Constitutional amendments that can actually be passed:

We haven’t tried in a generation. I could see pardon power and independent agencies getting through recent Congresses. (Between Biden and Trump, the former has been thoroughly abused. And the Congress likes creating independent agencies.)

▲

jkaplowitz 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> We haven't tried in a generation.

Longer than a generation if you include the Congressional stage of the process as part of the attempt - the last time Congress sent an amendment to the states was in 1978.

Yes, an amendment was ratified as recently as 1992, but that amendment was approved by Congress all the way back in 1789 (!) along with ten other amendments which we now know as the Bill of Rights and one additional amendment that has still never been (and probably won't ever be) ratified. The story of why that ended up getting ratified in 1992 is quite interesting, but it has nothing to do with how to get new amendments through Congress these days.

▲

lovich an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Independent agencies are not getting through recent Congresses unless the Republicans party has a total collapse and the Dems simultaneously find their balls again and stop being allergic to the use of power.

The removal of Humphrey’s executor was a goal of Project 2025, they are elated at this ruling.

> One example includes potentially seeking the overruling of Humphrey's Exec- utor v. United States. 62 This case approved so-called independent agencies whose directors are not removable by the President at will. The Supreme Court has chipped away at Humphrey's Executor in cases like Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 63 but the precedent remains. The next conservative Adminis- tration should formally take the position that Humphrey's Executor violates the Constitution's separation of powers.[1]

[1] https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24088042/project-2025...

▲

deaux an hour ago | parent [-]

> the Dems simultaneously find their balls again and stop being allergic to the use of power.

If only the problem was that they don't have balls. Everything they've done, and not done, is intentional. Hence why most of them see the DSA as a bigger threat than the Reps, and the former is what's awakening some of them rather than 8 years of MAGA.

	▲	lovich an hour ago \| parent [-]
		While I am also struggling with the dems reaction to the DSA I do still think the allergy to power is a problem. I have caused some flame wars and/or been removed from dem leaning groups by asking if a candidate or the person speaking would be willing to use 100% of the power lent to them by my vote to enact their policy goals. I didn’t even expect it to be inflammatory, but apparently being frank about power being power is inappropriate.