As a British person following this column with huge interest, and worry, I am really grateful for the comment that the 'confederate lobby' stole and distorted the word 'Socialism' in 1871 to mean, apparently, any sort of social intervention which might have a redistributive effect, and above all one which would shift the balance of power against their side within the states. It seems to me that this gives an understanding as to why the USA seems to have a fear of 'socialism' which is to us totally irrational and bigoted, and which extends way beyond any meaning we would accept for the term. It has to be kept as a term of tribal belonging, as opposed to rational discourse, so that the rich can persuade the poor to support them.
Enslaved people created a lot of wealth; their enslavers stole it all. White supremacy was invented to give white workers just enough privilege to get them to support slavery, and later its close cousins. Screaming socialism at the very idea of returning a small fraction of that stolen wealth has been effective for a long time.
Absolutely! Slavery and its current prison-based economic cousin might even be called a form of “socialism”. But keep your government hands off my Medicare.
The conservative pols are very much against spending public money on public programs. They think it is better used to subsidize and underwrite private enterprises. And of course, private enterprise should never be taxed to benefit the public.
I have seen these folks use both 'antifascist' and 'fascist' to identify us. Marxist and Communist, Leninist and Stalinist. It is only for deflection and redirection. When you don't have an argument you have to just throw dust in the air.
Most of my lesser historically informed neighbors here in Georgia equate “socialism” with communist anti-Americanism. Radical, and therefore bad. Their association, not mine. They won’t hold still for long enough to discuss it, or react at some point with real dismissive anger. You just can’t have a productive conversation when one person brings facts and reason, and the other brings emotional reactivity —
Indeed, Gustav. My experience with these types of people/conversations is that I can say something, they come back with a 'whataboutism' and I ask them to stay on the subject, and they reply "I'm done talking." Because they got nothin'
I had a realization yesterday that struck me with some force, even though I already understood it on a subconscious level. It was that those of us who read and comment on this newsletter are the bad guys, and the enemy, to Q-anon, Maga Nation, the conservative/Christian Right. We are the people who do not willingly accept the blatant or subtle lies and falsehoods propounded by political leaders in service of maintaining power hierarchies that are classist, racist, sexist, etc. etc.
I accept this distinction as a point of pride, but it gives me pause. I will forcefully contest any who come to me with explanations or reasoning that defends right wing ideologies, based mostly on my opposition to creeping corporatization and commodification of seemingly every aspect of modern life. But I am willing (very willing!) to engage in those dialogues. The idea of being an enemy hit me so hard because I feel like the people in my life who disagree with me are unwilling or unable to take up these arguments, and I am wondering if it's because of the hardening of political rhetoric that is casting the people of our country into opposing camps, where reasoned discourse is not valued.
I know this has been brewing a long time, but it's very disheartening. If we are truly unable to talk out our differences, the alternatives are truly scary.
I suggest seeking the Independents (40% of voters) for dialogues. That's where we get the most bang for the buck--and retention of sanity. The far right Heritage Foundation types are aggressively and systematically pursuing the Independents.
HCR has suggested treating Q types like victims of DV. They're not ready to listen, so don't waste your breath, but do continue to set the example and keep the line of communication open.
This is nothing new. My family is poor white ... (well I won't continue with the "trash," but some of them actually are). My mom told me that when she dropped out of 8th grade in St. Louis in 1944 and ran off with my dad to Mississippi, she was helping some of my younger uncles with their high school homework. In the late '50s when I visited family in MS, I was derided by cousins for being that book learnin' yankee. (No a horse hair dropped in water won't turn into a snake, No that brightly colored skink lizard it not poisonous, No toad pee will not give you warts) My St. Louis public school education was either far superior to their backwater school system or perhaps we just knew the value of knowledge over folk tales and superstition.
You just encapsulated an entire Paul Krugman column in the New York Times about why Republicans actually love to have leaders who lack any expertise on the matters they are charged with tending in the public interest.
