As Donald Trump and his followers meet at CPAC to continue spreading the Big Lie and railing against “radical” Democratic bills such as HR-1/S-1 (For the People Act), my thoughts are with a true patriot.
This month marks 90 years since the passing of Ida B. Wells. Born into slavery, Ms. Wells would go on to co-found the NAACP and become a fierce advocate for civil rights and a woman’s right to vote.
I mention Ms. Wells because of her searing writing on the practice of lynching – a practice that would become a spectator sport in states across the nation, drawing enormous crowds including children who were released from school in order to attend. Lynching was an attack on Black Americans, on their bodies, their citizenship, their humanity.
I mention Ms. Wells because her work goes to the heart of what it means to be a citizen – the right to vote and to expect your government to defend you rights and privileges regardless of your gender or the color of your skin.
I mention Ms. Wells because 150 years after the ratification of the 14th Amendment, the promises contained therein are under attack today, not by the lynch mobs Ms. Wells wrote and spoke so fiercely about, but by Republicans in Congress, and in State Legislatures across the country controlled by Republicans, who are working to restrict the right to vote.
In the final essay of his remarkable life, Representative John Lewis wrote:
“Ordinary people with extraordinary vision can redeem the soul of America by getting in what I call good trouble, necessary trouble. Voting and participating in the democratic process are key. The vote is the most powerful nonviolent change agent you have in a democratic society. You must use it because it is not guaranteed. You can lose it.”
Ida Wells got into “good trouble” and so must we all, by supporting HR-1/S-1 and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
Is there something wrong with me? Am I too rational for 2021? Of course I support HR-1/S and The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. However, have we not been here before?
"The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1868, granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States—including former enslaved people—and guaranteed all citizens “equal protection of the laws.” One of three amendments passed during the Reconstruction era to abolish slavery and establish civil and legal rights for Black Americans, it would become the basis for many landmark Supreme Court decisions over the years.
In its later sections, the 14th Amendment authorized the federal government to punish states that violated or abridged their citizens’ right to vote by proportionally reducing the states’ representation in Congress, and mandated that anyone who “engaged in insurrection” against the United States could not hold civil, military or elected office (without the approval of two-thirds of the House and Senate)."
And then:
"The Fifteenth Amendment (Amendment XV) to the United States Constitution prohibits the federal government and each state from denying a citizen the right to vote based on that citizen's "race, color, or previous condition of servitude." It was ratified on February 3, 1870,[1] as the third and last of the Reconstruction Amendments."
Does anyone find it repulsive that in America 2021 democrats/progressives/independents have to fight to create a bill that provides a law that EVERY American citizen, despite their color, has the right to vote--our rights which are already very protected in our Constitution??
I find it repulsive to have to spend this kind of time and money on the knuckle-draggers and anti-maskers when we have a world and climate in crisis. Most of the bill, as I understand it is necessary, I suppose. But, as I re-visited these amendments above, gerrymandering and voter suppression simply violate both of these Constitutional Amendments. Of course, I am not a legal expert, I am just a rational citizen.
I would prefer to spend our time and money on upholding these hard-earned Rights and prosecuting the individuals and/or states whose ignorant knees are pressing upon any of American citizen's necks. All forms of voter suppression should be covered under these Amendments. Are they not? Is there a twist I am missing?
There are 20 states now with automatic voter registration at places like the DMV. That is civil and rational. There is reason-free absentee voting in Vermont and ID's are needed only for first time voters. That is rational. Is that not as equally as rational to republicans as our 2nd Amendment (which does not include weapons of mass destruction).
We have a wealthy, myopic political party that is completely out of control, that is anti-Constitutional, racist, seditious, autocratic, promotes lies, propaganda and very serious voter suppression. They are harmful to our people, our citizens and our democratic republic. It is 2021. It is now "We The People, All of Us This Time." You are with us or against our Constitution and America today. It is time for violators to pay Consequences. What does attorney Glenn Kirschner always say? Oh yes, "Because Justice Matters."
There is one descriptor that may not be accurate, "out of control". The Repubicans are as disciplined as a Roman army. Their goal is not democracy. Their goal is oligarchy. They sencerely believe only the wealthy are wise enough to manage the world.
I absolutely agree. The stated goal of even normal 80’s - 90’s style republicans and now even more from the far right regions of the party are to make government as small as possible. This country and its two parties do not make up one nation. At this point I see little value in working so hard to negotiate with an opposing party that does not even want the same things. And, as many other have noted here time and again, this nation was created with two very different ideas of what the future United States should look like. There was never full consensus on what liberty and justice meant. The “compromise” is absolutely outdated and there is no longer a real purpose to compromise as much as republicans want democrats to. The stakes are too high to appeal to groups of people who deny science, equity and cooperation.
How do we come to a consensus? If people want bathtub sized government, are they willing to drive on dirt roads, let our bridges crumble, homeschool unless their kids can walk or be driven, have only wealthy people be our leaders, let people and communities suffer with mental health, poverty, lack of childcare, criminals, drug lords, domestic abuse, no learning challenges and physical challenges support, no police and national guard or fire persons.
What kind of world would we be living in if the caste system were installed any more deeply? It would be full-bore chaos and Darwinian. It would be Apocalyptic. Wackos and civilians would would be screaming and terrorizing our streets and our Capital, trying to lynch elected officials with whom they disagree or were programmed to find and kill. They would flout all laws, believing themselves to be above them. .They would, they would...Oh. Maybe things would NOT be any different than they already are...
It seems quite obvious that you have indeed described our current situation. If our justice system does not incarcerate these knuckle dragging louts we are in for a world of hurt.
Not that you didn't cover it, but an explicit mention of the Texas electric grid deregulation misgovernance might bring the message home to those who otherwise might just consider your message over-hyperbolic and dismiss it.
The only reason to attempt working with Republicans is to show just how obstructionist they are, so that the large "middle" of the electorate can see and reevaluate their assumptions on which party represents their interests.
Since this effort is just beginning, the Biden administration is right to be making approaches to Republicans, as long as they do not play the usual Democratic game of designing an approach that provides 80% of the solution, cutting it to 50% of the needed solution, and then negotiating the resulting solution down to something less than 10% of what is needed, and then if successfully passing it, patting themselves on the back and going on to the next problem.
So far, the Biden administration is NOT following that path to failure, and must be strongly supported to keep on this new approach.
Now, either directly or through surrogates, Democrats must get this message out directly and through the media so as to provide the needed education and reevaluation of assumptions by the electorate.
I love that AOC raised a lot of money to help Texas. THAT is modeling the kind of behavior in being truly the best America has to offer...and that was from a woman of color... Brilliant, honest, compassionate role modeling for trumplicans. Where was Cancun Cruz while AOC was raising funds for state in crisis?
So, we need to delineate why the republicans no longer want a democratic republic. Exactly which people in our country would benefit under a dictator? Sell dictatorship to us. State your arguments-- with truth.
Those people who already have theirs believe they would be the beneficiaries of a tRumpocracy. There are some well off people who really fear that losing the status quo would mean the end of their privilege.
Yes and yes. The problem is that one political party that claims to closely follow the “sacred” Constitution is deeply flawed and mostly nutso. Repubs twist themselves into pretzels to interpret the “sacred” Constitution for their own benefit.
Sadly, it has to do with a combination of gerrymandering and allowing the states to pass voting laws specific to their state - my question is a different one.. There needs to be laws over which individual states have no say-- and if they can get HR1/S1 through and past Supreme Court tests, perhaps this is part of the answer. A big IF in getting it past this Supreme Court... the other half as to do with the disgusting practice (on both sides) of Gerrymandering. HR1/S1 might work for the presidential election, but the 37 states that account for 15% of the countries population have outsized power in the senate and house districts that are drawn to minimize the minority vote...sigh
Without having read word for word, line by line each of our amendments that protect the right to vote, I too have wondered why we constantly need to reinvent the wheel. Loopholes? Fatal flaws?
Bravo! I totally agree with you. Not only must "justice prevail but, also, common sense, which seems to be sorely lacking in Congress these past several decades!
As a retired elementary school librarian, I highly recommend this picture book, “Yours for Justice, Ida B. Wells: The Daring Life of a Crusading Journalist.”
My pleasure always!! It is a wonderful story, beautifully told and very attractive to my students of high poverty, about half of whom were Black. Every time I read it aloud I could have checked out 20 copies.
Sadly, many of the libraries in my former district, at all levels, have been disassembled or no longer have American Library Association masters degreed, certified librarians. Mine was one of those, when I was forced to retire. The difference between a good school library and a book warehouse is a good school librarian.
A Dolly Parton “Imagination Library” for older students sounds like a GREAT investment. ❤️ Her free books distributed to little ones across the country is the absolute best!
We could turn it into huge posters and hang it on the walls or put it up in the display easels the Republicans are so fond of posting their lies on. Each Democrat could use their 5 minute time to read the portion on their board into the record.
Though I suppose it is harder to do since they all don’t meet in the House with Covid. Maybe in a few committee meetings. Get the ones with the seditionists in, especially Jim Jordan and Steve Scalise.
Agreed, but don't forget library support staff. Patrons deal directly with Circ staff more than professional librarians. AOC borrowed books from me when I worked in the BU library; we helped to start her on the path to Congress. The BU community thinks the world of our amazing grads-turned-Reps, AOC and Ayanna Pressley.
Congratulations on your grads-turned Reps!!! But I’m referring to K-12 school libraries. And they typically have no support staff. The librarian does everything - circulation, shelving, weekly classes for every grade level, collection development in odd moments. 😉 That’s why I say that a school library is just a book warehouse without an ALA master’s degreed, certified school librarian.
As I retired elementary school administrator, I can attest to the wonderful and important work school librarians do. In our school the Librarian, who is a certified professional, is an inspiration to the students, knows individual students, their reading levels and interests, is able to identify and purchase quality materials, and serves as a valuable resource to our teachers as they prepare learning experiences for their students.
I volunteered to help at my children's school in the library and was honestly surprised at how amazingly important and how involved the job of liberian is. I think for the children the librarians are very helpful nice adults but when I needed information about what some of my children were going through I quickly learned how astounding and amazing these librarians were. I was and still am so grateful for all their help not just for my children but for me as well. Thank you for all you have done. It is a highly specialized and indrediable job that is certainly undervalued.
Thank you for bringing up this issue in this forum and for the book recommendation. Often librarians are an echo chamber of library advocacy so it's nice to have the conversation brought outside the library walls.
I am a librarian/web developer for a school district in central office support. Much of what my department does is advocate for teacher librarians (TLs) in all schools within the district. Since principals often don't have it within their budget to hire a TL, they decide to go with a paraprofessional so at least there's someone there to circulate books. This creates a rift between TLs and paras, but the animosity is misguided. It comes down to leadership and budget issues. I pulled my kids from our neighborhood school since one of the school leaders told my one of my colleagues - with a serious face - that libraries are obsolete and that messaged trickled down to the staff. They use the library space as an office, but still say it is a library because they circulate books. No mention of the fact that there's no opportunity for browsing or programming and the collection is painfully outdated.
At the heart of the matter is funding. I live in Colorado, which has turned blue (a nod to universal mail-in voting), but also has TABOR and an abysmal record of funding public education. Therefore, when budgets are tight, libraries are at the top of the list for cuts. Most school leaders think of libraries as something that is nice to have, but not necessary. Until there's a solid line drawn between professionally staffed libraries and standardized test scores, they're going to continue to be cut along with other specials (art, music, PE).
Terribly sad, and very true. Yes, librarians are very expensive. In most states they are required to have a master’s. The only other people in the building with master’s required are the principal and the AP. I had 30yrs experience from around the country, and they gained two positions when they “let” me retire.
“Burning and torture here lasts but a little while, but if I die with a lie on my soul, I shall be tortured forever"- Ida B. Wells
I disagree with just about everything with Liz Cheney. Proud of her for standing up to the big lie strategy. I've been thinking what faction other than business republicans would also break away. I thought could it be the Christian Evangelicals? No, abortion. Not the gun freaks, no. Not the white nationalist, certainly not. Maybe the older Eisenhower Republicans, maybe. But “If Southern white men are not careful, they will overreach themselves and public sentiment will have a reaction; a conclusion will then be reached which will be very damaging to the moral reputation of their women.”― Ida B. Wells-Barnett.
The next big break within the Republican Party will be the loss of women to that party.
When women leave the Republican Party in droves, watch how the messaging of fear of Black Men will ratchet upward as a counter. Like Bush did with Willy Horton in his 1988 campaign. The strategy of fear since reconstruction. It is only a stronger message with video & film & likes, and comments, like mini shorts of 1915's "Birth of Nation". FB and IG allow for more racist short films to hit directly, with force and relentless repetition. Its no wonder how the Republicans have lasted this long. They are well versed in hate and fear tactics and weld the arsenal to maintain only power. MTG/Qanon is the prime example of this strategy working for the Republicans. Why would Republicans refute a fear conspiracy that has brought them so much success with women voters? It is perhaps one of their most potent psychological weapons.
