As the president shows more of his general unfitness for office on a daily basis, the calls to impeach him are steadily growing more frequent and more strident from those on the farther left. Their frustration is evident, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi continues to brush the matter aside, saying that in effect, they’ll do it when the time is right.
Pelosi is correct, of course. The time is not yet right to begin the proceedings. It’s not that we don’t yet have sufficient evidence; it’s that impeachment – though conducted as if it were a criminal proceeding – is a political process. And the situation isn’t politically ripe to even start holding hearings.
A quick review of the procedure is in order. Continue reading
Now that the Green New Deal has been placed on the back burner, so to speak, the Big Issue on the Left is getting Medicare for All (MfA). This would be a complete overhaul of one of the larger sectors of the national economy (health care spending is about 18% of the GDP).
I am in favor of some sort of national health care plan (just as I am in favor of much of the Green New Deal). But as someone who will hopefully be living through the transition period, I’d like to know what I’ll be getting into.
While any sane person has to agree that making sure every American has equal access to health care, regardless of their income or financial situation, the people pushing MfA seem to be letting some serious questions about it slide. Maybe they don’t want to answer them; maybe they haven’t even thought about them enough.
So of course I’m going to ask them.
Now that the “suitable for the public’ version of the Mueller Report has been released, and we’ve had time to read it and mull over the contents, what have we learned?
First, it seems that we were overreacting about the possibility of Attorney General William Barr going overboard with his redactions. The amount, where they came in the report, and the general reasons for them, seem to actually be reasonable. Most of them were in the section about Russia’s cyberattacks and interference in the 2016 election campaign. And given that those threats are still active and being fought by the relevant intelligence agencies, it’s reasonable that one would not want to let any of the details be made public. Making them available to important members of Congress is entirely justified, though.
The freshmen class of Democratic representatives (and one or two on the Republican side of the aisle) came up with this nice little legislative proposal to attack global warming head-on, and deal with a few other pet social and economic issues.
As a set of policy goals or a proposed platform, it’s a lot like Wilson’s Fourteen Points. As a detailed legislative package, well, it’s a lot like Wilson’s Fourteen Points….
And it doesn’t help that its backers, so far, seem to be adopting the tactic of browbeating the opposition until they cry “Uncle!” and give up. Hanging out in the halls of Congress harassing people isn’t going to win them over to your side. Yes, the matter is extremely urgent, but why not come up with a better approach – one that explains the dangers if we don’t do anything, gives some ideas about what will have to be done to avoid that fate, and makes the necessary steps more palatable?
So Bernie Sanders has tossed his hat into the ring. In one day, he raised kajillions of dollars, and that was enough to make him the “front runner” in the primary campaign. Nevermind that fundraising does not directly correlate with votes, and that the first actual primary is a year away, his supporters from 2016 (perhaps “fans” or “acolytes” would be a better term) are rallying around the banner.
His campaign was questionable back then, and it has some questions now. This time around, because the circumstances are quite different, he’s got a few additional hurdles in the way. We’ll leave out the fact that he’s four years older….
I’ve been reading a bit lately about a general dissatisfaction with the construction of the Senate. Seems people aren’t happy with the rule that gives every state, regardless of population, two senators. Such an arrangement gives a drastically unequal representation to the citizens of the states. Why should Wyoming have the same number of senators as California (to use the example most frequently cited) when they only have about one seventeenth of the population?
This would be a very strong argument – if it weren’t for one thing.
The Senate isn’t the only part of Congress.
There’s also the House of Representatives, which *does* have proportional representation.
Well, almost cleared. Or at least cleared enough for us to see the lay of the land after the elections. Technically, there’s a Senate seat from Florida that’s heading for a recount, and in Georgia, Stacey Abrams isn’t going to concede until every single vote has been counted (seriously, why are we letting one of the candidates in *any* election be the person who sets the rules for that election?).
The Forces of Democracy did very well. Though they lost a few seats in the Senate (taking control of that house was a long shot), they did garner control of the House of Representatives. Of considerable importance as well, they won a goodly number of governorships and state offices. And several states also passed decidedly Democratic measures (like Florida, where over one million residents got their voting rights restored).
So, now what?
NOTE: I strongly disagree with Judge Kavanaugh’s political views. But he is entitled to them, and they are not in themselves reason to keep him off the Supreme Court. His probable perjury before Congressional committees, questionable finances, and inability to give a straightforward answer to simple questions on his judicial philosophy are.
I think (at least I *hope*) we can all agree that the vast majority of men are not sexual predators, perverts, or even creeps. But “Distinguished Man Treats Women Properly” isn’t going to sell any papers, so we’re constantly bombarded with stories of Men Behaving Badly.
The latest one has to do with a successful jurist being accused of an attempted rape that he is said to have committed over thirty-five years ago.
Whatever you think of Judge Kavanaugh or statutes of limitations, it shouldn’t be hard to see why a lot of men are nervous.
I’m not saying we should feel sorry for the Senate Minority Leader. But he’s got no really good options when it comes to the matter of confirming Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court.
Not only does the GOP have all the good cards, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is making up the rules.
Let’s say Schumer holds the line and fights the confirmation tooth and nail like the left wing of the Democrats wants him to do. He rallies every single Democratic and Independent senator to the “No” side, and manages to convince one or two Republicans to join in.
Is the next nominee going to be any better? What about the Democratic senators from “red” states that are up for re-election? Fight too hard, and there’s a significant chance you’ll hurt their chances at re-election – and then taking control of the Senate.
Put up just enough of a protest to save face, tell the Red State Senators to do whatever they need to do to get re-elected, and you’ll face the incandescent wrath of the Far Left, with no guarantee that the Democrats will get control of the Senate from the Mid-Terms.
Stall, and hope that there’s something in the vast pile of documents that you want to have released that could sink Kavanaugh’s nomination? McConnell is going to fight and delay that every step of the way, deliberately interfering with the Mid-Term Campaign Season. And the group mind of the GOP isn’t likely to be deterred by anything that could come up. And again, who’s next on the list?
Whatever path Schumer takes, there are going to be risks.
None of this is easy. The rabid Far Left, with its insistence on fighting to the death in every battle, isn’t helping. Schumer is not in control of the Senate, and he has limited political capital to spend. He has to pick and choose his fights carefully, keeping his eye on the future (the good possibility that the Democrats take control of the Senate as well as the House). What good is winning this particular battle if you lose the war?
With each passing day, more and more corruption in the Trump administration is revealed. And there are more and more examples of Trump’s unsuitability for office. Social movements from student demonstrations against gun violence to teachers’ strikes are all over the news. More and more members of the administration, and Republicans in Congress, are leaving. Those on the Left politically have to be happy about their prospects for the mid-terms.
But Election Day is six months away. That’s a long time. It can be too easy to lose momentum or become complacent, and if one hopes to at least check the worst excesses of the current administration, that could lead to disaster.
What’s a Democrat / Liberal / Leftist to do?