You’re absolute correct Phillip, rational discourse has given way to tribalism. The typical responses I get when talking with these folks are: “it’s my choice; I don’t have to tell anyone why; I’m a free American.” Discussion closed.
1871 was the year that Paris Commune was crushed by the French Army in a brutal and savage response to the "Communards." the revolutionary people of Paris. This event no doubt resonated with the fear that Whites in America and the South of revolution that could in any way challenge their power.
Not trying to put words into the mouth of Ms. Richardson, I think she avoided going into this event and the repercussions in depth to stay on focus, of the current goal of the far right and that is to stay in power through voter suppression. By eliminating African Americans and people of color from voting in close elections and especially in the South, the Fascist Republicans will maintain power.
The "Socialist" label really was revived during the McCarthy era as synonymous with the "Evil Empire" of Communism.
But yes at the heart of this fear among the Whites in power is essentially the same fear they have always had of a revenge seeking black population coming to power.
As a white guy, I've never had such fears. African Americans have somehow endured and bourne decades of prejudice, discrimination and simply being marginalized from a decent life in this nation. I welcome the day when they can not be gerrymandered and voter suppressed from the life all whites enjoy without a thought.
The stain of slavery is the curse that will destroy the nation and end Democracy alright, but by the hands of the whites who live in fearnot the blacks who are oppressed.
I’m not sure they live in fear because white people have never experienced the kind of fear that severely marginalized groups of people have experienced. And I speak of “white people” as being top of the caste ladder with privilege many white people just take for granted because it’s always been there.
I believe that what is happening now is that the caste, the decision to base all on color of skin for convenience, the idea of white privilege moving from “norm” to a racist maneuver is gnawing at folks. There is a history of guilt of many many knowing the wrong and injustice of it but accepting it because it’s easier. And who truly wants to wake up “black”tomorrow morning if given the choice in this country?
It is a greed to keep the status quo. That is the only thing that scares me. Not McCarthy, the former, Boebert, or any of the charlatans. It’s the “toppling of the ladder of caste” argument they use to incite those against equity, equality of opportunity, and freedom for all.
I think every day about how enlightened can somehow win this argument and not the darkness. Darkness. Ironic, isn’t it?
If we can get through this time and still have an intact country I think history will look back and marvel at the contribution of the many African-American thinkers of the past and present who have shared their wisdom. In my lifetime of 70 years they include Martin Luther King Jr; Malcolm X; John Lewis; Bryan Stevenson; Heather McGhee; Michele Alexander; Colson Whitehead; Ibram X. Kendi; Ava DuVernay; Ta-Nehisi Coates; Nikole Hannah-Jones; Isabel Wilkerson; August Wilson...I could go on...these are just the folks I can think of at the moment. If their thinking prevails and we white folks face our history squarely then we really will have a "more perfect union."
At one point in time, the conservatives did this with the word “liberal.” Then some liberals reclaimed the word by having ads that said, I am a proud, card carrying Liberal.” Might have been Dukakis, who didn’t fare well—destroyed possibly by Roger Stone and the whole Willie Horton debacle. But still, maybe we can reclaim the word “socialism.”
“The mere fact that there is some disparity in impact does not necessarily mean that a system is not equally open or that it does not give everyone an equal opportunity to vote.”
Are you freaking kidding me?!?! 😡 That is EXACTLY what it means! If “John” can no longer vote because he doesn’t have a car to get to the poll, and it is no longer legal for someone with a car to deliver his ballot, then he has effectively lost his right to vote.
Neatly explained. Is there a legal remedy? If not, AZ will need many, many volunteers organized ( I don't exactly know how) ready and willing to drive needy voters to the polls.
Justice Alito and his merry band are so entitled that, if their analysis truly reflects their thought process, they have absolutely no concept of the trials many people have to deal with.
Question: How can a "disparity in impact" = "an equal opportunity to vote" for everyone? That's like saying, I'm going to destroy everyone's left shoe, but that doesn't mean that everyone still has a Pair of shoes.