On March 6th, 1956, speaking to the Fourth Annual Republican Women's National Conference, President Dwight Eisenhower said, "If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is NOT a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power."
Thank you Heather. Finally, capital Police being taken to task. I remember what my own eyes saw as some police simply dismantled and pulled back the flimsy barricades. But, imo, All the little mob soldiers who go to jail in this failed coup attempt will not cure our ills UNTIL their commander in chief gets arrested and prosecuted right along with them. Head of the snake.
Many of us knew that there would be angry, violent agitators at our Capitol on Jan. 6. Who knew they were out to murder our elected officials and destroy and desecrate our Capital along with those who should be protecting us? I would like to know who told our police, National Guard, and military to stand down that day? Everyone knows t**p was riling his cult up for months claiming he won by a landslide. I know of no one who is rational that would have gone anywhere near DC because of the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, KKK, and other domestic terrorists. Now we can add many republican elected officials, trained American police and veterans to the list of seditionists. We pay for them to be trained to protect us—not harm us.
This is the elephant in the room that everyone (media included) seems to be dancing around: WHO prevented the National Guard and military from assisting? We probably all can guess who that WHO is, but my question is what exactly are they dodging right now? Is it because they need to get safely through the March 4th conspiratorial "inauguration"? Do they lack sufficient evidence to prosecute? Are they still pursuing threads in order to eradicate ALL of the heads of Medusa? Their silence is deafening.
I knew they would try to storm the Capitol and try to kill elected officials (after what we endured in Michigan and in my own neighborhood), and I knew that the last minute changing of the guard in Defense leadership was a very bad sign, and I screamed at the TV earier, when the DC Mayor said there were 360 Capitol Police on duty, "We need 36,000!!". But I thought the Military Chiefs of Staff would override any tRump/Steve Miller order, never dreaming that tRump's seditionitist monsters would block the National Guard employment. You are right - we need to know exactly who ordered what and when, and they should all be sentenced to life in prison.
I have very mixed feelings about the JCS intervening in political affairs. It might have helped on Jan 6, but after initial intervention, where does it stop? The tenets of the Self-Denying Ordinance, dating to 1640s England and excluding legislators from simultaneous military service, form a bedrock of democratic civilian rule in the Anglo-American political tradition. Those countries that abandoned it, especially in former British Africa, have a history of military coups and instability that is worth avoiding.
careful though, he displeased greatly much of the French Aristocracy and the kings...and spend a great deal of time in jail and in exile which he spent writing even more.
Tell that to his successors. One politician recently mistook him for a brand of cheap clothing! Another, Minister of Culture admitted not having had time to read a book in a very long time.
You’re right, to kill a snake 🐍 you have to cut off it’s head, but you have to be very careful with the head as it can still bite even after you separate it from it’s body.
Thank you, Heather! As a retired teacher-librarian, I’d like to nominate you as a true Wonder Woman. I’m amazed that you manage to do all this research, produce a polished and detailed nightly letter, do your day job and remain focused, coherent and sane. Kudos!
Don't forget the twice weekly chats! BTW, have you noticed when she talks History on Thursdays, she speaks much more rapidly than her Tuesday Politics chats? I struggled to keep up on this last one😲
Lynell, I think its because she's trying to use her calming voice for us with what we are dealing with in the current political culture. As in trying to keep us from jumping off the ledge.
I think she gets really excited on her Thursday chats as that is her love of history shining through! She sometimes literally twinkles with excitement, which I so adore. I still cannot belive she takes the time to do these chats along with these wonderful letters. Talk about service to the people, for the people!
Chats are on Facebook. Tuesdays at 4:00 pm are her Politics chats. Thursdays at 1:00 pm are her History chats. When on FB search "Heather Cox Richardson Videos. You will see a "library" of past chats there. They are also posted on her YouTube channel. It's my understanding the YouTubes are posted later.
Yes I agree our Heather is a super Wonder Woman. I bet it helps that you live in that peaceful remote part of Maine. I lived in Dark Harbor Islesboro for a time and it’s heavenly beautiful up there.
After the COVID relief bill passes, I'm ready for Democratic leaders to become much more aggressive and vocal in pushing the For the People legislation. Not just speaking out in support but painting Republicans as enemies of voting. The GOP has made this clear with the raft of state bills that seek to prevent the extraordinary turnout last November. They must be stopped.
Ah, the filibuster! There is a joke about traditional behaviors that have long outlasted their original utility. The joke goes like this: A young girl has watched her mother always cut a few inches off the end of a ham, before baking it in the oven. When she asked for mother why, she was told that her grandmother always did this and that was how her mother learned to bake a ham. Curious, the girl asked her grandmother why she always cut the end of the ham off. The grandmother got a far away look and laughed, then said “Oh that! We had a very small oven and I had to cut the end off the ham so it would fit in the oven.” Clearly, there was no longer utility in wasting part of every ham. The same is true with the filibuster. The Founding Fathers envisioned the Congress would be populated by wise men of good will who would think through issues and debate them before coming to a resolution. The House soon grew too large for unlimited debate, so established rules for limiting it. The smaller Senate kept unlimited debate rules. Well now the Senate is likely larger than the House was when it limited debate. Further, the filibuster is now used to eliminate debate on an issue and to kill potential legislation, rather than to further debate. The filibuster is a tradition, much like living in caves or cutting off the. end of hams, that no longer serves the goal of debate. It is time to end it.
I have a real-life example of a tradition that outlived its efficacy in my own family. My mother spent her childhood and early adolescence on a farm and her family did a lot of home canning of garden produce. Because home-canned green beans with a defective seal had caused the death by botulism of a whole family on a neighboring farm, she early developed the habit of boilingeven commercially canned green beans until they were an unappetising dull khaki-colored mush. Years after I had left home and learned how to cook fresh vegetables, I visited my parents and, as I often did when visiting them, cooked dinner. That night, fresh green beans were on the menu. I did my usual steaming to just past the crispy point and brought the still bright green beans to the table. My mother gasped, "You didn't boil those beans for 20 minutes!" and retold the botulism story. "Mom, these are fresh beans. They won't poison you." She waited until my father and I had eaten healthy portions of the beans with no ill effects before daring to take two beans and eat them. She watched us for hours expecting us to drop dead!
I read that the filibuster was created by accident. John C Calhoun noticed that a rules change had left room for it. He needed something to help him defend slavery....
That doesn't surprise me. And now in a Democratic Republic, we're stuck with a rule that encourages tyranny by the minority. We live in a Bizzaro World where up is down, facts don't matter, electors choose their voters, and the minority controls which legislation can reach the Senate floor.
Seems H.R. 1 and S. 1 will be the perfect reason for for busting the filibuster and bring the end of minority rule. It certainly will favor Democrats for years but it would give the GOP a much needed slap in the face to purge itself of the movement conservatives hellbent on killing democracy.
I'm with you 100%. In the history of this country, every large economic expansion has involved large influx of immigrants. When we move factories and entire industries abroad just to post better quarterly profits by killing unions and fair play for workers, (even our domestic food and drug supply are in domestic jeopardy), we loose the ability to grow the economy again, save for the very wealthy ownership of what is left. This is why recessions are lasting longer. There are less and less suppliers of everything in every industry. There are less and less small business owners and entrepreneurship. Offshoring everything creates less opportunity for the American Dream here as well as creating volatility and uncertainty in the job market. Restaurants are not enough. Housing construction is not enough. Offshoring and anti immigration go hand in hand with corporatocracy, Oligarchy, Populist Politics, Politics of Grievance, White Supremacy. And so anti-immigration is bad for economy long term and remains an immoral policy. In moral society business owners deal with workers as partners in the process towards profit and Politian's don't separate families and put kids in cages. We will need immigration labor to help us build the infrastructure we need for the next century.
I mean that they will reduce filibuster just enough this time that voting rights will be excluded fom areas where it can be practiced. Problem is...next time that the Republicans dominate the Congress they can easily reverse it.
....or not. Given the gravity of the "one time" situation and the potential to turn a 2nd slow-stepped administration or Obama 2.0 into a once in a century event, taking really bold action may prevail.
As for Manchin, he's not in all that solid of a position. He has many skeletons in his closet. Blackmail is an ugly word, I prefer to call it "conflict avoidance."
Joe's rise to the Senate began with a rather shady beginning. He's now a multi-millionaire, that can't be over emphasized enough.
We're at the Last Chances crossroads with Climate Change, Income Inequality and Racial/Gender/LGBT issues and Voting Rights. Rocking the boat a little is not an option imho. It's also no time to play footsie with super Centrist Democrats trying to gain power for their personal benefit.
With these people there is no other way at this time...but you have 2-4 years to get it done, in place and accepted or they will once again neuter the Democratic voter....and then some!
Let's get H.R./S1 passed and see how the people react when for the first time, in maybe forever, they experience the closest thing to democracy in their lifetime.
I would love to see the filibuster eliminated in order to get serious things accomplished. But, the next time there is a Republican Senate--possibly in two years--we might regret its disappearance. I don't understand why there never is any mention of a way to limit the use of the filibuster without doing away with it: return to the original protocol, which was that the the Senator launching a filibuster had to stand (not sit) and speak in order to prevent a vote. He (and it was always a man in those days) could read the phone book or Joy of Cooking; it didn't matter as long as he didn't sit down or leave the podium. He could speak for hours and hours; the longest by segregationist Strom Thurmond was slightly more than 24 hours. You can bet there would be far fewer people stopping the majority's will if that were the way it was done now.
I recently read another way to modify the filibuster -- instead of requiring 60 votes to end debate, as it is now, require the periodic muster of 40 votes to continue debate. That way, instead of letting the Republicans leave the chamber, eat ice cream, or wander around the city, they would almost all have to hang around continuously to keep the filibuster going. The current model makes it entirely too easy to gum up the works.
(As a side note, it must be incredibly easy to be a Republican Representative, since all you have to do is make up right wing sound-bites and sabotage your own government. After all, their only real policy is "Government bad, rich people good," so they have every motivation to cripple the very government they were elected to help lead.)
I have read that there is no mention of any filibuster in the US Constitution. I have also read that the filibuster is yet another instance of our political system's racist roots, in good company with the Electoral College and the 2 Senators per state rule regardless of population. There is nothing even remotely democratic about a minority in the Senate being able to block legislation, while the Constitution calls for rule by a simple majority, or 2 thirds to override a presidential veto.
If the Democrats do not simply do away with the filibuster, they will be unable to pass the legislation that a substantial majority of American voters want, the benefits of this legislation will not happen, and the GOP will lie and corrupt itself back into control of Congress.
If Biden - and the rest of us - cannot convince Mancin and Sinema to be real Democrats and vote to end the filibuster, then all talk of his being the reincarnation of FDR will just be so much hot air, and we will be in for 4 years of futility and rancor and disorder, followed by a second Trump (or Hawley, or Cruz, God help us!) administration and all that entails.
Definitely, not in the Constitution. My understanding is that one of its earliest uses was in 1837 when Jackson was president and it wasn't directly about race, but about him having been censured by the Senate. According to various sources, the Senate and House had similar rules for debate until 1806 when the Senate abandoned its ability to "call the question" and thus, by a simple majority, end debate and vote. That laid the way for the filibuster to emerge.
When Congress, the Senate, in particular is allowed to not advance bills for a vote or the entire process is just stopped without discussion or negotitation then our governement ceases doing their job/duty. They get paid a lovely salary especially given the amount of time they are in session, pension, healthcare, and lovely perks from lobbyists, so how are they allowed to just not do their job. I am so tired of members of Congress getting such luxuries while violating their oaths, the Constitution, insider trading, conflict of interest, not to mention possible crimes. But there are no consequences at all, except wait till next election. They even get to write their own rules- seems like there needs to be some big checks and balances on Congress.
The Electoral College and 2 Senators per state are not instances of "our political system's racist roots." Those were established in the Constitution from the get go.
Hello kmKieva. A majority of the signers of the Constitution owned slaves, some were abolitionists, and the issue did come up and was divisive, but in order to agree on a Constitution it seems the issue was - to a then-sufficient degree - swept under the rug of national unity. But both the Senate and the Electoral college are configured the way they are so as to avoid confronting an issue that could have made it impossible to agree on a Constitution. Our Constitution is a pretty amazing document, even a work of genius, but it left unresolved issues that have led to The Civil War, Jim Crow and Donald Trump, and is in urgent need of an update.
I have just noticed that Susan Lawrence (below) makes my case better than I do, but since I brought up "our racist roots" in this string, I thought I should respond directly. As I grow older I find there is just no way to escape race as the best key to understanding our history. Racism, tragically, informs the American experience from the get go.
A lot of things drive history, but if you want to identify one thing that has consistently influenced our national trajectory, you are correct: it is racism.
Which at the time was all property owning white men who considered Blacks 3/5 of a person for statistical purposes only. Sounds like racist roots to me.
