🔗 Share this article

Trump's public theatre regularly seems to turn including opposition into part of the show. We become like supporting actors reacting while he thrills his followers by disregarding long-standing principles. But why not we created a separate political theatre excluding the former president aside – or alternatively having a distinct emphasis?

Past Precedents of Political Resistance

Americans during the pre-Revolution era created new types of opposition in response to British crackdown. Instead of relying on conventional governmental bodies, they selected trade resistance groups including a pioneering delegates' meeting without any obvious official status or historical model.

These acts of political theater, although imperfect, finally resulted in formal independence. After the revolution, framers convened a convention – nominally to modify the Articles of Confederation with a unanimous vote by every state. Instead, delegates deliberated behind closed doors, replaced the articles altogether, and modified the procedure for amending the updated system to a supermajority requirement.

A Contemporary Possibility for Change

The Trump presidency represents a colossal setback for constitutional standards, however it offers an opportunity to improve such principles for the better. Following the example of the founders, we could create a selective, by-invitation group – an initial governing assembly – which anti-Trump Democratic states solely establish autonomously, restrict among themselves, and control.

The U.S. Constitution already provides some authority to support this approach.

Developing an Interstate Compact

The selected governments could convene to draft an interstate compact by and between themselves, in the spirit though not necessarily the letter of similar arrangements that the constitution’s interstate agreement clause outlines. They would submit formally to Congress for ratification as national legislation. Of course ratification appears improbable in this case, given the federal government in its current broken form lacks the ability regarding significant systemic change, in any form.

But the objective would be to propose a prototype for a new type of political organization, for a post-Trump country, that preserves components of the current institutional framework with enduring value, combined with significant reform in response to current challenges.

A Concrete Example

As an illustration: Several progressive states might announce a governmental failure. The governors might assemble a limited group aligned resisting states to appoint delegates selected through popular vote or state representatives. The representatives' task would include to draft an inter-state compact, a declaration of rights of the people and duties of the participating governments.

This agreement would allocate financial support of such duties to member governments and the federal government, if it were somehow adopted by Congress. It would create obligations that Washington would support financially – exclusively for participating regions and additional that subsequently decide to join the agreement.

An Inspirational Preamble

That compact would open with a preamble where The residents of these several states recognize not only our protections and our duties to treat all members fairly. The preamble would recognize our obligations to guarantee each person obtains sufficient nutrition, retirement benefits, access to healthcare, and meaningful work as security in a time of technological change. It should be explicit regarding the dangers of AI and climate change. It must demand on the federal role in healthcare innovation and scientifically based public health to ensure our quality improves and longer lives.

Confronting Previous Wrongs

Additionally the document should include a specific list of wrongs by the Trump administration, acts of cruelty, that deserve punished and redressed, and abuses from the judicial branch, such as Citizens United, that should be overturned via regional measures adopting this agreement.

From the beginning, the states ought to include Washington D.C. and the territory to join as full members with equal standing and join the partnership.

The Most Difficult Part – Funding

Then comes the most difficult aspect – money. The compact would outline the specific programs that member states should fund and the programs that the federal government ought to support – at least for the states that ratify this agreement. The document would serve as both a governing framework for the ages, and a financial plan for immediate implementation. It needs to incorporate a reinstatement of funding for Medicaid, and decreasing of costs for other forms of healthcare.

An Open Opportunity

Finally, the compact should include an offer to Republican-leaning regions, and all additional non-participating region to participate also, despite they were not initially included.

Strategic Significance

Regardless of what may be said criticizing such an agreement, it could move Trump from prominence and show a certain tradition-defying nerve from a status-quo left. It could provide Democratic governments credit for their own symbolic breaking of conventions. Even better if the other states do not show. {In