Jeanne, I agree the time has come to add Supreme Court justices, but I'm pretty sure it is the US Congress that has to make it happen, not so much Joe Biden (who would certainly sign the bill, I hope!). Not sure if the end of SCOTUS nominations being subject to the Senate filibuster would apply in this case or not, but I am sure that getting 50 votes (+ the VP) in the Senate will be no piece of cake. Then it is time to add DC and Puerto Rico as states, too, but all this could well run aground on the Manchin/Sinema shoals. Think Cape Fear. The Drake Passage. The Maelstrom!
The larger and more urgent question is how to prevent the GOP from retaking one or both houses of Congress in 2022. And if the answer is "there is no way to prevent the GOP from retaking one or both houses of Congress," then we are screwed. We may have already been screwed when Trump was elected. Someday the historians will sort this out for our great, great grandchildren, assuming our species survives climate change.
But in the short term, I believe the USA risks secessions, widespread and organized violence and a general descent into chaos if the GOP retakes power. Similar things have happened to other countries in living memory and throughout history. Lots of Americans still believe chaos can't happen here: we're Americans, right? Ask the Russians or the Chinese or the Europeans or almost anyone who is not American if chaos can happen. The Trump crazies have already headed down this road and have a head start on the rest of us. So if we want to avoid Armageddon, perhaps it is not too early for massive non-violent protest focused on voting rights, climate change, and economic justice. Massive measured not in tens of thousands, but in millions.
Jeanne & David -- Better than increasing the size of the Supreme Court is a very well thought out proposal to "Fix the Court" with 18-year term limits, with a new judge appointed every 2 years by whoever is President. For details, see https://fixthecourt.com/fix/term-limits/
David, I think violence is likely whether or not the GOP retakes power. In fact, more likely if they don’t. If you think their tantrum after losing this last election was excessive, imagine what it will be in 2022 or 2024. As for secession, perhaps we shouldn’t fear it. Whether or not it succeeds, it will force the seceders (Texas? Other Confederate states? Libertarian states like Idaho and South Dakota?) to debate the meaning of the “united states”. They might argue they would be better off without us. I am certain we would be better off with them gone. If they begin a secession movement, we should let them. Do nothing to stop them, take no military or police action. This would be on them.
I watched a movie last night on Montbatten's role as Vice-Roy in the independence of India in 1948. The big question was indeed the mixed Muslim/Hindu populations in the interior of Punjab and the Bengal....and not the much less mixed other states. They were given to Hindu India and not to Pakistan and the biggest mass emmigration/immigration that the world has ever seen was started amidst constant and overwhelming massacres by both sides of those of 'the other' religion. When it comes to secession, a 50.1% local majority for it is obviously nowhere near enough and we've seen what non-contiguous Countries perform like...the Palestine for example. Secession will be the ruin of both sides and be a disaster for the people and needs to be resisted with all our force..
Which is why I cringe when people believe the notion that moving to another city or state to live a better life is just a matter of deciding to pick up and go. Having that kind of ability is a luxury for a vast number of people. It smacks of the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps", Horatio Alger nonsense that if you work hard and are honest, you will always be rewarded. Life simply doesn't work that way.
You are absolutely right. And no one should have to move because of demented and power hungry politicians plying their manipulative skills to maintain their seats and plunder the wealth of the people. How can we allow so few to manipulate so many while doing so little (nothing in fact) to promote the common good? We are at a critical point and the very idea of abandoning democracy and those who believe in it to "separate states" is unequivocally detestable. We read Heather because we want to defeat these people and these ideas. Maybe a march of 10 million is not a bad idea.
Annette, I too live in FL. My husband and I are retired, we could sell our house and move to another state. However, my daughter is a teacher and my son-in-law is the owner of a successful business, that was started by his father. He has worked 20 years to continue and expand the business. They have three children, all born in FL. Furthermore, I have a 26 year old grandson, he is my late son’s only child. How do I leave? Becky I truly respect what you did, but can you see how difficult it can be for others?
I do wonder though, if the states do leave the union, do they think that their SS and Medicare go with them?