The 3/5 rule is often (mis)interpreted as proof of racism, that slavery's supporters thought the enslaved people were only 3/5 human. But it's not so straightforward. Their views ranged from seeing Blacks as totally subhuman, to those who saw them as fully human but still unworthy of full rights. The 3/5 figure was a product of negotiation and compromise between northern and southern sections to ensure ratification of the Constitution; thus it was more a measure of pragmatism than ideology. Most white Americans in the 18-19C were racist, but there's abundant proof that doesn't depend on misconstruing the 3/5 rule.
The 3/5 rule made it possible for white folks in the slave states to exercise far more than their just share of power at the national level. Each vote cast by a relative handful of privileged southern slave-holders was worth far more than any vote cast in free states because each non-voting slave still showed up as 3/5ths of a person in the census. So, southern states had more representatives in the House and more votes in the Electoral College than they deserved, and they could use this advantage to guarantee that their slave-based economy would flourish, and that all efforts to end slavery would fail. This state of affairs led to the Civil War.
It really doesn't matter if some slave owners seated piggishly around their groaning dining tables argued about the "human-ness" quotient of their slaves, and there is no possible instance of master/slave friendship/bonding/love that could possibly justify such a ghastly institution as slavery.
I agree that Whites both north and south were being pragmatic when they agreed to our Constitution. They could afford to be pragmatic and there was money to be made, but the 3/5ths rule was, nevertheless, utterly racist, and parts of the Constitution are fatally tainted by this.
They were a sop to slave states from the get-go, a way to overcome southern resistance to ratification. Parity in the upper house (and the ability to count 3/5 of the slave population to achieve near-parity in the lower house) and presidential election by state legislatures were all included to mollify southern delegates. The US Constitution was a hard sell in the South - these and numerous other inclusions were necessary to replace the Articles of Confederation and get the country going. We are still living with that legacy.
If we refuse to eliminate the filibuster everything in the Senate that is not done on reconciliation will not pass. Republicans won’t vote for it no matter how much their constituents want it. This means no voting rights, no gun reform, no minimum wage and no violence against women act.
This also means the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico will not become states.
The Senate will grind to a halt and we might as well send the House and Senate home. The only thing they can do is pass a budget. Give them two-months a year to work that out and pay them accordingly. No more $174,000 salaries for a group of people that refuse to work together and do nothing but lie to Americans.
The Republicans should all agree to this because they want less government. Let’s turn these lazy white men and brainless women loose to fend for themselves. No living high off campaign contributions. My Congressman is Darrell Issa. He’s a big lie supporter. He’s corrupt and he does nothing to support our district. We had Duncan Hunter before that and he got a Trump pardon for misuse of funds. Our district is gerrymandered even in California.
Thanks Sharon, for a stiff dose of reality. Hopefully you exclude most Dems from the do-nothing group.
BTW, we too have gerrymandering in blue MA. It protects state more than federal legislators. Results: Beacon Hill frequently thwarts the voters' will; and House speakers are routinely indicted for corruption -- including all 3 from 1991-2009. Argh!!!
Classic film, a favorite that often springs to mind today. But it's the romantic view of filibustering, not the reality, and no one today would suffer such remorse as Claude Rains.
I’d like us to move major elections to Saturday. No more Tuesdays. U get Saturday and u will increase participation, you have more volunteers, more available security, less disruption during the work week. This should be in the HR 1 bill.
Or at least make Election Day a national holiday. I would also like to turn the primary process into a one day event as well. The campaign cycle is too long in this country.
Where would we be if all the election spending was spent on vaccines instead? How much did the country collectively spend on the last one? Is that the best use of that money? I agree with you. shorten and place spending limits.
Instead of a NEW national holiday, how about moving Presidents Day to the first Friday in November as our election day? Too bad we can't have Election Day in the summer - nicer weather would bring more to the polls.
Voting in Saturdays would exclude anyone who observes that day as a religious day, which is certain Christian sects and all observant Jews. Make Election Day a paid holiday. It’s at least as important as any of our Monday holidays.
When you have vote by mail, election day does not matter. Voter participation was higher than ever with mail in. Even with corrupt postmaster general. 3 proven cases of fraud in Pennsylvania were votes for Don the con.
I think the suggestion that we have a paid National Voters Holiday during the week for national elections is a good one. We could adapt "President's Day" and make it the basis for the election.
The penalty for not voting MUST include the option to vote "none of the above". There are some religions that prohibit voting. They spent time in the Naxi prison camps for it. Also, in Austria if "none of the above" gets 30% of the vote, a new election with more candidates must be held.
Nevada has "None of these" and I think it is a great way to send a message to the two domineering parties. I disagree with penalizing people for not voting. It is a right not an obligation even if it is the responsible thing to do. It would mean having a lot of unprepared voters just making guesses or voting for a party.
Paying people to vote is not the same as paying people to vote the way you want. The ballot is still secret. Corporations donating to politicians with understood but not explicit quid pro quo is another matter. Indeed a steeper and slipperier slope.
What is Citizens United? Corporations donating to Republicans to buy their congressional vote for the corporation over their constituents? Now that is steeper slippery sloope, no?
Ok, good point Joan, I uncle. We've grown so much in population, why is it still a one day affair? Make voting Friday to Tuesday. All National Holiday week.
Alternatively, enable plenty of early voting - at least 15 days, including Saturdays and Sundays - and mail-in voting, so that "Election Day" becomes "last day to vote" among many.
Apparently Republican legislators have decided that early voting helps Democrats more than themselves, especially Sundays when many Black churches organize buses after church, so they want to suppress it.
Yes to many options to open up and celebrate our right to vote! That will help children understand how important this act is if they see that their parents aren’t just doing it in a way that it’s one more thing they have on their to do list but that it’s an honor and even fun.
I vote for voting on a weekday national holiday so that no one will have to skip any of the fun stuff on the weekend. There should be no excuses not to vote, and voter registration should be automatic whenever someone applies for any state-recognized photo ID card. And for a really high turnout, how about a national lottery ticket for each voter, and divide up a few hundred million dollars among the winners? Let's make suffrage universal and FUN!
The more fun the more voters turn out but fun in a serious way. That would be a true democracy that our founding fathers were afraid of— so they felt the need for the electoral college.
The only way this could work would be to outlaw businesses being open on that day - and that will never happen. I remember when all stores and restaurants as well as government offices were closed on July 4th, Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year's Day. The first time I was told I had to work on an Independence Day - because the shopping center in which the shop where I worked was having a big sales event - I insisted that nobody would show up to shop on a national holiday. It turned out to be a very slow sales day but that was the beginning of the new tradition of having big sales on national holidays - as far as retail and food service workers are concerned that was the end of true national holidays. When there's money to be made, businesses will find a way to stay open and require employees to show up. That's why I prefer Washington State's mail-in ballots. I don't even know how to vote in person here anymore, although I did see signs near my county courthouse pointing to an in-person polling place for several weeks this last fall, so it is possible.
We have all become too accustomed to businesses calling the shots. A federal law (with teeth) requiring all businesses (should they choose to stay open on federal election days) to pay double-time and limit work shifts to 4 hours per employee, coupled with 6 AM to 10 PM open polls, in addition to mandatory 2-week early ballot drop-off and no-questions-asked mail-in voting options would do the trick.
In fact, what really needs to happen is an amendment to the Constitution that establishes detailed criteria for all voting at every level and effectively outlaws gerrymandering and any harassment of voters, but the DEMs will need to win more elections by larger margins before that can happen. And then there's all that money in politics, all the legalized corruption post-Citizens-United, and the utterly absurd and undemocratic Electoral College, and all the lying on Twitter and Facebook and QAnon zombies. And Trump. We really still are a work in progress.
In Nicaragua after they overthrew their dictator, Samosa around 1984, they modeled their constitution after European democracies. They decided that all political advertizing was required to stop 2 weeks before the election subject to high fines. This prevented attacks on the day before the election leaving no time left for defence by the other side.
Somoza was a dictator; samosa is a South Asian pastry.
Somoza was overthrown and exiled in 1979. You probably refer to the first election held by the Sandinistas under Daniel Ortega. It was widely recognized as free and fair, except by the Reagan admin and its allies.
Yes but thereafter he wasn't very keen on allowing anyone to beat him in minor affaires like elections..;and still isn't.....even llowing for US propaganda.
I understand your meaning, Stuart, but when I read this post, I first mistakenly interpreted it as “It’s always Sunday in France”—and envisioned a stroll down the Champs-Elysees on a weekend, preferably on a spring day, without a care in the world. Pure fantasy, of course. Thanks for the delightful escape, if only for a few moments.
I did that in 1996, in September, for a magical 50th birthday on the first day of fall, it was near the culmination of the best month of my life. I spent a week in Rome, was married in Amalfi, honeymooned in Florence, Venice, Lyon, and Paris.
"Eighty-five percent of us want to limit the amount of politics,"
probably should have been,
"Eighty-five percent of us want to limit the amount of money in politics".
One wonders if that same 85% would therefore strongly support public financing of elections.
I certainly would.
Publicly financed elections, an end to partisan gerrymandering, and the elimination of the Electoral College would go a long way toward establishing a democracy in America. It would also likely mean the end of the Republican Party as it is today.
California where I live makes voting as easy as possible. Similar to Colorado although I have not gotten text or email updates. As in Colorado, fraud is zilch, zip, zero. Thanks for the stats. Helps in sharing info with others.
U know there’s something to that idea but when it comes right down to it and when we’re off the subject of saving our democracy, I so love the variety of cultures we have in our country and I never want that to change.
re-annex perhaps but then Virginia might claim the preponderance on much of the south and west of the Appalachians through the Papal doctrine of "Discovery"
I would say that we are the state that invented gerrymandering (named after founding father Elbridge Gerry from MA). I live in Ayanna Pressley’s district and it looks pretty gerrymandered to me - shaped like an octopus to include working class neighborhoods of Somerville and Cambridge in addition to certain parts of Boston. It works for me as we have her. But I how MA would look redisticted. We consistently elect Republican governors.
You can't Gerrymander a "state-wide" vote......just suppress votes! Not the case perhaps in MA....but opposition, when it is loyal, is a very important part of democracy. Split tickets are not always bad. They tend to maintain a more "centrist" perspective...a consensus approach that serves well when both sides rely on fact first and opinion afterwards.....and are willing to see the others point of view. Getting pretty rare these days.
Also, in the San Diego area we vote in small places. I’ve voted in someone’s garage, in an apartment complex club house and in a realtors office. There are loads of them for neighborhoods so no long lines. I vote by mail now but my husband worked at the polling location for the primaries. Making thousands of people go to one central location, have to deal with parking and long lines just discourages them. I’ve waited hours in those lines in Kansas City, KS and Manchester, NH.
That is one thing California has done in getting their act together! We have absentee and mail-in voting plus in-house voting. Our ballot boxes are placed everywhere and God forbid somebody tries to hijack them.
Democracy in the US cannot survive without stopping vote suppression by the Republican Party. Unfortunately, HR1/S1 almost certainly cannot pass in the Senate unless the Democrats abolish the filibuster, which they cannot do because Manchin, Sinema, and one or two other Democrats have only slim margins in their overwhelmingly white states and fear losing them if they don't walk the Jim Crow line. Furthermore, even if the Senate did eliminate the filibuster and pass the bill, the Roberts court would probably emasculate it. (Roberts has steadfastly pursued preservation of white political dominance throughout his career.) So, in addition to dropping the filibuster, Democrats would need to expand the Supreme Court. That makes three high barriers protecting the white ruling class, and each of those barriers seems insurmountable. A monumental, nationwide, get-out-the-vote effort in 2022 might give the Democrats the three or four extra Senate seats they need to get rid of the filibuster and at the same time avoid the loss of the House. No prudent person would bet on that outcome, but now is not the time for prudence. Now it the time for monumental effort.
I would like to see Biden increase seats in the Supreme Court, yes. The Dems problem is that we lost seats in the House and came dang near too close in losing it. We cannot fall asleep at the wheel again.
He could just bring the Court back to its original function as designated in the founders thoughts and laid out in the Constitution which should find the support of the "Originalists" in principle (if they still have any!) and thus make it much less dangerous in terms of "progressive" legislation which adapts the Government to the times as the Government would do the referral of cases and their scope would be severely limited.
Yes to monumental effort. If we don’t try to overcome these barriers to HR1/S1, we have zero chance of bending the arc toward justice. Any erosion of these barriers will serve to bend that arc in a progressive direction.
The Democrats do not think in terms of a lifetime of effort. That is the power of the conservative right wing with its roots in William F. Buckley and Berry Goldwater. The Christian religious right has their roots in Carl MacIntire who predates Jerry Falwell.
How many liberals remember Buckminister Fuller or have read the seed work, The Good Society or the science fiction book Ecotopia?? How many liberals opposed Ralph Nader? How many progressives have read Cornel West? White Liberals brag about being educated, but they have no "skin in the game" so they lack curiosity and imagination except dystopia. These are over generalizations but worthy of self reflection.
