* *
In Congress, July 4, 1776
* *
March 1, 2026
Washington/Toronto
LAKA Proposes Structural Reforms
By Laka Jack
Editor, LAKA News
This page outlines structural reforms intended to strengthen constitutional balance, legislative integrity, and long-term institutional stability. These proposals are grounded in the principle that durable governance requires guardrails that apply equally across parties and administrations.
These reforms are presented below in order of public demonstrated support based on consistent findings from long-term national polling conducted by established research organizations. Additional proposals that strengthen these principles are welcome, send submissions to: admin@lakaspinatosis.com
LAKA welcomes perspectives from Canadian contributors interested in developing a parallel Canadian reforms framework grounded in democratic stability, institutional accountability, and constitutional balance. Contributions and proposals may be submitted to: admin@lakaspinatosis.com
Jump to a Reform
1. Reform National Background Check Requirements for Firearm Transfers
Typical national support: ~85–92%
Federal law currently requires licensed firearm dealers to conduct background checks through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) before completing most firearm sales. However, gaps remain in the system for certain private sales and transfers, depending on jurisdiction and the circumstances of the transaction.
These inconsistencies create uneven safeguards across states and can allow prohibited purchasers to seek firearms through channels that do not require verification. The result is a patchwork framework that varies significantly in enforcement and public understanding.
Public polling over many years has shown broad bipartisan support for strengthening background check requirements. Support consistently includes majorities of Democrats, Republicans, and independent voters, making it one of the most widely supported firearm policy proposals in national surveys.
Reform in this area should focus on strengthening the consistency and reliability of the existing background check framework. Congress should examine mechanisms such as:
• Expanding background check requirements to cover most commercial firearm transfers, including private sales conducted through online marketplaces or gun shows.
• Improving the completeness and timeliness of records submitted to the national background check system.
• Providing clear standards for lawful private transfers while preserving legitimate activities such as family transfers, temporary loans, and sporting uses.
The objective is not to prevent lawful firearm ownership. It is to ensure that background check protections function consistently and that individuals prohibited under existing law cannot bypass the system through structural gaps.
Source: → Pew Research Center national survey
2. Reform Congressional Financial Conflicts & Public Trust
Typical national support: ~75–90%
Members of Congress have access to nonpublic information through classified briefings, regulatory oversight, and legislative negotiations.
While existing ethics laws prohibit trading on material nonpublic information, members of Congress are currently permitted to buy and sell individual stocks. Even when no law is broken, this structure creates a persistent perception risk.
Public trust depends not only on legality, but on the absence of conflicts of interest. When lawmakers can personally trade in industries they regulate, confidence in the integrity of legislative decision-making declines.
Reform in this area should focus on strengthening ethical guardrails and restoring public confidence. Congress should examine mechanisms such as:
• Prohibiting individual stock trading by sitting members of Congress.
• Requiring blind trusts or diversified index fund investments.
• Strengthening disclosure timelines and enforcement mechanisms.
The objective is not to restrict lawful investment. It is to reduce structural conflicts of interest and reinforce the principle that public office is a public trust.
Source: → University of Maryland Program for Public Consultation
Back to Reform list →
3. Reform Term Limits for Members of Congress
Typical national support: ~70–85%
Many Americans support limiting the number of terms members of Congress may serve. Because the Constitution sets eligibility requirements for federal office, establishing term limits would require a constitutional amendment.
Constitutional amendments are intentionally difficult to enact. That difficulty is by design. Yet throughout American history, amendments have been adopted when structural reform was necessary — including the 19th Amendment, which extended the right to vote to women.
Difficulty alone is not an argument against reform. The question is whether structural change is warranted.
Reform discussion in this area should weigh the benefits of rotation in office against the value of experience and institutional knowledge.
Source:→ Pew Research Center national survey on congressional term limits
Back to Reform list →
4. Reform Presidential Pardon & Clemency Authority
Typical national support: ~70–85%
The Constitution grants the President authority to issue pardons and other forms of clemency for federal offenses, including pardons, commutations, and other forms of relief.
Clemency authority serves important purposes, including correcting injustices and providing mercy in exceptional circumstances. At the same time, it operates with limited structural transparency and minimal independent review requirements.
Reform in this area should focus on strengthening public confidence in the process. Congress should examine:
• Greater transparency in the exercise of clemency authority, including written explanations and public reporting.
• A formally structured and independent advisory review process.
• Clear conflict-of-interest safeguards in cases involving personal, familial, or financial relationships.
Final constitutional authority would remain with the President. The objective is not to eliminate clemency, but to ensure that its exercise is grounded in transparent standards and independent review.
Source:→ U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2 – Presidential Pardon Power
Back to Reform list →
5. Reform Redistricting & Electoral Accountability
Typical national support: ~65–80%
Gerrymandering refers to the practice of drawing electoral district boundaries in a way that advantages a particular political party or group.
Redistricting is a constitutional process that occurs after each census. Both major political parties have engaged in this practice when given the opportunity. However, when district lines are drawn primarily to advantage one side, accountability weakens.
Representative government depends on voters choosing their representatives. When representatives effectively choose their voters through strategic district design, competitive representation declines.
Source:→ Pew Research Center national survey on redistricting reform
Back to Reform list →
6. Reform the National Emergencies Act
Typical national support: ~65–80%
Emergency declarations can unlock a wide range of authorities across federal law. These authorities are written into law by Congress but become available only after a President declares a national emergency.
Most Americans assume a clear legal definition of what qualifies as a national emergency already exists. It does not.
Before any reform of the National Emergencies Act moves forward, Congress should first clearly define what qualifies as a national emergency.
National emergencies are intended for extraordinary and time-sensitive circumstances. Extraordinary authorities should not become routine through prolonged renewal. Emergency powers should remain temporary and subject to meaningful congressional review.
Source:→ National Emergencies Act, 50 U.S.C. §§ 1601–1651.
Back to Reform list →
7. Reform Executive Orders & Legislative Responsibility
Typical national support: ~60–75%
Executive orders do not create new laws. However, they can significantly influence national policy by directing how existing federal laws are implemented and enforced within the executive branch.
When Congress does not act on major policy questions, executive action is often used to fill the gap. Over time, repeated reliance on executive implementation in place of legislation can shift policymaking influence away from the legislative branch.
Reform in this area should reinforce legislative responsibility. Durable governance depends on Congress making laws and the executive faithfully implementing them.
Executive authority must remain strong, but bounded by clear definitions, transparency, and legislative responsibility.
Source:→ American Bar Association – Overview of Executive Orders
Back to Reform list →