Tag: 2020

Sorry, Neil Gorsuch. The Supreme Court Seat Was Already Filled

Geoffrey Stone makes as good a case as I’ve seen:

Anyone who cares about the proper and legitimate functioning of our American democracy must oppose Judge Gorsuch’s nomination, not because he is necessarily unqualified, but because of the undermining of our American democracy by Senate Republicans. Anyone who cares about the rule of law should must oppose this nomination. If we fail to take this stand, the Senate Republicans will have succeeded in placing a justice onto our highest Court who has no business being there. They will have undermined the credibility of the Supreme Court as an institution, an institution that is critical to the functioning of our Constitution.

Judge Gorsuch’s nomination should be withdrawn, and the President should nominate in his place a genuinely moderate justice who is acceptable to Democrats and Republicans alike. Only then can we move on with a sense of institutional integrity. Short of that, every decision of the Court decided by a margin of five-to-four with Neil Gorsuch in the majority will justifiably be castigated as fundamentally illegitimate.

Simply saying you’re holding the seat for at least four years isn’t going to fly. Preemptively declaring a blanket filibuster on all candidates isn’t going to fly; that sort of thing is perfectly okay if you’re a Republican, but otherwise you can forget about it. But the Democrats must find a way to extract a political price over the Garland theft, but have to do so in a “serious” way that also placates the recently ascendant Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. Maybe you can manage to hold until mid-terms? But you have to have an end game and start talking about it today; good thing the Democrats are known for their excellent coordinated messaging machine…

Sorry, Neil Gorsuch. The Supreme Court Seat Was Already Filled

The reported resort to astrology in the White House has occasioned much merriment.  It is not funny.  Astrological gibberish, which means astrology generally, has no place in a newspaper, let alone government.  Unlike comics, which are part of a newspaper’s harmless pleasure and make no truth claims, astrology is a fraud.  The idea that it gets a hearing in government is dismaying.

George Will, noted Serious Person, writing in 1988. What I wouldn’t give for an astrologer and a Serious Person that noticed.

I went on three network Sunday shows. I spoke for 35 minutes on three network Sunday shows. You know what got picked? The fact that I said alternative facts, not the fact that I ripped a new one to some of those hosts for never covering the facts that matter to America’s women, 16.1 million women in poverty as we sit there, the 12.4 million who have no health insurance. Everybody should feel outraged. The billions of dollars we have spent as a nation on public education, only to have millions of kids trapped in schools that fail them and never really promote and protect their intelligence and prepare them for the world that they all deserve. They shouldn’t be restricted by the zip code where they live. They should be lifted up.

This has all been a colossus failure, and nobody wants to talk about that. They want to talk about it’s always zing. It’s always playing gotcha. There’s no question that when you look at the contributions made by the media, money contributions, they went to Hillary Clinton. We have all the headlines, people should be embarrassed. Not one network person has been let go. Not one silly political analyst and pundit who talked smack all day long about Donald Trump has been let go. They are on panels every Sunday. They’re on cable news every day. Who’s the first editorial—the first blogger that will be left out that embarrassed his or her outlet? We know all their names.

I’m too polite to call them by name. But they know who they are, and they’re all wondering, will I be the first to go? The election was three months ago. None of them have been let go. If this were a real business, if the mainstream media were a thriving private sector business that actually turn a profit, which is not true of many of our newspapers, Chris, 20 percent of the people would be gone. They embarrassed, they failed to protect their shareholders and their board members and their colleagues.

And yet we deal with him every single day. We turn the other cheek. If you are part of team Trump, you walk around with these gaping, seeping wounds every single day, and that’s fine. I believe in a full and fair press. I’m here every Sunday morning. I haven’t slept in a month. I believe in a full and fair press. But with the free press comes responsibility. And responsibility is to get the story right. Biased coverage is easy to detect. Incomplete coverage impossible to detect. That’s my major grievance, is the media are not—they’re not giving us complete coverage. President Trump has signed all these executive orders this week. He’s met with these heads of states. He’s done so many things to stimulate the economy, to boost wages, to create jobs. Where’s the coverage?

Special Snowflake to the President, Kellyanne Conway, bringing it, uh, bigly to FOXnews’ Chris Wallace (who rather wisely just let her ramble on, it would seem). She’s right about one thing, people should be embarassed and people should be outraged. Just different people in different slots than you would have it.

The President can sign whatever executive orders he likes. But the law is the law. We are not bringing back torture in the United States of America.