All white people benefit from systemic racism. Probably that reduces the level of commitment among white liberals but has the opposite effect for liberals who have non-European ancestors. Nevertheless, all committed liberals need to get on board with GOTV efforts now to avoid an autocratic white supremacist government.
Too much scourging of Dems when the GOP deserves it more. Denouncing and thwarting democracy's enemies is good for democracy. Dumping on its friends is not.
"Scourging"? "Dumping on friends"?? When is the time for self reflection? Not when the party is down, it would be disheartening. Criticising the Affordable Health Care during the struggle to get passage would not be helpful, we were fortunate to have something, rather an a nothing sandwich.
Now when we aspire to build back better, now is the time for reassessing what are we doing wrong? Not educating the base and being satisfied with 50% plus one is not inspiring imagination. Black Lives Matter is doing something that sparks the imagination. The threat of "defunding" the police woke up a lot of people to start thinking about solutions. My assessment of weakness of the Democrats is constructive, but not if it creates defensiveness rather than "yeah, we need to work on that."
It is high time we get answers to the nefarious workings of some of the Capitol police. As in every Police force, there are dirty police. That is a fact. When I was growing up, my Dad was a Deputy Sheriff and was dismayed by the true interests of some, certainly not all, Police. The Police Chief was a family friend who lived in our neighborhood and worked in tandem with my Mom with her involvement in the School District. I remember him saying at our house over dinner that it's a full time job just keeping the Police on the straight and narrow, let alone the criminals. Perhaps that I why even today I have a cautious opinion of Police.
Regarding voter suppression, I am sickened by the factor of Republicans that are openly willing to vote against the good of the People. These are not grey issues, these are clear and pointed facts they are choosing to drive over people with. This issue alone has dwindled any hope I have for true reform.
I can't praise Liz Cheney enough for her tough stand on Trump. I am waiting for the other shoe to drop with her, but so far she is showing ethics I didn't think she had. CPAC will be every Republicans wet dream. This will be Trump's resurrection. Hold on to your hats, this will be the stomping down of the Democrats in more ways than one.
I do not think every Republican is orgasmic about CPAC's event (circus). I would wager that half would split off to a true conservative party, including/led by Liz Cheney, if there was any way to transfer the power away from the trumpists.
I literally just had this conversation today. I am starting to wonder if Liz Cheney will secure herself a spot on the 2024 ticket as the ethical candidate. This is possible if the Capitol insurrection investigation reveals Hawley, Cruz , Boebert and others caught red handed and brought down.
They continue to prove that Richard Hofstadter was right 67 years ago. We should start calling them what they are: Pseudo-Conservatives -
From clinical interviews and thematic apperception tests, Adorno and his co-workers found that their pseudo-conservative subjects, although given to a form of political expression that combines a curious mixture of largely conservative with occasional radical notions, succeed in concealing from themselves impulsive tendencies that, if released in action, would be very far from conservative. The pseudo-conservative, Adorno writes, shows “conventionality and authoritarian submissiveness” in his conscious thinking and “violence, anarchic impulses, and chaotic destructiveness in the unconscious sphere. . . . The pseudo conservative is a man who, in the name of upholding traditional American values and institutions and defending them against more or less fictitious dangers, consciously or unconsciously aims at their abolition.”
Thank you, TCinLA. My Republican PA family of lawyers and judges and other professionals who voted for “that other guy” are perfect examples of what you describe. Fully damaged people who orate “American values” but are personally weak and coming from a place of disappointment, intense fear and grievance. ❤️🤍💙
I know this is surprising; it surprised me. Most of the actual neocons are Never-Trumpers, or among the officeholders getting "censured" by the loons in their state parties.
HR1/S1, For the People Act is worth going to the mat for. Democrats cannot afford to let these bills not become law. Truth is, Americans cannot afford that; it's just that so many Rs in Congress have forgotten what it means, truly means, to be an American.
So, the filibuster must go, at least for bills that affect voting rights, as it has gone for budget bills. Also, and I've wondered about this for years, whatever happened to actually having to hold the floor, to talk without respite for hours and days. If you insist on filibustering, then do it for goodness sake! don't just threaten and the other side caves in!
I just finished a bit of research on what my own piece of Republicanism accomplished during his six terms in office and I was truly impressed by how little a Congressman can get away with doing, putting cult before country, and still be elected. Really low bar. He initiated 33 bills over six terms, managed to get one (1) passed, to rename a post office after a local hero.
Now, my district is a safe Republican seat --R+14-- and I'm embarrassed to say that it was the Maryland Dems who gerrymandered it so they'd have seven safe Democratic seats. It makes me so 😡 mad.
HR1/S1 could bring us a little closer to a more perfect union, to an honest democracy, just a little, and there are Congress folk who would rather see it not pass? What are you doing in a position of leadership? Get out of the way!
It is amazing to me that HR1 was written and initially submitted by Maryland Congressman John Sarbanes who was elected by the outrageously gerrymandered MD District 3 in which I live. I feel like this was a selfless act by him because properly drawing Maryland districts could affect his electoral possibilities. I have bellowed against the drawing of these districts by a state with a long history of democrat control as being a betrayal of democracy. That democrats deplore gerrymandering by Republicans while doing the same thing is hypocrisy. Gerrymandering is a non-partisan activity used by either party that is in power. It goes deeply against the one-person-one vote promise of a democracy. Pass HR1/S1 without diluting it with reductive amendments.
Richard, I agree that the irony of the gerrymandered seat going Republican is painful. Well, I guess folks can continue to take up space talking only to people who are also just taking up space saying the same things over and over again. It's almost as if Dr Richardson has been talking into the wind for the last year and something, because I am just seeing the same kind of thing only a few frustrated people wrote in the beginning. Then we began to understand what she was trying to teach us and it was like a light showing us the way. We do need to grieve and process all that has happened. But here we are, a month and a week into a Democratic administration, and a foundation is being laid for a better future. It isn't going to happen all at once. I hope you can find a way to initiate some action, however small, that can change that gerrymander in the future. It's all those little things that people like you and me and the many who are not here right now because they are out there working with other people to speak up, speak out, attend a public meeting (here in New England we are getting ready for Town Meeting, which will be held online. Our ballots are mail-in or drop-off and we're good with that. In the meantime, we are wearing masks and being careful. Helping older folks and home-bound folks make appointments for Covid shots. We've all carried a heavy load for a while. I'm looking forward to spending time with my family again. And proud of them that they all are finding small ways to make a difference. Sometimes the people in the way are ourselves, not noticing that we are blocking someone else who is trying to learn how to do.
I have a question. If the only way a political party can win elections is via guile, deception, Big Lies, and loud-mouthed spokespersons, wouldn't you think its members would take a long hard look at themselves to determine why they are not popular? And then course correct from the inside out? Rhetorical.
They did take a long, hard look after 2012. In March 2013, the RNC released the "Growth and Opportunity Project," a report commonly known as the "autopsy" following Obama's re-election. It was truly a thoughtful self-examination of the GOP's future in a multi-cultural America. But, Trumpism buried it. It is easier to lie and cheat and appeal to the baser instincts of the GOP base than to accept inclusive democracy.
The autopsy was thoughtful and even data-driven. But as you note, it's fatally flawed by the greater commitment to Repug party dominance over actually providing better representation for Americans. It's more vote-searching than soul-searching.
Then to do that they’d have to be humble and reflective—which I wouldn’t say The repugs are famous for oh yeah there was Abraham Lincoln. I think we should all become independent and start over.
That's a marvelous biography. Chernow covers Grant's drinking more thoroughly than anyone else, conclusively settling any controversy from false or exaggerated stories. Grant was a very high-functioning alcoholic, who after the 1850s never let it affect his military or political career.
Why bother? They are winning fine without having to course correct. The republican bias in the senate will only get worse. Plus Republicans are committed to minority rule and are taking the necessary steps to keep themselves in power for a very long time. Joe Manchin and Sinema are helping them knowingly or unknowingly. No wonder Mcconnell made a big deal about nailing them down against the filibuster. I have zero doubt that the filibuster will survive next time republicans are in power and it suits their needs. I despise them but they sure know how to win at any cost.
Mostly the Republicans "win" legally because they change the laws ahead of time to their future advantage. Democrats would never do that. Democrat weakness is only looking ahead to the next election cycle, like Wall Street only looks ahead to the next quarterly report.
That's an excellent point. The weakness means Republicans increase their advantage year over year. Once in a while Democrats get power but fail to utilize it. But I can't blame them because it's a stacked deck against them. Even the RINOs fall in line when it matters.
That’s if they had integrity and understood things better but I’m afraid power has corrupted some of the repugs thoroughly so that they can’t even think straight now. It’s just all about keeping their power. George Washington was dying to get back to Mt. Vernon. So he tried to set a wonderful example of public service and then you go back to private life or farming.
As Donald Trump and his followers meet at CPAC to continue spreading the Big Lie and railing against “radical” Democratic bills such as HR-1/S-1 (For the People Act), my thoughts are with a true patriot.
This month marks 90 years since the passing of Ida B. Wells. Born into slavery, Ms. Wells would go on to co-found the NAACP and become a fierce advocate for civil rights and a woman’s right to vote.
I mention Ms. Wells because of her searing writing on the practice of lynching – a practice that would become a spectator sport in states across the nation, drawing enormous crowds including children who were released from school in order to attend. Lynching was an attack on Black Americans, on their bodies, their citizenship, their humanity.
I mention Ms. Wells because her work goes to the heart of what it means to be a citizen – the right to vote and to expect your government to defend you rights and privileges regardless of your gender or the color of your skin.
I mention Ms. Wells because 150 years after the ratification of the 14th Amendment, the promises contained therein are under attack today, not by the lynch mobs Ms. Wells wrote and spoke so fiercely about, but by Republicans in Congress, and in State Legislatures across the country controlled by Republicans, who are working to restrict the right to vote.
In the final essay of his remarkable life, Representative John Lewis wrote:
“Ordinary people with extraordinary vision can redeem the soul of America by getting in what I call good trouble, necessary trouble. Voting and participating in the democratic process are key. The vote is the most powerful nonviolent change agent you have in a democratic society. You must use it because it is not guaranteed. You can lose it.”
Ida Wells got into “good trouble” and so must we all, by supporting HR-1/S-1 and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
Is there something wrong with me? Am I too rational for 2021? Of course I support HR-1/S and The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. However, have we not been here before?
"The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1868, granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States—including former enslaved people—and guaranteed all citizens “equal protection of the laws.” One of three amendments passed during the Reconstruction era to abolish slavery and establish civil and legal rights for Black Americans, it would become the basis for many landmark Supreme Court decisions over the years.
In its later sections, the 14th Amendment authorized the federal government to punish states that violated or abridged their citizens’ right to vote by proportionally reducing the states’ representation in Congress, and mandated that anyone who “engaged in insurrection” against the United States could not hold civil, military or elected office (without the approval of two-thirds of the House and Senate)."
And then:
"The Fifteenth Amendment (Amendment XV) to the United States Constitution prohibits the federal government and each state from denying a citizen the right to vote based on that citizen's "race, color, or previous condition of servitude." It was ratified on February 3, 1870,[1] as the third and last of the Reconstruction Amendments."
Does anyone find it repulsive that in America 2021 democrats/progressives/independents have to fight to create a bill that provides a law that EVERY American citizen, despite their color, has the right to vote--our rights which are already very protected in our Constitution??
I find it repulsive to have to spend this kind of time and money on the knuckle-draggers and anti-maskers when we have a world and climate in crisis. Most of the bill, as I understand it is necessary, I suppose. But, as I re-visited these amendments above, gerrymandering and voter suppression simply violate both of these Constitutional Amendments. Of course, I am not a legal expert, I am just a rational citizen.
I would prefer to spend our time and money on upholding these hard-earned Rights and prosecuting the individuals and/or states whose ignorant knees are pressing upon any of American citizen's necks. All forms of voter suppression should be covered under these Amendments. Are they not? Is there a twist I am missing?
There are 20 states now with automatic voter registration at places like the DMV. That is civil and rational. There is reason-free absentee voting in Vermont and ID's are needed only for first time voters. That is rational. Is that not as equally as rational to republicans as our 2nd Amendment (which does not include weapons of mass destruction).
We have a wealthy, myopic political party that is completely out of control, that is anti-Constitutional, racist, seditious, autocratic, promotes lies, propaganda and very serious voter suppression. They are harmful to our people, our citizens and our democratic republic. It is 2021. It is now "We The People, All of Us This Time." You are with us or against our Constitution and America today. It is time for violators to pay Consequences. What does attorney Glenn Kirschner always say? Oh yes, "Because Justice Matters."
There is one descriptor that may not be accurate, "out of control". The Repubicans are as disciplined as a Roman army. Their goal is not democracy. Their goal is oligarchy. They sencerely believe only the wealthy are wise enough to manage the world.
