Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Not really, but he's going to fight it to the end.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Amy Klobuchar has a plan to reverse the war on drugs — and doesn’t need Congress to do it
It's basically using the power of the pardon for drug crimes.
And now Klobuchar wants to use that power, much as President Barack Obama did toward the end of his term, to roll back mass incarceration and the war on drugs. By setting up a new system for clemency as soon as possible, she aims to release thousands of people with overly long prison sentences who’ve shown signs of rehabilitation.
In a CNN op-ed, Klobuchar laid out her plan to set up a bipartisan clemency advisory board that would give recommendations on who deserves a presidential pardon or commutation. The board would include people who advocate for criminal justice reform, as well as victim advocates and law enforcement.
“A diverse, bipartisan clemency advisory board — one that includes victim advocates as well as prison and sentencing reform advocates — could look at this from a different perspective,” she wrote. “And a criminal justice reform advocate in the White House will ensure that someone is advising the president on criminal justice reform.”
Edited by sgamer82 on Apr 30th 2019 at 10:25:52 AM
Ooof. Yeah, okay, that would solve the problem of non-violent drug users getting locked up alongside hardened criminals, but I can't help but feel using what is basically a presidential emergency power as a giant band-aid won't exactly do much good to the balance of power.
As my programmer friend would say: "Dem's dirty hacks"
Well, at a certain point the cops might just stop prosecuting people for non-violent possession if they're going to be bounced out of prison the instant they land. The profit motive for private prisons, which is the biggest economic factor driving mass drug incarceration, will be gone.
Edited by Fighteer on Apr 30th 2019 at 12:38:13 PM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I've had that plan in my "If I were President" fantasies for years. However, I don't know if Trump would go for it as it doesn't seem to fit his ideology.
As for private prisons, Obama was going to phase them out as a whole.
There's no reason they should exist.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Apr 30th 2019 at 9:52:51 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.Totally agreed, but what is being discussed here is a worst-case scenario where we get a Democratic President but not a Democratic Congress.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I think that would require amending the Constitution, so its safe. And even if it isn't, it would require a veto proof Congressional majority.
However, it wouldn't do anything at the state level, though it might encourage some Governors to take similar approaches.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.Mass pardoning everyone who breaks a law you disagree with would probably set a dangerous precedent. In fact, I'd recommend amending the constitution specifically to prevent that.
Leviticus 19:34I’m not sure what else the precedent could be pulled off with though, what other things are federal crimes but legal in a number of states?
I guess if we ever got a federal ban on child marriage the precedent could be used by a Republican to undo that? Maybe some gun stuff, pardon people who refuse to run background checks before selling a person a gun?
It is a dangerous precedent, but the precedent isn’t that the president can make something legal on their own, it’s that on their own they can federally legalise crimes already legalised at a state level.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranA fedral ban on child marriage would be overturned by the Supreme Court for violating the 10th amendment. Cannabis laws are a good example of "legal in some states illegal federally" though.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

Considering that I suspect that his whole empire is basically a giant ponzi scheme, I wouldn't mit it blowing up.