“On June 16, 2015, the United States Senate voted 78-21 to adopt an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 that reaffirmed the prohibition on torture by limiting interrogation techniques to those in the Army Field Manual. The Army Field Manual does not include waterboarding or other forms of enhanced interrogation. The law requires the field manual to be updated to ensure it ‘complies with the legal obligations of the United States and reflects current, evidence-based, best practices for interrogation that are designed to elicit reliable and voluntary statements and do not involve the use or threat of force.’ Furthermore, the law requires any revisions to the field manual be made available to the public 30 days prior to the date the revisions take effect.

Senator John McCain (R), Arizona and chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, doubles down on his "I'll see Trump in court" language. This is definitely where the rubber meets the road. Will McCain actually hold the line, or will he fall into line when they either a) resume torturing without regard to the law or b) just revise the Field Manual to include whatever forms of torture they prefer? I'm guessing there will be a thirty day public comment period for which the announcement of said comment period and the contents of the text to be commented on is classified or otherwise disallowed from release to the public. Later, when the practice of torture inevitably leaks in a politically damaging way, various members of Congress and media sources will reveal that, oh, yeah, we knew about and sat on that for months. Didn't seem important what with all those Hillary emails and the Twitter. And so the republic burns.

About those meetings between the Trump campaign and Russian officials

What we are left with from all this is that a high level Russian official confirmed in early November that there had, in fact, been meetings between the Trump campaign and officials from his country. We also know that the Trump campaign lied about the involvement of Carter Page in the organization and that he took a leave of absence when allegations that he had met with high level Russian officials surfaced.

Drip. Drip. Drip.

About those meetings between the Trump campaign and Russian officials

We’re going to get reimbursed, but I don’t want to wait that long. But you start, and then you get reimbursed.

Incoming President Donald Trump. I hope he has the right TPS reports forms for that, because I hear the Mexican government can be sticklers on reciepts, the TPS reports, the cover sheets, and their formatting.

I’m a PC

A long piece by Ta-Nehesi Coates on Obama (and, basically, race in America) that is predictably excellent, but this little scene really sticks out to me:

The [systematic and complete GOP] obstruction [throughout Obama’s presidency] grew out of narrow political incentives. “If Republicans didn’t cooperate,” Obama told me, “and there was not a portrait of bipartisan cooperation and a functional federal government, then the party in power would pay the price and they could win back the Senate and/or the House. That wasn’t an inaccurate political calculation.”

Obama is not sure of the degree to which individual racism played into this calculation. “I do remember watching Bill Clinton get impeached and Hillary Clinton being accused of killing Vince Foster,” he said. “And if you ask them, I’m sure they would say, ‘No, actually what you’re experiencing is not because you’re black, it’s because you’re a Democrat.’ ”

This is a genuinely and deeply important perception by Obama. It is undeniable that racism figures into much of the baseline Obama hatred/denial (“not my President!” “not a citizen!” and so forth), but baseline crazy is baked right into the mix for any Democrat that holds high office. Period. And an over-reliance on just characterizing this stuff over the last eight years as racism in blanket fashion is definitively of a piece with the “PC run wild” attacks that Trump used to great effect.

Even more importantly, though, is the fact that it’s all too easy to forget what the ground rules are for Democrats as candidates or office-holders. Expect this kind of shit. Run against it. Point it out in off years any time you are near a live microphone. You can never just “move forward,” unilaterally disarm, and take what you perceive to be the high road. Use your foreknowledge and expectation of these asinine talking points to preemptively mock and aggressively belittle your opponents based on the predictability of their spew as opposed to the far easier shortcut “oh, that’s just racist.” Because once you throw those qualifiers in, people on the convincible peripheries just stop listening. It is far easier to show them the crystal clear pattern of noise and falsehood, especially if you’re the one bringing it up and preemptively bludgeoning your opponent with it, than it is to get them to stare into the maw of decades and centuries of systematic privilege from which they have likely benefited…and but also magically admit to that, accept your point, change their worldview, and march right down to vote “D” for the rest of their natural lives.

But, alas, Serious Democrats are against this sort of thing; my dears that simply isn’t done. And this is why they fail.