I absolutely agree. The stated goal of even normal 80’s - 90’s style republicans and now even more from the far right regions of the party are to make government as small as possible. This country and its two parties do not make up one nation. At this point I see little value in working so hard to negotiate with an opposing party that does not even want the same things. And, as many other have noted here time and again, this nation was created with two very different ideas of what the future United States should look like. There was never full consensus on what liberty and justice meant. The “compromise” is absolutely outdated and there is no longer a real purpose to compromise as much as republicans want democrats to. The stakes are too high to appeal to groups of people who deny science, equity and cooperation.
How do we come to a consensus? If people want bathtub sized government, are they willing to drive on dirt roads, let our bridges crumble, homeschool unless their kids can walk or be driven, have only wealthy people be our leaders, let people and communities suffer with mental health, poverty, lack of childcare, criminals, drug lords, domestic abuse, no learning challenges and physical challenges support, no police and national guard or fire persons.
What kind of world would we be living in if the caste system were installed any more deeply? It would be full-bore chaos and Darwinian. It would be Apocalyptic. Wackos and civilians would would be screaming and terrorizing our streets and our Capital, trying to lynch elected officials with whom they disagree or were programmed to find and kill. They would flout all laws, believing themselves to be above them. .They would, they would...Oh. Maybe things would NOT be any different than they already are...
It seems quite obvious that you have indeed described our current situation. If our justice system does not incarcerate these knuckle dragging louts we are in for a world of hurt.
Not that you didn't cover it, but an explicit mention of the Texas electric grid deregulation misgovernance might bring the message home to those who otherwise might just consider your message over-hyperbolic and dismiss it.
You just added it!!
The only reason to attempt working with Republicans is to show just how obstructionist they are, so that the large "middle" of the electorate can see and reevaluate their assumptions on which party represents their interests.
Since this effort is just beginning, the Biden administration is right to be making approaches to Republicans, as long as they do not play the usual Democratic game of designing an approach that provides 80% of the solution, cutting it to 50% of the needed solution, and then negotiating the resulting solution down to something less than 10% of what is needed, and then if successfully passing it, patting themselves on the back and going on to the next problem.
So far, the Biden administration is NOT following that path to failure, and must be strongly supported to keep on this new approach.
Now, either directly or through surrogates, Democrats must get this message out directly and through the media so as to provide the needed education and reevaluation of assumptions by the electorate.
I love that AOC raised a lot of money to help Texas. THAT is modeling the kind of behavior in being truly the best America has to offer...and that was from a woman of color... Brilliant, honest, compassionate role modeling for trumplicans. Where was Cancun Cruz while AOC was raising funds for state in crisis?
Maybe the Repugnants will regulate themselves out of existence.
So, we need to delineate why the republicans no longer want a democratic republic. Exactly which people in our country would benefit under a dictator? Sell dictatorship to us. State your arguments-- with truth.
Those people who already have theirs believe they would be the beneficiaries of a tRumpocracy. There are some well off people who really fear that losing the status quo would mean the end of their privilege.
Totally Agree Judith!!!!😡
Yes and yes. The problem is that one political party that claims to closely follow the “sacred” Constitution is deeply flawed and mostly nutso. Repubs twist themselves into pretzels to interpret the “sacred” Constitution for their own benefit.
Penelope we still haven't passed the ERA--and it was introduced in 1920 originally, I think.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/equal-rights-amendment-96-years-old-and-still-not-part-constitution-heres-why-180973548/
Sadly, it has to do with a combination of gerrymandering and allowing the states to pass voting laws specific to their state - my question is a different one.. There needs to be laws over which individual states have no say-- and if they can get HR1/S1 through and past Supreme Court tests, perhaps this is part of the answer. A big IF in getting it past this Supreme Court... the other half as to do with the disgusting practice (on both sides) of Gerrymandering. HR1/S1 might work for the presidential election, but the 37 states that account for 15% of the countries population have outsized power in the senate and house districts that are drawn to minimize the minority vote...sigh
Without having read word for word, line by line each of our amendments that protect the right to vote, I too have wondered why we constantly need to reinvent the wheel. Loopholes? Fatal flaws?
Enforcement. Fox-ists guarding our hen house.
Bravo! I totally agree with you. Not only must "justice prevail but, also, common sense, which seems to be sorely lacking in Congress these past several decades!
All very good questions!! I would love to hear the answers.
When someone says 2+2 does not equal 5, it implies a different answer. Keep reading.
Penelope for President!
Hahahah!!
PSA you’d have my vote.
MaryPat, Penelope for President! Indeed.
As a retired elementary school librarian, I highly recommend this picture book, “Yours for Justice, Ida B. Wells: The Daring Life of a Crusading Journalist.”
https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/yours-for-justice-ida-b-wells-philip-dray/1111117198
Ty!
My pleasure always!! It is a wonderful story, beautifully told and very attractive to my students of high poverty, about half of whom were Black. Every time I read it aloud I could have checked out 20 copies.
Sadly, many of the libraries in my former district, at all levels, have been disassembled or no longer have American Library Association masters degreed, certified librarians. Mine was one of those, when I was forced to retire. The difference between a good school library and a book warehouse is a good school librarian.
I'd contribute to a Go Fund Me page for the purchase of this book to be distributed to Members of Congress. Eh?
We might have to read it aloud to them.
Apparently you can read anything into the Congressional Record - ask Ron Johnson.
😄😂🤣 Wed have to hogtie the GOP, but that would be good for them, too!!
And confiscate their cellphones prior to the recitation.
🤣😓
I wouldn’t waste my money on a lost cause! Plant the seeds of Ida B. Wells and “Yours for Justice” where they can grow.
I’d contribute to a Go Fund Me page for the purchase of this book to be distributed to school children!
A Dolly Parton “Imagination Library” for older students sounds like a GREAT investment. ❤️ Her free books distributed to little ones across the country is the absolute best!
We could turn it into huge posters and hang it on the walls or put it up in the display easels the Republicans are so fond of posting their lies on. Each Democrat could use their 5 minute time to read the portion on their board into the record.
Though I suppose it is harder to do since they all don’t meet in the House with Covid. Maybe in a few committee meetings. Get the ones with the seditionists in, especially Jim Jordan and Steve Scalise.
Love it!!!
Good idea!
Absolutely agree, thank you again for recommendation, new one on my list for grandkids.
Agreed, but don't forget library support staff. Patrons deal directly with Circ staff more than professional librarians. AOC borrowed books from me when I worked in the BU library; we helped to start her on the path to Congress. The BU community thinks the world of our amazing grads-turned-Reps, AOC and Ayanna Pressley.
Congratulations on your grads-turned Reps!!! But I’m referring to K-12 school libraries. And they typically have no support staff. The librarian does everything - circulation, shelving, weekly classes for every grade level, collection development in odd moments. 😉 That’s why I say that a school library is just a book warehouse without an ALA master’s degreed, certified school librarian.
As I retired elementary school administrator, I can attest to the wonderful and important work school librarians do. In our school the Librarian, who is a certified professional, is an inspiration to the students, knows individual students, their reading levels and interests, is able to identify and purchase quality materials, and serves as a valuable resource to our teachers as they prepare learning experiences for their students.
I volunteered to help at my children's school in the library and was honestly surprised at how amazingly important and how involved the job of liberian is. I think for the children the librarians are very helpful nice adults but when I needed information about what some of my children were going through I quickly learned how astounding and amazing these librarians were. I was and still am so grateful for all their help not just for my children but for me as well. Thank you for all you have done. It is a highly specialized and indrediable job that is certainly undervalued.
Thank you for bringing up this issue in this forum and for the book recommendation. Often librarians are an echo chamber of library advocacy so it's nice to have the conversation brought outside the library walls.
I am a librarian/web developer for a school district in central office support. Much of what my department does is advocate for teacher librarians (TLs) in all schools within the district. Since principals often don't have it within their budget to hire a TL, they decide to go with a paraprofessional so at least there's someone there to circulate books. This creates a rift between TLs and paras, but the animosity is misguided. It comes down to leadership and budget issues. I pulled my kids from our neighborhood school since one of the school leaders told my one of my colleagues - with a serious face - that libraries are obsolete and that messaged trickled down to the staff. They use the library space as an office, but still say it is a library because they circulate books. No mention of the fact that there's no opportunity for browsing or programming and the collection is painfully outdated.
At the heart of the matter is funding. I live in Colorado, which has turned blue (a nod to universal mail-in voting), but also has TABOR and an abysmal record of funding public education. Therefore, when budgets are tight, libraries are at the top of the list for cuts. Most school leaders think of libraries as something that is nice to have, but not necessary. Until there's a solid line drawn between professionally staffed libraries and standardized test scores, they're going to continue to be cut along with other specials (art, music, PE).
Terribly sad, and very true. Yes, librarians are very expensive. In most states they are required to have a master’s. The only other people in the building with master’s required are the principal and the AP. I had 30yrs experience from around the country, and they gained two positions when they “let” me retire.
taking the funding from *1* plane of war would fund all the libraries in K-12, nationwide...
Thanks for the recommendation .
Thanks for calling attention to this perfect emobdiment of good trouble. Ms Wells-Barnett was one of the world's greatest human rights advocates.
“Burning and torture here lasts but a little while, but if I die with a lie on my soul, I shall be tortured forever"- Ida B. Wells
I disagree with just about everything with Liz Cheney. Proud of her for standing up to the big lie strategy. I've been thinking what faction other than business republicans would also break away. I thought could it be the Christian Evangelicals? No, abortion. Not the gun freaks, no. Not the white nationalist, certainly not. Maybe the older Eisenhower Republicans, maybe. But “If Southern white men are not careful, they will overreach themselves and public sentiment will have a reaction; a conclusion will then be reached which will be very damaging to the moral reputation of their women.”― Ida B. Wells-Barnett.
The next big break within the Republican Party will be the loss of women to that party.
When women leave the Republican Party in droves, watch how the messaging of fear of Black Men will ratchet upward as a counter. Like Bush did with Willy Horton in his 1988 campaign. The strategy of fear since reconstruction. It is only a stronger message with video & film & likes, and comments, like mini shorts of 1915's "Birth of Nation". FB and IG allow for more racist short films to hit directly, with force and relentless repetition. Its no wonder how the Republicans have lasted this long. They are well versed in hate and fear tactics and weld the arsenal to maintain only power. MTG/Qanon is the prime example of this strategy working for the Republicans. Why would Republicans refute a fear conspiracy that has brought them so much success with women voters? It is perhaps one of their most potent psychological weapons.
On March 6th, 1956, speaking to the Fourth Annual Republican Women's National Conference, President Dwight Eisenhower said, "If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is NOT a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power."
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fourth-annual-republican-women-s-national-conference
Il left the party when the Moral Majority took over & have a hard time understanding how any women remain. There is so little respect women.
Wow. Just, wow. How prescient. 😢
Yes, and I think this is already happening, especially among younger women.
Let’s hope so!
Good trouble xoxo
CPAc - the "Star Wars bar scene" for far right loons.
Complete with "Jabba the Trump" ... their slug-like leader.
You really should check out the "golden" T***p statuette. Sheesh. Move over, Jeff Koons.
Well, it takes a Bozo to build one - and he has.
Jabba. Thats funny R! Nice!
My favorite scene in all the Star Wars films.
Thank you Heather. Finally, capital Police being taken to task. I remember what my own eyes saw as some police simply dismantled and pulled back the flimsy barricades. But, imo, All the little mob soldiers who go to jail in this failed coup attempt will not cure our ills UNTIL their commander in chief gets arrested and prosecuted right along with them. Head of the snake.
Many of us knew that there would be angry, violent agitators at our Capitol on Jan. 6. Who knew they were out to murder our elected officials and destroy and desecrate our Capital along with those who should be protecting us? I would like to know who told our police, National Guard, and military to stand down that day? Everyone knows t**p was riling his cult up for months claiming he won by a landslide. I know of no one who is rational that would have gone anywhere near DC because of the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, KKK, and other domestic terrorists. Now we can add many republican elected officials, trained American police and veterans to the list of seditionists. We pay for them to be trained to protect us—not harm us.
This is the elephant in the room that everyone (media included) seems to be dancing around: WHO prevented the National Guard and military from assisting? We probably all can guess who that WHO is, but my question is what exactly are they dodging right now? Is it because they need to get safely through the March 4th conspiratorial "inauguration"? Do they lack sufficient evidence to prosecute? Are they still pursuing threads in order to eradicate ALL of the heads of Medusa? Their silence is deafening.
I knew they would try to storm the Capitol and try to kill elected officials (after what we endured in Michigan and in my own neighborhood), and I knew that the last minute changing of the guard in Defense leadership was a very bad sign, and I screamed at the TV earier, when the DC Mayor said there were 360 Capitol Police on duty, "We need 36,000!!". But I thought the Military Chiefs of Staff would override any tRump/Steve Miller order, never dreaming that tRump's seditionitist monsters would block the National Guard employment. You are right - we need to know exactly who ordered what and when, and they should all be sentenced to life in prison.
Deployment I mean.
