Without control of the White House, there is of course only so much Democrats can do with their newfound power. And in the context of the myriad horrors of the first half of President Donald Trump’s second term, talking about what the party “should” do next is roughly analogous to deciding which out-of-control forest fire to fight first: There is not enough water, there are lots of worthy candidates, and all of them are getting worse.
One thing must be true, though: Whatever issues Democratic lawmakers choose to focus on—and, as the 2028 ideas primary gets underway, whatever ambitious ideas Democratic presidential hopefuls choose to support—the party must also have a plan for taking on the Supreme Court, which remains an existential threat to anything Democrats might hope to accomplish. Even if the party is fortunate enough to win a trifecta—the House, the Senate, and the White House—in 2028, things like a Green New Deal and Medicare for All and a new Voting Rights Act do not stand a chance before this six-justice conservative supermajority. Regrettably, what I wrote in 2020 is just as true today: If Congress passes any one of these proposals into law, the only real question is which justice ends up writing the opinion that kills it.



Expand the House, too! I’d make it as representative as what they had when they designed the system: 3,929,214 people represented in the first Census by 65 Representatives by the end of the first Congress, or around 60,000 constituents per Representative. Taking that as a nice round number for our putative replacement for the Reapportionment Act, we’d end up with 5,524 Representatives. It’d effectively end the utility of gerrymandering, hugely dilute the extra votes in the electoral college given to states with small population, and could even make possible the rise of more than two parties acting in two coalitions, instead.
I believe the House should truly reflect the power of the people.
I propose we increase the size of the US House to 343 million.
Ideally the House should have proportional representation. That would kill gerrymandering and allow more parties. But it would probably require a constitutional amendment.
Also make corruption harder to pull off. Buying two or three swing votes is easy. Buying two or three hundred is harder.