Prices went waaaay up here in VT due to Covid. If blue people wanted to move here, they would really pay a price, that is if there is anything left for sale.
Yes, I have seen real estate prices soar. I am also in Vermont, and I fled Florida 6 years ago to return to a saner place, bringing nothing with me but a little cash. I was a live-in caregiver for a few years in exchange for a place to live. New prospects unfolded in time because I am in a place that values people. I know that not everyone could have done that, but I was pretty desperate.
The problem with secession this round is that we don’t have a clear geographical boundary. Even during our Civil War we ended up with West Virginia splitting off.
Our current situation has a lot of blue cities surrounded by rural red counties, so how does anyone secede. Even if you try to go state by state, I’m sitting in purple, currently leaning blue, New Mexico. We are bounded by Arizona and Texas and as a former NM Territorial Governor commented “Poor New Mexico, so far from Heaven and so close to Texas.”
Annette and Danielle, I’m not necessarily advocating for secession (it is very tempting to imagine not having to deal with belligerent idiots like DeSantis and MTGreene and Ted Cruz and Matt Gaetz - such sweet release!) Secession would be exceedingly difficult - not just drawing borders, but relocating people who didn’t want to stay where they were, allocating resources and revenues, etc. I am advocating for a response of “sure, go ahead” when states like Texas threaten to secede. Texas (and their fellow “you’re not the boss of me” states like Florida, South Carolina, South Dakota et al) are like petulant teenagers railing against restrictive parents, and threatening to run away. Let ‘em try. Don’t try to reason with them. Don’t try to stop them. I doubt they’d get far, but they have to be the ones to decide to stay. It’s on them.
JR, having raised two children who are now very responsible adults and having taught K-8 for 22 years, the petulant teenager “You’re not the boss of me!” gave me a good laugh to start my day on a better note. Spot on!
Sucession is a terrible idea that pulls our heart strings to talk about but it is really really terrible. Imagine having a separate country next door where the crazies can run free and you need a passport just to cross what used to be State lines.
The capitalists. the church, and the GOP had waited for decades for Trump to come along. The triad has been in place a long time, waiting for the trigger man. Now they are determined to everything in an uproar.
The wheels of justice seem to grind so slowly. I want him to pull out all the stops. I’m grateful for him, and I’m sure he knows better than I do about what can backfire, but I also fear what can happen if the voter restriction laws work and we get stuck with the current crop of Republicans. Further devastating climate change, more racial injustice, the erosion of our Democracy are all possible outcomes. I am cheering Biden on! Come on, For the People Act!!
Let’s not forget how many executive orders he signed, Linda, as soon as he sat down in the chair at the Oval Office after the inauguration. Considering there had not been a peaceful transfer of power and little transition accomplished to facilitate the new administration, I believe the speed that Biden has moved is a reflection of his years of experience in Washington DC, including the White House. Time to focus on our strengths right now. Obv, we are aware of the regrets of what the former president has done.
Thanks, Christine. It offends me when people pile on to criticize Biden, after four years of chaos. While not admirable, the Republicans' ability to march in lockstep to accomplish their goals has proved very effective. To get Democrats to agree on anything is like herding cats. No, Biden isn't perfect - nobody is - but we need to stop the infighting.
I agree that Biden moved with tremendous and thoughtful speed. Given the sh** show he was handed, it is even more remarkable. The steadiness of this administration with smart, compassionate, experienced, knowledgeable, and ethical people at the helm is the bright light. As a retiree a decade younger than Biden, I have trouble getting to the gym and one Zoom meeting done in the same day and neither requires much in the way of cognitive prowess on my part, thank goodness! :)
And with a very limited and fraught transition period to boot - where the access to sensitive info was withheld just to make things difficult. That should never be allowed again.