I have very mixed feelings about the JCS intervening in political affairs. It might have helped on Jan 6, but after initial intervention, where does it stop? The tenets of the Self-Denying Ordinance, dating to 1640s England and excluding legislators from simultaneous military service, form a bedrock of democratic civilian rule in the Anglo-American political tradition. Those countries that abandoned it, especially in former British Africa, have a history of military coups and instability that is worth avoiding.
Ecrasez l'infame!
-- Voltaire
Crush the loathsome thing!
YES. Thx TPJ.
careful though, he displeased greatly much of the French Aristocracy and the kings...and spend a great deal of time in jail and in exile which he spent writing even more.
I have a feeling my emails displease greatly my loathsome representatives and governor.
R u sure they can read?
Good trouble; keep it up!
Hey but Voltaire is immortal— vive la France 🇫🇷
Tell that to his successors. One politician recently mistook him for a brand of cheap clothing! Another, Minister of Culture admitted not having had time to read a book in a very long time.
🤦🏼♀️
Ah! There’s the rub — there and here. No one has time to “read a book”.
That’s a great saying to know by heart and it sounds so much better in French!
You’re right, to kill a snake 🐍 you have to cut off it’s head, but you have to be very careful with the head as it can still bite even after you separate it from it’s body.
The head of that snake needs to be removed from the enormous hole it is buried in before one can contemplate removal.
Thank you, Heather! As a retired teacher-librarian, I’d like to nominate you as a true Wonder Woman. I’m amazed that you manage to do all this research, produce a polished and detailed nightly letter, do your day job and remain focused, coherent and sane. Kudos!
Don't forget the twice weekly chats! BTW, have you noticed when she talks History on Thursdays, she speaks much more rapidly than her Tuesday Politics chats? I struggled to keep up on this last one😲
Lynell, I think its because she's trying to use her calming voice for us with what we are dealing with in the current political culture. As in trying to keep us from jumping off the ledge.
Could be. I attributed it to her being more enthusiastic when she talks about history than when she talks about current politics.
Well, history is her wheelhouse and that's what makes her happy. I'm sure she prefers it over the bullshit that's going on now.
Exactly!
I think she gets really excited on her Thursday chats as that is her love of history shining through! She sometimes literally twinkles with excitement, which I so adore. I still cannot belive she takes the time to do these chats along with these wonderful letters. Talk about service to the people, for the people!
More definitely. I don't know if she reads any of our comments, but I do hope she knows how appreciated she is.
This is my take about her Thursday chats as well, Margaret. And yes, we are so fortunate to be the receivers of her dedication
So much information, so little time to convey it ....
True. this!
Where are these weekly chats?
Chats are on Facebook. Tuesdays at 4:00 pm are her Politics chats. Thursdays at 1:00 pm are her History chats. When on FB search "Heather Cox Richardson Videos. You will see a "library" of past chats there. They are also posted on her YouTube channel. It's my understanding the YouTubes are posted later.
TY!
Yes I agree our Heather is a super Wonder Woman. I bet it helps that you live in that peaceful remote part of Maine. I lived in Dark Harbor Islesboro for a time and it’s heavenly beautiful up there.
After the COVID relief bill passes, I'm ready for Democratic leaders to become much more aggressive and vocal in pushing the For the People legislation. Not just speaking out in support but painting Republicans as enemies of voting. The GOP has made this clear with the raft of state bills that seek to prevent the extraordinary turnout last November. They must be stopped.
The Dems should mount a massive public campaign on how the For the People act will promote clean elections. Worried about voter fraud? Support FTP
They need to be prosecuted.
Ah, the filibuster! There is a joke about traditional behaviors that have long outlasted their original utility. The joke goes like this: A young girl has watched her mother always cut a few inches off the end of a ham, before baking it in the oven. When she asked for mother why, she was told that her grandmother always did this and that was how her mother learned to bake a ham. Curious, the girl asked her grandmother why she always cut the end of the ham off. The grandmother got a far away look and laughed, then said “Oh that! We had a very small oven and I had to cut the end off the ham so it would fit in the oven.” Clearly, there was no longer utility in wasting part of every ham. The same is true with the filibuster. The Founding Fathers envisioned the Congress would be populated by wise men of good will who would think through issues and debate them before coming to a resolution. The House soon grew too large for unlimited debate, so established rules for limiting it. The smaller Senate kept unlimited debate rules. Well now the Senate is likely larger than the House was when it limited debate. Further, the filibuster is now used to eliminate debate on an issue and to kill potential legislation, rather than to further debate. The filibuster is a tradition, much like living in caves or cutting off the. end of hams, that no longer serves the goal of debate. It is time to end it.
I have a real-life example of a tradition that outlived its efficacy in my own family. My mother spent her childhood and early adolescence on a farm and her family did a lot of home canning of garden produce. Because home-canned green beans with a defective seal had caused the death by botulism of a whole family on a neighboring farm, she early developed the habit of boilingeven commercially canned green beans until they were an unappetising dull khaki-colored mush. Years after I had left home and learned how to cook fresh vegetables, I visited my parents and, as I often did when visiting them, cooked dinner. That night, fresh green beans were on the menu. I did my usual steaming to just past the crispy point and brought the still bright green beans to the table. My mother gasped, "You didn't boil those beans for 20 minutes!" and retold the botulism story. "Mom, these are fresh beans. They won't poison you." She waited until my father and I had eaten healthy portions of the beans with no ill effects before daring to take two beans and eat them. She watched us for hours expecting us to drop dead!
I read that the filibuster was created by accident. John C Calhoun noticed that a rules change had left room for it. He needed something to help him defend slavery....
That doesn't surprise me. And now in a Democratic Republic, we're stuck with a rule that encourages tyranny by the minority. We live in a Bizzaro World where up is down, facts don't matter, electors choose their voters, and the minority controls which legislation can reach the Senate floor.
I read this in Reader's digest back in the early 60s with minor differences!
Fran, may I share this with my senators (Murray and Cantwell)?
Congratulations on having two fine senators in WA.
please do
Seems H.R. 1 and S. 1 will be the perfect reason for for busting the filibuster and bring the end of minority rule. It certainly will favor Democrats for years but it would give the GOP a much needed slap in the face to purge itself of the movement conservatives hellbent on killing democracy.
A boy can dream.
We all should support Dreamers!
I'm with you 100%. In the history of this country, every large economic expansion has involved large influx of immigrants. When we move factories and entire industries abroad just to post better quarterly profits by killing unions and fair play for workers, (even our domestic food and drug supply are in domestic jeopardy), we loose the ability to grow the economy again, save for the very wealthy ownership of what is left. This is why recessions are lasting longer. There are less and less suppliers of everything in every industry. There are less and less small business owners and entrepreneurship. Offshoring everything creates less opportunity for the American Dream here as well as creating volatility and uncertainty in the job market. Restaurants are not enough. Housing construction is not enough. Offshoring and anti immigration go hand in hand with corporatocracy, Oligarchy, Populist Politics, Politics of Grievance, White Supremacy. And so anti-immigration is bad for economy long term and remains an immoral policy. In moral society business owners deal with workers as partners in the process towards profit and Politian's don't separate families and put kids in cages. We will need immigration labor to help us build the infrastructure we need for the next century.
We share that dream!
You will probably find that they'll find some way to use a "salami" strategy to satisfy Manchin etc
?
I mean that they will reduce filibuster just enough this time that voting rights will be excluded fom areas where it can be practiced. Problem is...next time that the Republicans dominate the Congress they can easily reverse it.
....or not. Given the gravity of the "one time" situation and the potential to turn a 2nd slow-stepped administration or Obama 2.0 into a once in a century event, taking really bold action may prevail.
As for Manchin, he's not in all that solid of a position. He has many skeletons in his closet. Blackmail is an ugly word, I prefer to call it "conflict avoidance."
Joe's rise to the Senate began with a rather shady beginning. He's now a multi-millionaire, that can't be over emphasized enough.
We're at the Last Chances crossroads with Climate Change, Income Inequality and Racial/Gender/LGBT issues and Voting Rights. Rocking the boat a little is not an option imho. It's also no time to play footsie with super Centrist Democrats trying to gain power for their personal benefit.
I want to see Democrats play hardball.
</Game Face On>
With these people there is no other way at this time...but you have 2-4 years to get it done, in place and accepted or they will once again neuter the Democratic voter....and then some!
Let's get H.R./S1 passed and see how the people react when for the first time, in maybe forever, they experience the closest thing to democracy in their lifetime.
I would love to see the filibuster eliminated in order to get serious things accomplished. But, the next time there is a Republican Senate--possibly in two years--we might regret its disappearance. I don't understand why there never is any mention of a way to limit the use of the filibuster without doing away with it: return to the original protocol, which was that the the Senator launching a filibuster had to stand (not sit) and speak in order to prevent a vote. He (and it was always a man in those days) could read the phone book or Joy of Cooking; it didn't matter as long as he didn't sit down or leave the podium. He could speak for hours and hours; the longest by segregationist Strom Thurmond was slightly more than 24 hours. You can bet there would be far fewer people stopping the majority's will if that were the way it was done now.
I recently read another way to modify the filibuster -- instead of requiring 60 votes to end debate, as it is now, require the periodic muster of 40 votes to continue debate. That way, instead of letting the Republicans leave the chamber, eat ice cream, or wander around the city, they would almost all have to hang around continuously to keep the filibuster going. The current model makes it entirely too easy to gum up the works.
(As a side note, it must be incredibly easy to be a Republican Representative, since all you have to do is make up right wing sound-bites and sabotage your own government. After all, their only real policy is "Government bad, rich people good," so they have every motivation to cripple the very government they were elected to help lead.)
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/09/fix-filibuster/615961
Excellent idea, and has a much better chance of happening than abolition. Let's push it.
Thanks, Joan, for this link. I'll include this idea in my next missives to my senators.
I have read that there is no mention of any filibuster in the US Constitution. I have also read that the filibuster is yet another instance of our political system's racist roots, in good company with the Electoral College and the 2 Senators per state rule regardless of population. There is nothing even remotely democratic about a minority in the Senate being able to block legislation, while the Constitution calls for rule by a simple majority, or 2 thirds to override a presidential veto.
If the Democrats do not simply do away with the filibuster, they will be unable to pass the legislation that a substantial majority of American voters want, the benefits of this legislation will not happen, and the GOP will lie and corrupt itself back into control of Congress.
If Biden - and the rest of us - cannot convince Mancin and Sinema to be real Democrats and vote to end the filibuster, then all talk of his being the reincarnation of FDR will just be so much hot air, and we will be in for 4 years of futility and rancor and disorder, followed by a second Trump (or Hawley, or Cruz, God help us!) administration and all that entails.
It will be the end.
Definitely, not in the Constitution. My understanding is that one of its earliest uses was in 1837 when Jackson was president and it wasn't directly about race, but about him having been censured by the Senate. According to various sources, the Senate and House had similar rules for debate until 1806 when the Senate abandoned its ability to "call the question" and thus, by a simple majority, end debate and vote. That laid the way for the filibuster to emerge.
When Congress, the Senate, in particular is allowed to not advance bills for a vote or the entire process is just stopped without discussion or negotitation then our governement ceases doing their job/duty. They get paid a lovely salary especially given the amount of time they are in session, pension, healthcare, and lovely perks from lobbyists, so how are they allowed to just not do their job. I am so tired of members of Congress getting such luxuries while violating their oaths, the Constitution, insider trading, conflict of interest, not to mention possible crimes. But there are no consequences at all, except wait till next election. They even get to write their own rules- seems like there needs to be some big checks and balances on Congress.
David, you are spot on.
https://history.house.gov/Institution/Electoral-College/Electoral-College/#:~:text=Established%20in%20Article%20II%2C%20Section,President%20of%20the%20United%20States.
Scary scenario is reactionary vs. reactionary with blood in the streets.
The Electoral College and 2 Senators per state are not instances of "our political system's racist roots." Those were established in the Constitution from the get go.
Hello kmKieva. A majority of the signers of the Constitution owned slaves, some were abolitionists, and the issue did come up and was divisive, but in order to agree on a Constitution it seems the issue was - to a then-sufficient degree - swept under the rug of national unity. But both the Senate and the Electoral college are configured the way they are so as to avoid confronting an issue that could have made it impossible to agree on a Constitution. Our Constitution is a pretty amazing document, even a work of genius, but it left unresolved issues that have led to The Civil War, Jim Crow and Donald Trump, and is in urgent need of an update.
I have just noticed that Susan Lawrence (below) makes my case better than I do, but since I brought up "our racist roots" in this string, I thought I should respond directly. As I grow older I find there is just no way to escape race as the best key to understanding our history. Racism, tragically, informs the American experience from the get go.
A lot of things drive history, but if you want to identify one thing that has consistently influenced our national trajectory, you are correct: it is racism.
Which at the time was all property owning white men who considered Blacks 3/5 of a person for statistical purposes only. Sounds like racist roots to me.
