank you!

I've always told my kids that, before starting something important, to consider the potential good and bad outcomes, for both the short and long term. It appears that we are seeing the worst potential of the current Supreme Court.

[Karadeniz]

6. Yes he should, but I doubt that close to an election is good timing... it would just give the GOP

another weapon and a powerful one, at that.

[H2O Man]

11. Thanks!

Interesting points!

[Hekate]

7. #1 Yes. #2 Probably not

[H2O Man]

12. Thanks!

I go back and forth on this. But I do not think the current issue can be decided by people for religious reasons, as in this case. I like what a carpenter said about keeping your religion between you and "God."

[Hekate]

21. Off to the Greatest with you

[H2O Man]

23. Thank you!

Tomorrow I'll be planting more sunflowers outside. They have the ability to suck toxins out of the earth, and their seeds from the human body. Thus, I am hoping that those I plant in sight of the road remove the toxins of my neighbor's Trump signs.

[ms liberty]

8. Yes, and I don't know.

I think we shouldn't make big promises on it or hang our platform on it but if we do well in the mid terms - which is possible IMO with this Roe crap, and if we can do well with the J6 hearings - then we should do it, and we might succeed.

[H2O Man]

14. Thank you!

I agree that with this and the January 6 Committee hearings, we should be able to defeat the republicans in November.

Now, it's interesting -- even funny in a sad way -- but a few old friends who I asked to join me earlier in the year to work on primaries, but who said they were burned out, are now fired up.

As always, I appreciate your response.

[brooklynite]

9. No and No.

[H2O Man]

15. Thank you!

[H2O Man]

22. I think that is

a valid response, and have heard it when talking to others I know. One friend said that Congress should pass term limits for the justices. I think that would be hard, considering Article 3, Section 1, which allows lifetime terms so long as they engage in "good behavior." My mind is open to any possibility that has positive potentials.

That includes considering having Congress deal with those who fail to follow "good behavior." It is a long-term plan, compared to the others, but I think it has merit. Maintain the House, and make real gains in the Senate. The Constitution has a remedy, that isn't immediate, but have the House impeach the worst offenders, and the Senate convict and remove them.

[c-rational]

13. Yes, and Possible.

[H2O Man]

16. Thanks!

That's about where I'm at.

[Xolodno]

17. Those are really loaded questions.

If we expand the court, the GOP will attempt to do the same later...then again, they may try to do so anyway. So, what do you do?

As for Biden, if FDR couldn't do so...I won't hold my breath. And it could cost him politically.

[H2O Man]

18. Thank you!

They are very tough questions, in my opinion. So I appreciate everyone's responses.

[uponit7771]

19. Yes and Yes, use same stoke campaigns GZP uses to justify anything.

[H2O Man]

20. Thank you!

I really appreciate your response!

[Timewas]

24. Yes

Actually the only move that makes sense and might just save the democracy.

[H2O Man]

25. Thank you!

A lot of people think exactly that.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

26. To your first question, I say YES, my dear H20 Man.

It has had more members in the past than it does now (if my memory serves!) and I do think we need more now. It should never be a partisan body, and it has deeply failed there.

As to your second question, will it be successful? God only knows.......and she ain't tellin'.

[H2O Man]

27. Thank you!

I think it would be beneficial to expose the public to the actual history of the Supreme Court.

[PufPuf23]

28. POTUS Biden should change the composition of the USSC,

this could involve adding Justices but better if Justices with obvious biases were removed from the court and replaced with individuals of good character and no blatant bias that makes them unacceptable for a diverse and egalitarian, democratic society.

Frankly, do not understand why Clarence and Ginni Thomas are not in jail with no bail as flight risk.

We need to gain clear majorities in the House and Senate. The alternative is troubling.

Unfortunately, think the World is ripe with smash and grabs at the moment and have no good answers.

POTUS Biden has done much better than I expected and also has faced far more of a shitstorm than expected.

Our opponents are not dealing in good faith with the expectation that Dems will fail.

Think things are getting bumpy. I am sort of old (69) but sick so won't see what happens.

[H2O Man]

33. Thank you!

We are of the same generation. Likely none of us thought we'd ever see anything compare to 1968. Now, one of the things I hear most frequently from others our age is, "This ain't the country I grew up in." I figure that whatever energy I have left in this old bag of bones will be invested in trying to make a better future for the generations following us.

[bottomofthehill]

30. Going to have to add a qualifier.

He should only try if he can win and in the current senate, he can not win so. As things currently exist, no on question 1 and no on question 2.

If we pick up a couple seats in the senate, maybe try to legislate length of term instead of packing.

[H2O Man]

34. Thanks!

Great points!

I don't know about term limits, per Article 3, Section 1 of the Constitution. But it does speak of following "good behavior," which may mean that impeachment and conviction are a more likely remedy.

[bottomofthehill]

38. Good point the size of the court could be regulated by legislation

But term limits may take an amendment

[H2O Man]

39. Right.

I think there needs to be a nation-wide discussion among Democrats, reviewing every option. One thing I've noticed is a number of Good People correctly stating that while wealthy people will always have access to abortion, poor women will not. But -- at least in my opinion -- our party has failed to work in poor communities to educate, register, and incourage voting. And while I hesitate to put an issue in balck and white terms, I think that white middle- and upper-income whites in particular have failed to tap this potential voting block. The truth is that many low-income people do not see any connection between "politics" and their daily lives. We need to bridge that gap.

[onenote]

31. A bill to enlarge the Court was introduced in the House in 2021 and is going nowhere

I think that tells you what you need to know.

https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/04/bill-to-enlarge-the-supreme-court-faces-dim-prospects-in-congress/

[H2O Man]

35. Thank you!

That is, of course, an important point that I don't think enough people are aware of. While the current crisis may create more support for the bill, at this point it would not appear to be going anywhere. Just my opinion.

Thus, as frustrating as I find it -- and I surely do -- I think that maintaining & expanding the majority in the House, and winning more seats in the Senate, is likely the most realistic option. Then we can impeach and convict those Injustices that do not belong on the court. Again, just my opinion, and I try to keep an open mind while hearing other thoughts.

[canetoad]

32. My opiniion FWIW

1. Yes
2. Possibly. Not out of the question.

[H2O Man]

36. Thanks!

[hamsterjill]

37. Absolutely to the first: Who knows to the second.

But I am tired of Democrats NOT taking action because of a threat of failure.

I hear that way to often as to Trump. “But we might not get him convicted, etc.”

Risks are always scary but action is almost always better than no action.

Let’s do something!

[H2O Man]

40. Thank you!

When one of my daughters was hesitant to shoot the ball during games, my son said, "You'll never make the shot you don't take."

I agree 100% that the Democrats in DC (and in state government) need to at least try. As Randall McMurphy said towards the end of the flick "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, "At least I tried." And that inspired the others, most notably Chief -- who represented the real America.

[Saoirse9]

41. Good questions

1) Definitely
2) Only if we have a stronger majority

[H2O Man]

43. Thank you!

[Caliman73]

42. Two Answers

1. I think the court should be expanded and I think that President Biden should do it.

2. Without significant gains in the Senate and holding the House, I do not think that President Biden would be successful. FDR tried to pack the court and he had both houses, but he was stopped by public sentiment around the issue.

[H2O Man]

44. Thanks!