I do agree with you, Christine, about President Biden’s work so far: it has been wonderful to see some of the awful orders from TFG overturned immediately. I am so impressed with how he has met the needs of our country in this terrible turning point. I know there is so much I don’t know about what is going on behind the scenes, what can be done legally, which changes require Congress and a super majority and which changes can be made with executive orders. It seems to me we need to win a few more seats in the Senate and in the House before we can
Christine, I don't disregard what he has done. I just wish this problem was front and center on his desk as well. We are now in a "shutting the door after the cows have left" mode.
Hearing the SCOTUS decision yesterday filled me with dread, much like the day I was diagnosed with cancer. I knew then, what I know now, we are in for a long painful fight with no certainty that it will end well.
Today is a day of reflection and gathering inner strength. Tomorrow the fight begins. We have numbers on our side. Strategy, will and hard work are what’s needed now.
Thank you, Diane for expressing my feeling of dread and anxious thoughts when I heard about the SCOTUS ruling, yesterday. The Robert’s Court with ACB and BK. And all the conservative federal judges appointed during the Trump years spread across the land. The recent rulings feel like just the beginning of the bombardment. I have the will and can work hard. It’s the strategy that I’m looking for - the leadership that has to come from the top. So far, it’s Stacey Abrams sounding the alarm. And, Ron Klein is the station master. That’s reassuring. But. Now or very soon, Joe Biden, it’s time to step out from behind the curtain and lead. This is war. ❤️🤍💙
How do I access the Herd meeting? Is it on Substack, or another another platform?
As a long time reader, and recent subscriber, I still have a lot to learn. If it is not appropriate to discuss it here, I’ll put my email in my profile.
Heather's Herd is an email group dedicated to political action based on what we learn here. Ellie will want your email, but wait to post it until I hear from her on where. Thanks.
Yes, Diane, and we can't lose sight of the fact that we have the numbers. We can overcome this, and other insults, and see to it that we organize to overcome this travesty. Secure the house and Senate, and reclaim a large enough majority in both that we can't be held hostage by the Manchins and Sinemas, and in the meantime, find a way to pass the For the People Act.
The following is from an article by David Badash posted on Alternet:
"Ezra Klein, in his New York Times opinion piece Thursday titled "The Rest of the World Is Worried About America," spoke to scholars of democracy from other countries.
"I'm positive that American democracy is not what Americans think it is," David Altman, a political scientist in Chile, told me. "There is a cognitive dissonance between what American citizens believe their institutions are and what they actually are."
“Today’s decision by the Supreme Court undercuts voting rights in this country ... and makes it all the more crucial to pass the For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to restore and expand voting protections.”
President Joseph Biden
It is imperative to heed President Biden's words, and more, to do all that we can by writing to and placing pressure on our representatives in Congress. The previous president shouldn't be given the last word!
Here’s what I don’t understand. The Supreme Court has already overturned significant portions of the Voting Rights Act. Which was passed by Congress. What is to stop them from overturning the For The People act, if it is passed? Isn’t it likely that this same SCOTUS will overturn the For the People act’s ban on gerrymandering, on excessive campaign donations and on voting restrictions? Given the way the Republican majority on SCOTUS has ruled on these issues, the For The People act seems like a waste of time.
You're wrong. It didn't stop them from interfering with the Voting Rights Act passed in both houses in 1965 and re-endorsed by both houses in 2006. The SCOTUS is no longer a judicial body, but no more than a political extension of the other two branches of our government. I am even beginning to think that our three headed system of government, depending on checks and balances which don't seem to work any longer, isn't as democratic as a one-house parliamentary system, with all of its warts, would be.
To Rowshan, Christine, Jack and Barbara, what this debate about the likelihood of the For The People act being dismantled by the Republican SCOTUS demonstrates is that we need to remake the Supreme Court. It’s not enough to hold a slim majority in Congress and pass laws that strengthen democracy and votings. Not when an anti-democratic Republican majority controls the court. Mitch McConnell and the Federalist Society have played the long game well. We need to undo the damage they’ve done. If we had a fair-minded court of justices dedicated to the Constitution and democracy we wouldn’t need the For The People act. No court dedicated to the rule of law and free and fair elections would have ruled gerrymandering legal, or found for Citizens United, or ruled Arizona’s voter suppression to be legal. McConnell was right, it’s all about the courts.