The 3/5 rule is often (mis)interpreted as proof of racism, that slavery's supporters thought the enslaved people were only 3/5 human. But it's not so straightforward. Their views ranged from seeing Blacks as totally subhuman, to those who saw them as fully human but still unworthy of full rights. The 3/5 figure was a product of negotiation and compromise between northern and southern sections to ensure ratification of the Constitution; thus it was more a measure of pragmatism than ideology. Most white Americans in the 18-19C were racist, but there's abundant proof that doesn't depend on misconstruing the 3/5 rule.
G Fredrickson, Black Image in the White Mind
W Jordan, White Over Black
A Keyssar, The Right to Vote
S Wilentz, No Property in Man
_____, Rise of American Democracy
The 3/5 rule made it possible for white folks in the slave states to exercise far more than their just share of power at the national level. Each vote cast by a relative handful of privileged southern slave-holders was worth far more than any vote cast in free states because each non-voting slave still showed up as 3/5ths of a person in the census. So, southern states had more representatives in the House and more votes in the Electoral College than they deserved, and they could use this advantage to guarantee that their slave-based economy would flourish, and that all efforts to end slavery would fail. This state of affairs led to the Civil War.
It really doesn't matter if some slave owners seated piggishly around their groaning dining tables argued about the "human-ness" quotient of their slaves, and there is no possible instance of master/slave friendship/bonding/love that could possibly justify such a ghastly institution as slavery.
I agree that Whites both north and south were being pragmatic when they agreed to our Constitution. They could afford to be pragmatic and there was money to be made, but the 3/5ths rule was, nevertheless, utterly racist, and parts of the Constitution are fatally tainted by this.
Pragmatism is required when dealing with racists. Absolutism only descends to civil war which didn’t appear to solve much the first time.
They were a sop to slave states from the get-go, a way to overcome southern resistance to ratification. Parity in the upper house (and the ability to count 3/5 of the slave population to achieve near-parity in the lower house) and presidential election by state legislatures were all included to mollify southern delegates. The US Constitution was a hard sell in the South - these and numerous other inclusions were necessary to replace the Articles of Confederation and get the country going. We are still living with that legacy.
You are right, I stand corrected.
If we refuse to eliminate the filibuster everything in the Senate that is not done on reconciliation will not pass. Republicans won’t vote for it no matter how much their constituents want it. This means no voting rights, no gun reform, no minimum wage and no violence against women act.
This also means the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico will not become states.
The Senate will grind to a halt and we might as well send the House and Senate home. The only thing they can do is pass a budget. Give them two-months a year to work that out and pay them accordingly. No more $174,000 salaries for a group of people that refuse to work together and do nothing but lie to Americans.
The Republicans should all agree to this because they want less government. Let’s turn these lazy white men and brainless women loose to fend for themselves. No living high off campaign contributions. My Congressman is Darrell Issa. He’s a big lie supporter. He’s corrupt and he does nothing to support our district. We had Duncan Hunter before that and he got a Trump pardon for misuse of funds. Our district is gerrymandered even in California.
Thanks Sharon, for a stiff dose of reality. Hopefully you exclude most Dems from the do-nothing group.
BTW, we too have gerrymandering in blue MA. It protects state more than federal legislators. Results: Beacon Hill frequently thwarts the voters' will; and House speakers are routinely indicted for corruption -- including all 3 from 1991-2009. Argh!!!
Jimmy Stewart, “Mr. Smith Goes To Washington.” Highly recommended! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._Smith_Goes_to_Washington
Classic film, a favorite that often springs to mind today. But it's the romantic view of filibustering, not the reality, and no one today would suffer such remorse as Claude Rains.
I’d like us to move major elections to Saturday. No more Tuesdays. U get Saturday and u will increase participation, you have more volunteers, more available security, less disruption during the work week. This should be in the HR 1 bill.
Or at least make Election Day a national holiday. I would also like to turn the primary process into a one day event as well. The campaign cycle is too long in this country.
I would like to see the campaign cycle minimalized. An incumbent spends the majority of the last year of the term campaigning.
In my opinion, the UK has a pretty good system - very short campaign period with limited funding controlled by the government, i.e., by "taxpayers".
Canada’s election cycle is shorter than the buildup to the Iowa Caucus.
I want to be annexed by Canada.
That sounds almost perfect. Like a business plan with oversight.
Where would we be if all the election spending was spent on vaccines instead? How much did the country collectively spend on the last one? Is that the best use of that money? I agree with you. shorten and place spending limits.
Some House members spend almost all their time fundraising, essential to modern campaigning.
It would certainly curtail the power of NH and IA, two tiny white states.
Instead of a NEW national holiday, how about moving Presidents Day to the first Friday in November as our election day? Too bad we can't have Election Day in the summer - nicer weather would bring more to the polls.
Voting in Saturdays would exclude anyone who observes that day as a religious day, which is certain Christian sects and all observant Jews. Make Election Day a paid holiday. It’s at least as important as any of our Monday holidays.
When you have vote by mail, election day does not matter. Voter participation was higher than ever with mail in. Even with corrupt postmaster general. 3 proven cases of fraud in Pennsylvania were votes for Don the con.
Post office has to be non partisan, like the fed. Dejoy need to go, and maybe go to jail.
I think the suggestion that we have a paid National Voters Holiday during the week for national elections is a good one. We could adapt "President's Day" and make it the basis for the election.
Ways to encourage universal voter participation:
a) mail in ballots
b) automatic voter registration
c) move Election Day to Saturday or Sunday
d) penalty for not voting
e) All of the above
My point being that if we choose all of the above, no one will be excluded. Jews can vote by mail.
The penalty for not voting MUST include the option to vote "none of the above". There are some religions that prohibit voting. They spent time in the Naxi prison camps for it. Also, in Austria if "none of the above" gets 30% of the vote, a new election with more candidates must be held.
Nevada has "None of these" and I think it is a great way to send a message to the two domineering parties. I disagree with penalizing people for not voting. It is a right not an obligation even if it is the responsible thing to do. It would mean having a lot of unprepared voters just making guesses or voting for a party.
Agreed. I was assuming those who choose not to vote would not be penalized for turning in a blank ballot.
If it's good enough for one group to vote by mail, it's good enough for everyone. No need to move the final in-person day.
Agree. A lot of people still work on holidays. Too many to exclude.
Tax credit for voting?
Agreed, an incentive might be a better option than a penalty. And it might encourage more poor people to vote.
That's basically paying people to vote. A slippery slope. . . .
Paying people to vote is not the same as paying people to vote the way you want. The ballot is still secret. Corporations donating to politicians with understood but not explicit quid pro quo is another matter. Indeed a steeper and slipperier slope.
What is Citizens United? Corporations donating to Republicans to buy their congressional vote for the corporation over their constituents? Now that is steeper slippery sloope, no?
Definitely another slippery slope. We have accumulated a number of them. . . .
Ok, good point Joan, I uncle. We've grown so much in population, why is it still a one day affair? Make voting Friday to Tuesday. All National Holiday week.
Alternatively, enable plenty of early voting - at least 15 days, including Saturdays and Sundays - and mail-in voting, so that "Election Day" becomes "last day to vote" among many.
I don't understand the hang-up about 15 days of early voting. Seems like that should be the easy part of the bill.
Apparently Republican legislators have decided that early voting helps Democrats more than themselves, especially Sundays when many Black churches organize buses after church, so they want to suppress it.
Yes to Saturday election day, also a federal holiday, and greatly expanded early voting.
Yes to many options to open up and celebrate our right to vote! That will help children understand how important this act is if they see that their parents aren’t just doing it in a way that it’s one more thing they have on their to do list but that it’s an honor and even fun.
Saturday voting s would allow for kids and college students help, observe the process. Learn from it, then teach it.
I vote for voting on a weekday national holiday so that no one will have to skip any of the fun stuff on the weekend. There should be no excuses not to vote, and voter registration should be automatic whenever someone applies for any state-recognized photo ID card. And for a really high turnout, how about a national lottery ticket for each voter, and divide up a few hundred million dollars among the winners? Let's make suffrage universal and FUN!
The more fun the more voters turn out but fun in a serious way. That would be a true democracy that our founding fathers were afraid of— so they felt the need for the electoral college.
The only way this could work would be to outlaw businesses being open on that day - and that will never happen. I remember when all stores and restaurants as well as government offices were closed on July 4th, Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year's Day. The first time I was told I had to work on an Independence Day - because the shopping center in which the shop where I worked was having a big sales event - I insisted that nobody would show up to shop on a national holiday. It turned out to be a very slow sales day but that was the beginning of the new tradition of having big sales on national holidays - as far as retail and food service workers are concerned that was the end of true national holidays. When there's money to be made, businesses will find a way to stay open and require employees to show up. That's why I prefer Washington State's mail-in ballots. I don't even know how to vote in person here anymore, although I did see signs near my county courthouse pointing to an in-person polling place for several weeks this last fall, so it is possible.
I'm soo old I remember when stores were closed on Sunday!
I'm so old I remember when there was no Sunday.
Oh, thanks for making me laugh out loud!!
We have all become too accustomed to businesses calling the shots. A federal law (with teeth) requiring all businesses (should they choose to stay open on federal election days) to pay double-time and limit work shifts to 4 hours per employee, coupled with 6 AM to 10 PM open polls, in addition to mandatory 2-week early ballot drop-off and no-questions-asked mail-in voting options would do the trick.
In fact, what really needs to happen is an amendment to the Constitution that establishes detailed criteria for all voting at every level and effectively outlaws gerrymandering and any harassment of voters, but the DEMs will need to win more elections by larger margins before that can happen. And then there's all that money in politics, all the legalized corruption post-Citizens-United, and the utterly absurd and undemocratic Electoral College, and all the lying on Twitter and Facebook and QAnon zombies. And Trump. We really still are a work in progress.
"We have all become too accustomed to businesses calling the shots."
Truer words were never spoken.
In Nicaragua after they overthrew their dictator, Samosa around 1984, they modeled their constitution after European democracies. They decided that all political advertizing was required to stop 2 weeks before the election subject to high fines. This prevented attacks on the day before the election leaving no time left for defence by the other side.
Somoza was a dictator; samosa is a South Asian pastry.
Somoza was overthrown and exiled in 1979. You probably refer to the first election held by the Sandinistas under Daniel Ortega. It was widely recognized as free and fair, except by the Reagan admin and its allies.
Yes but thereafter he wasn't very keen on allowing anyone to beat him in minor affaires like elections..;and still isn't.....even llowing for US propaganda.
It's always Sundays in France
I understand your meaning, Stuart, but when I read this post, I first mistakenly interpreted it as “It’s always Sunday in France”—and envisioned a stroll down the Champs-Elysees on a weekend, preferably on a spring day, without a care in the world. Pure fantasy, of course. Thanks for the delightful escape, if only for a few moments.
I did that in 1996, in September, for a magical 50th birthday on the first day of fall, it was near the culmination of the best month of my life. I spent a week in Rome, was married in Amalfi, honeymooned in Florence, Venice, Lyon, and Paris.
Dang! I hope my wife dosen't see your post.
You're welcome. Would that it was so easy!
❤️
Typo?
"Eighty-five percent of us want to limit the amount of politics,"
probably should have been,
"Eighty-five percent of us want to limit the amount of money in politics".
One wonders if that same 85% would therefore strongly support public financing of elections.
I certainly would.
Publicly financed elections, an end to partisan gerrymandering, and the elimination of the Electoral College would go a long way toward establishing a democracy in America. It would also likely mean the end of the Republican Party as it is today.
Two very noble endeavors.
California where I live makes voting as easy as possible. Similar to Colorado although I have not gotten text or email updates. As in Colorado, fraud is zilch, zip, zero. Thanks for the stats. Helps in sharing info with others.
Massachusetts also tries hard to make voting fair and easy.
Massachusetts should annex the rest of the country.
U know there’s something to that idea but when it comes right down to it and when we’re off the subject of saving our democracy, I so love the variety of cultures we have in our country and I never want that to change.
Hear-Hear, Liz. (Me thinks TPJ contends a MA annex would save our democracy)
Il est amusant oui?
Oui, Si, Ja, Da...et cetera, et cetera, et cetera!
Bien sur
Youthinks correctly, Lynell. Saving democracy is top priority.
Where's the LOL button?
Everywhere; it's a matter of perspective.
re-annex perhaps but then Virginia might claim the preponderance on much of the south and west of the Appalachians through the Papal doctrine of "Discovery"
Vermont and Oregon too
I would say that we are the state that invented gerrymandering (named after founding father Elbridge Gerry from MA). I live in Ayanna Pressley’s district and it looks pretty gerrymandered to me - shaped like an octopus to include working class neighborhoods of Somerville and Cambridge in addition to certain parts of Boston. It works for me as we have her. But I how MA would look redisticted. We consistently elect Republican governors.
You can't Gerrymander a "state-wide" vote......just suppress votes! Not the case perhaps in MA....but opposition, when it is loyal, is a very important part of democracy. Split tickets are not always bad. They tend to maintain a more "centrist" perspective...a consensus approach that serves well when both sides rely on fact first and opinion afterwards.....and are willing to see the others point of view. Getting pretty rare these days.
