🔗 Share this article

Trump's political drama frequently appears to turn including opposition as a segment of the show. We are like extras who splutter while he energizes his supporters through breaking traditional norms. But what if we created a separate public demonstration that leaves Trump aside – or alternatively with an alternative emphasis?

Past Examples of Political Action

Colonists in the late colonial period created innovative methods of opposition against British policies. Instead of using traditional governmental institutions, they opted for boycott organizations including a first continental congress with no obvious authorization or historical model.

These actions of political theater, despite limitations, finally culminated in national sovereignty. After the conflict, framers held a constitutional assembly – nominally to amend the initial governing document requiring a unanimous vote among all members. Instead, the framers deliberated behind closed doors, substituted the articles altogether, and revised the method to amend the updated system to a three quarters vote.

A Contemporary Chance for Transformation

That political era constitutes a massive setback to constitutional norms, but it is also an opportunity to reform such principles positively. Like the framers, we ought to create a limited, by-invitation assembly – an initial governing assembly – which resisting Democratic states specifically set up independently, restrict to their group, and manage.

The U.S. Constitution contains certain provisions for such action.

Proposing an Multi-state Partnership

These participating states could convene to develop a multi-state partnership between themselves, embracing the idea if not the precise language of similar arrangements that the constitution’s interstate agreement clause outlines. These states could propose to the federal legislature for approval as binding policy. Naturally this will never happen under present circumstances, given the federal government as currently dysfunctional cannot function regarding significant constitutional reform, whether preliminary or complete.

But the goal would be to put forward a framework for an alternative form to governance, following the current era, that preserves part of the present governmental structure with enduring value, combined with radical change in response to recent political developments.

A Concrete Scenario

For example: New York, California, Massachusetts and Illinois might announce a national emergency. Regional leaders might assemble several aligned anti-Trump regions to select delegates chosen either by the people or governmental bodies. Their responsibility would involve to draft a multi-state partnership, a proclamation of protections for residents and responsibilities of involved regions.

This agreement would distribute financial support of those obligations between the states and the federal government, should it be somehow adopted by Congress. It would establish obligations that Washington would support financially – just for member governments and future that thereafter choose to participate the partnership.

A Visionary Opening

The partnership would open with an introduction where The residents of these several states affirm not only our rights but also our responsibilities to treat one another with dignity. The introduction would affirm our responsibilities to guarantee all have food security, retirement benefits, medical care availability, fulfilling employment for protection in a time of AI advancement. It must clearly state regarding the risks artificial intelligence and climate change. It should insist on Washington's duty in healthcare innovation and research-informed healthcare policy to ensure we live better and longer lives.

Confronting Previous Abuses

Furthermore the document should include a detailed enumeration of wrongs by the Trump administration, acts of cruelty, which must be addressed and remedied, and violations by federal courts, including the campaign finance decision, which must be overturned via regional measures implementing the compact.

From the beginning, the states should also incorporate Washington D.C. and Puerto Rico to engage as full members with equal standing and join the agreement.

The Most Difficult Part – Funding

Then comes the hardest part – money. This agreement would specify particular initiatives which regional governments should fund and the programs that Washington should fund – basically for the states that ratify this agreement. The document would not only be a constitution for the ages, and a funding proposal for immediate implementation. It needs to incorporate a renewal of funding for Medicaid, and decreasing of costs for alternative models medical care.

An Open Invitation

Finally, the compact must incorporate an offer to Texas, Florida, Missouri, Mississippi, Ohio, and all additional non-participating government to participate too, although they were not originally invited.

Political Impact

Regardless of what may be said against such an agreement, it could move Trump off stage and display a specific norm-breaking nerve from Democratic allies. It might offer progressive regions recognition for their own symbolic breaking of traditions. More effective should additional regions decline to participate. {In