…[T]he thing that Mitch McConnell figured out on Day One of my Presidency [is that] people aren’t paying that close attention to how Washington works. They know there are lobbyists, special interests, gridlock; that the powerful have more influence and access than they do. And if things aren’t working, if there’s gridlock, then the only guy that they actually know is supposed to be in charge and supposed to be helping them is the President. And so the very deliberate strategy that Mitch McConnell and the Republican Party generally employed during the course of my Presidency was effective. What they understood was that, if you embraced old-fashioned dealing, trading, horse-trading, bipartisan achievement, people feel better. And, if people feel better, then they feel better about the President’s party, and the President’s party continues. And, if it feels broken, stuck, and everybody is angry, then that hurts the President or the President’s party.

President Barack Obama, talking to David Remnick of the New Yorker. This is, perhaps, the most important concept for the remaining Democrats in Congress to read, read again, memorize, and carve into some very hard rock in each of their offices. It may sound nice to “work with” a President Trump, but helping him only will make things worse. Work the edges. Minimize the pain, but Trumpism and the GOP must be seen to fail, and badly. Short-term bipartisanship is the worst possible reaction to 2016. You must oppose and be clear on the meaning and import of that opposition. You’re going to lose anyway, at least lose in a fashion that is productive long-term and helps shape your desired policy outcomes if and when the Trump era can be brought to an end.

Rock Bottom

In other settings the media normalization of the coming shit storm might be charming or even amusing.

First, we have the “that will never get 60 votes in the Senate” crowd. People, there will be no filibuster when the new Congress convenes in 2017; the only possible hope for a retained filibuster is that Mitch McConnell cynically enjoys power more than actually governing and wants a safety hatch of “someone to blame” (namely: Democrat minority in the Senate) for the outcomes of GOP policy decisions.

Similarly, we have the “what might they do” thought pieces. People, we know what they’ll do. They have an incurious leader that has repeatedly expressed his complete lack of interest in the policy details of even his own policy proposals. Assuming Ryan remains Speaker, we know what he’ll do. He’s been talking about it for years in explicit, legislative terms.
One notable example, “Medicare,” as a name for a program will still exist, but it will be converted to a fixed payment with which program recipients can attempt to go buy insurance on the open market. From Day One of the program, said payment will be insufficient to actually, you know, buy coverage on the market, but you can rest easy in the knowledge that the payment will never increase. But: Medicare is still there, folks! Nothing to see here, and I fully expect it to be reported in exactly those terms, because it’s been reported in exactly those terms every time he’s talked about it. Again, this is not a secret. It’s right there in the Plan for America.

Ryan’s broader proposed budgets actually contains no non-military discretionary spending at all, so the fact that Medicare will at least remain in name only is going to be characterized as a big liberal victory, I guess.

As far as Obamacare (or, really, the ACA): also toast. All the media assurances about “but the GOP will have to do the hard work of coming up with a replacement before repealing coverage” for the ~20M folks that were uninsured pre-ACA: Again, super-funny in other circumstances, media elite. The GOP has had the better part of a decade to suggest a replacement for the ACA and has offered nothing. If anything, they will drop in a high risk pool plan with capped lifetime benefit limits. The more likely outcome is the ACA is replaced with nothing. Is it any wonder that drug company stocks spiked on news of the election?

What a Democratic party should do: there’s no stopping most of it (see: filibuster, lack of), but the better long range strategy is to induce the healthcare death spiral. The community rating and associated benefits of the ACA are extremely popular. With heavy heart the Democrats should offer to gut the unpopular parts of the ACA, namely the mandate and the “Obamacare” portion, which actually subsidizes coverage for people unable to afford it on their own. We need to face the fact that the poors are in for quite the kicking over the next four years, no matter what, and but also work to keep the massively popular parts of ACA in force. The GOP, ever attracted to bad policy like cats to catnip, will be unable to resist, because: hey, popular! And so the Democrats shall have ushered in single payer health care, courtesy of the poison pill; briefly, the community rating forces coverage but eliminating the mandate allows people to buy healthcare only when they really need it, thus slowly burning the medical insurance establishment to the ground. Once there is no functional insurance infrastructure, the only remaining option is single payer. Good thing we still have that Medicare name sitting around and largely going unused.

Mostly, The Democrat needs to be planning based on gaining some seats in 2018, but then creating a wave election in 2020. You’re not going to be in control of any lever of govenment until at least 2018. Plan accordingly. Make small changes around the edges that, longer term, create a death-spiral situations to which your policy provides a positive (and ultimately the only) answer. They’re going to destroy most of the ACA no matter what, you can at least work to keep the popular parts that also happen to inexorably drag our healthcare system towards single payer.

There is zero doubt that this sort of approach creates real pain and suffering in the short term. But we’re going to get that pain and suffering no matter what. May as well make it worth something.