Mhead MA home of Eldridge Gerry
Camb MA home of Thomas Wentworth Higginson
Washington State has step by step tracking for mail in ballots.
Michigan too.
Also, in the San Diego area we vote in small places. I’ve voted in someone’s garage, in an apartment complex club house and in a realtors office. There are loads of them for neighborhoods so no long lines. I vote by mail now but my husband worked at the polling location for the primaries. Making thousands of people go to one central location, have to deal with parking and long lines just discourages them. I’ve waited hours in those lines in Kansas City, KS and Manchester, NH.
That is one thing California has done in getting their act together! We have absentee and mail-in voting plus in-house voting. Our ballot boxes are placed everywhere and God forbid somebody tries to hijack them.
Democracy in the US cannot survive without stopping vote suppression by the Republican Party. Unfortunately, HR1/S1 almost certainly cannot pass in the Senate unless the Democrats abolish the filibuster, which they cannot do because Manchin, Sinema, and one or two other Democrats have only slim margins in their overwhelmingly white states and fear losing them if they don't walk the Jim Crow line. Furthermore, even if the Senate did eliminate the filibuster and pass the bill, the Roberts court would probably emasculate it. (Roberts has steadfastly pursued preservation of white political dominance throughout his career.) So, in addition to dropping the filibuster, Democrats would need to expand the Supreme Court. That makes three high barriers protecting the white ruling class, and each of those barriers seems insurmountable. A monumental, nationwide, get-out-the-vote effort in 2022 might give the Democrats the three or four extra Senate seats they need to get rid of the filibuster and at the same time avoid the loss of the House. No prudent person would bet on that outcome, but now is not the time for prudence. Now it the time for monumental effort.
I would like to see Biden increase seats in the Supreme Court, yes. The Dems problem is that we lost seats in the House and came dang near too close in losing it. We cannot fall asleep at the wheel again.
He could just bring the Court back to its original function as designated in the founders thoughts and laid out in the Constitution which should find the support of the "Originalists" in principle (if they still have any!) and thus make it much less dangerous in terms of "progressive" legislation which adapts the Government to the times as the Government would do the referral of cases and their scope would be severely limited.
Yes to monumental effort. If we don’t try to overcome these barriers to HR1/S1, we have zero chance of bending the arc toward justice. Any erosion of these barriers will serve to bend that arc in a progressive direction.
The Democrats do not think in terms of a lifetime of effort. That is the power of the conservative right wing with its roots in William F. Buckley and Berry Goldwater. The Christian religious right has their roots in Carl MacIntire who predates Jerry Falwell.
How many liberals remember Buckminister Fuller or have read the seed work, The Good Society or the science fiction book Ecotopia?? How many liberals opposed Ralph Nader? How many progressives have read Cornel West? White Liberals brag about being educated, but they have no "skin in the game" so they lack curiosity and imagination except dystopia. These are over generalizations but worthy of self reflection.
All white people benefit from systemic racism. Probably that reduces the level of commitment among white liberals but has the opposite effect for liberals who have non-European ancestors. Nevertheless, all committed liberals need to get on board with GOTV efforts now to avoid an autocratic white supremacist government.
Too much scourging of Dems when the GOP deserves it more. Denouncing and thwarting democracy's enemies is good for democracy. Dumping on its friends is not.
"Scourging"? "Dumping on friends"?? When is the time for self reflection? Not when the party is down, it would be disheartening. Criticising the Affordable Health Care during the struggle to get passage would not be helpful, we were fortunate to have something, rather an a nothing sandwich.
Now when we aspire to build back better, now is the time for reassessing what are we doing wrong? Not educating the base and being satisfied with 50% plus one is not inspiring imagination. Black Lives Matter is doing something that sparks the imagination. The threat of "defunding" the police woke up a lot of people to start thinking about solutions. My assessment of weakness of the Democrats is constructive, but not if it creates defensiveness rather than "yeah, we need to work on that."
And time for more contributions to FairFight.
Thank you Heather.
It is high time we get answers to the nefarious workings of some of the Capitol police. As in every Police force, there are dirty police. That is a fact. When I was growing up, my Dad was a Deputy Sheriff and was dismayed by the true interests of some, certainly not all, Police. The Police Chief was a family friend who lived in our neighborhood and worked in tandem with my Mom with her involvement in the School District. I remember him saying at our house over dinner that it's a full time job just keeping the Police on the straight and narrow, let alone the criminals. Perhaps that I why even today I have a cautious opinion of Police.
Regarding voter suppression, I am sickened by the factor of Republicans that are openly willing to vote against the good of the People. These are not grey issues, these are clear and pointed facts they are choosing to drive over people with. This issue alone has dwindled any hope I have for true reform.
I can't praise Liz Cheney enough for her tough stand on Trump. I am waiting for the other shoe to drop with her, but so far she is showing ethics I didn't think she had. CPAC will be every Republicans wet dream. This will be Trump's resurrection. Hold on to your hats, this will be the stomping down of the Democrats in more ways than one.
Be safe, be well.
Prosecute the Seditionist Party.
Extirpate them root and branch. Nonviolently, please.
I do not think every Republican is orgasmic about CPAC's event (circus). I would wager that half would split off to a true conservative party, including/led by Liz Cheney, if there was any way to transfer the power away from the trumpists.
I literally just had this conversation today. I am starting to wonder if Liz Cheney will secure herself a spot on the 2024 ticket as the ethical candidate. This is possible if the Capitol insurrection investigation reveals Hawley, Cruz , Boebert and others caught red handed and brought down.
Oh! Let it be true!
For the People Act could save America Democracy.
👏🏻 YES
They continue to prove that Richard Hofstadter was right 67 years ago. We should start calling them what they are: Pseudo-Conservatives -
From clinical interviews and thematic apperception tests, Adorno and his co-workers found that their pseudo-conservative subjects, although given to a form of political expression that combines a curious mixture of largely conservative with occasional radical notions, succeed in concealing from themselves impulsive tendencies that, if released in action, would be very far from conservative. The pseudo-conservative, Adorno writes, shows “conventionality and authoritarian submissiveness” in his conscious thinking and “violence, anarchic impulses, and chaotic destructiveness in the unconscious sphere. . . . The pseudo conservative is a man who, in the name of upholding traditional American values and institutions and defending them against more or less fictitious dangers, consciously or unconsciously aims at their abolition.”
Thank you, TCinLA. My Republican PA family of lawyers and judges and other professionals who voted for “that other guy” are perfect examples of what you describe. Fully damaged people who orate “American values” but are personally weak and coming from a place of disappointment, intense fear and grievance. ❤️🤍💙
Doesn't matter what name you give it or what colour you paint it. A dictater is as dictator does!
How bout neoconservatives, rhymes with neonazis.
I know this is surprising; it surprised me. Most of the actual neocons are Never-Trumpers, or among the officeholders getting "censured" by the loons in their state parties.
Really? Miller? Bannon? I thought they were the prime examples
They are not "neocons" - they're just out and out fascists. Neocons (the real ones) are guys like Bill Kristol and Charlie Sykes.
I was thinking neonazis
Yeah - that describes them.
👍
HR1/S1, For the People Act is worth going to the mat for. Democrats cannot afford to let these bills not become law. Truth is, Americans cannot afford that; it's just that so many Rs in Congress have forgotten what it means, truly means, to be an American.
So, the filibuster must go, at least for bills that affect voting rights, as it has gone for budget bills. Also, and I've wondered about this for years, whatever happened to actually having to hold the floor, to talk without respite for hours and days. If you insist on filibustering, then do it for goodness sake! don't just threaten and the other side caves in!
I just finished a bit of research on what my own piece of Republicanism accomplished during his six terms in office and I was truly impressed by how little a Congressman can get away with doing, putting cult before country, and still be elected. Really low bar. He initiated 33 bills over six terms, managed to get one (1) passed, to rename a post office after a local hero.
Now, my district is a safe Republican seat --R+14-- and I'm embarrassed to say that it was the Maryland Dems who gerrymandered it so they'd have seven safe Democratic seats. It makes me so 😡 mad.
HR1/S1 could bring us a little closer to a more perfect union, to an honest democracy, just a little, and there are Congress folk who would rather see it not pass? What are you doing in a position of leadership? Get out of the way!
The "dog" probably has to do more than bark. To get things moving on this the "dog" is going to have to bite.
It is amazing to me that HR1 was written and initially submitted by Maryland Congressman John Sarbanes who was elected by the outrageously gerrymandered MD District 3 in which I live. I feel like this was a selfless act by him because properly drawing Maryland districts could affect his electoral possibilities. I have bellowed against the drawing of these districts by a state with a long history of democrat control as being a betrayal of democracy. That democrats deplore gerrymandering by Republicans while doing the same thing is hypocrisy. Gerrymandering is a non-partisan activity used by either party that is in power. It goes deeply against the one-person-one vote promise of a democracy. Pass HR1/S1 without diluting it with reductive amendments.
Richard, I agree that the irony of the gerrymandered seat going Republican is painful. Well, I guess folks can continue to take up space talking only to people who are also just taking up space saying the same things over and over again. It's almost as if Dr Richardson has been talking into the wind for the last year and something, because I am just seeing the same kind of thing only a few frustrated people wrote in the beginning. Then we began to understand what she was trying to teach us and it was like a light showing us the way. We do need to grieve and process all that has happened. But here we are, a month and a week into a Democratic administration, and a foundation is being laid for a better future. It isn't going to happen all at once. I hope you can find a way to initiate some action, however small, that can change that gerrymander in the future. It's all those little things that people like you and me and the many who are not here right now because they are out there working with other people to speak up, speak out, attend a public meeting (here in New England we are getting ready for Town Meeting, which will be held online. Our ballots are mail-in or drop-off and we're good with that. In the meantime, we are wearing masks and being careful. Helping older folks and home-bound folks make appointments for Covid shots. We've all carried a heavy load for a while. I'm looking forward to spending time with my family again. And proud of them that they all are finding small ways to make a difference. Sometimes the people in the way are ourselves, not noticing that we are blocking someone else who is trying to learn how to do.
I have a question. If the only way a political party can win elections is via guile, deception, Big Lies, and loud-mouthed spokespersons, wouldn't you think its members would take a long hard look at themselves to determine why they are not popular? And then course correct from the inside out? Rhetorical.
Nah--self-reflection requires empathy and a soul. Those are in short supply among the Gormless Obstructionists.
They did take a long, hard look after 2012. In March 2013, the RNC released the "Growth and Opportunity Project," a report commonly known as the "autopsy" following Obama's re-election. It was truly a thoughtful self-examination of the GOP's future in a multi-cultural America. But, Trumpism buried it. It is easier to lie and cheat and appeal to the baser instincts of the GOP base than to accept inclusive democracy.
The autopsy was thoughtful and even data-driven. But as you note, it's fatally flawed by the greater commitment to Repug party dominance over actually providing better representation for Americans. It's more vote-searching than soul-searching.
Then to do that they’d have to be humble and reflective—which I wouldn’t say The repugs are famous for oh yeah there was Abraham Lincoln. I think we should all become independent and start over.
Plus Ulysses Grant -- humble, reflective and a vastly underrated president.
He’s actually one of my favorite presidents especially after I read the Chernow bio.
That's a marvelous biography. Chernow covers Grant's drinking more thoroughly than anyone else, conclusively settling any controversy from false or exaggerated stories. Grant was a very high-functioning alcoholic, who after the 1850s never let it affect his military or political career.
Honestly, without Grant I think 5here# a good chance we wouldn’t have stayed 2hole as a nation.
"Starting over" would be like changing planes in mid-trip. History and the rules of the status quo will not allow that to happen
There was irony there Judith.
It appears many are unable/unwilling to "take that long hard look." Wouldn't want to see the shells they have become.
Why bother? They are winning fine without having to course correct. The republican bias in the senate will only get worse. Plus Republicans are committed to minority rule and are taking the necessary steps to keep themselves in power for a very long time. Joe Manchin and Sinema are helping them knowingly or unknowingly. No wonder Mcconnell made a big deal about nailing them down against the filibuster. I have zero doubt that the filibuster will survive next time republicans are in power and it suits their needs. I despise them but they sure know how to win at any cost.
Mostly the Republicans "win" legally because they change the laws ahead of time to their future advantage. Democrats would never do that. Democrat weakness is only looking ahead to the next election cycle, like Wall Street only looks ahead to the next quarterly report.
That's an excellent point. The weakness means Republicans increase their advantage year over year. Once in a while Democrats get power but fail to utilize it. But I can't blame them because it's a stacked deck against them. Even the RINOs fall in line when it matters.
They must lose because of their division, and Republicans despise division.
That’s if they had integrity and understood things better but I’m afraid power has corrupted some of the repugs thoroughly so that they can’t even think straight now. It’s just all about keeping their power. George Washington was dying to get back to Mt. Vernon. So he tried to set a wonderful example of public service and then you go back to private life or farming.