Ummmmm, I don’t believe McConnell was, is, or will be right. I don’t believe the solution is remaking the Supreme Court right now, I do believe the decision yesterday by SCOTUS Is questionable but not unexpected with Justice Roberts’ known opinion of the VRA. I don’t believe our focus is to be on “undoing the damage the Federalist Society has done”. I do believe that legislation for the benefit of, by, and for the people must be passed. Progressive work on infrastructure both physical and social must move ahead.
And most of all? All people of every color and gender and religion that believe in a democracy must fight NOW to keep it. Including choosing our words well and not bowing to wringing hands and helplessness that the scourge of political leaders are trying to create.
Standing proud, sure, and vocally supporting our current administration in word and deed is what is called for. Not changing the structure of the Supreme Court. Yet.
You make my point about the make-up of the Supreme Court, when you say “with Justice Roberts’ known opinion of the VRA”. Of course we knew how Roberts would rule on voter suppression. Roberts is on the Supreme Court because of his endorsement by the Federalist Society. Why did the Federalist Society select Roberts? Because they knew how he’d rule on voting rights, Citizens United, corporate power, workers’ rights, minority rights, abortion, etc. Which of the current justices were selected by the Federalist Society? These six - Alito, Thomas, Roberts, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Bryant. Which six justices ruled in favor of voter suppression in Arizona? The same six. Coincidence? No. Mitch McConnell and the Federalist Society have built a repressive, white supremacist, corporatist, fundamentalist Christian Supreme Court majority. While we weren’t paying close attention. We can pass For The People (maybe, there are other hurdles there). It won’t matter if these six reactionary justices throw it out. We need to change the make-up of the Supreme Court if we’re going to have any chance of defending democracy. Because we’re twenty years behind McConnell and the Federalist Society, who are bound and determined to destroy democracy and install a plutocracy.
Really, why wouldn’t they? The Voting Rights Act was passed by Congress. SCOTUS dismantled it, case by case (culminating in yesterday’s decision). Why wouldn’t they do the same to For The People, if it is passed by Congress (doubtful, I know)? SCOTUS has demonstrated in recent cases that they support gerrymandering, support unlimited campaign donations, support voting rights restrictions, support racial discrimination and support dark money. All things covered in For The People. SCOTUS has established precedents demonstrating that, when cases are filed challenging For The People, they will find against it. We should not put our faith in For The People.
Thanks for posting this link. I found it more optimistic than your earlier comment suggesting that SCOTUS would dismantle FTP. As cited in the NY TImes article, Harvard Professor Nicholas Stephanopoulos asserts not only (to your point) that “I have no doubt that if H.R. 1 passes, we’re going to have a dozen major Supreme Court cases on different pieces of it,” but also (to the contrary) that “Part of why the attack on H.R. 1 is unlikely to be successful in the end is that the law is not a single coherent structure the way Obamacare was. It’s a hundred different proposals, all packaged together...The Roberts court would dislike on policy grounds almost the entire law, but I think even this court would end up upholding most — big, big swaths — of the law. It would still leave the most important election bill in American history intact even after the court took its pound of flesh.”
Rowshan, the Movement Conservatives will immediately challenge bits and pieces in court, which will work their way up to SCOTUS. That's how women's reproductive/health rights are being chipped away now too.
You bet, Christine. This is such an important act! If only the white-hearted Qlarence would see the light from within the skewed tunnel in which he has positioned himself since time immemorial!
Biden needs to do a national tour, addressing voter suppression and related issues. Now. With passion. With urgency. It should be part of a comprehensive campaign, not just involving politicians but well-known, admired people.
Morning, all!! Morning, Dr. R!! As Gayle King (CBS) would say, "There's a whole lot of ugly on our plate." That said, I'll get right to it.
As a lead-in to this article, the Washington Post commentator (I forgot her name!) acknowledged the media's penchant for delivering only bad news. So with that in mind, she sent us subscribers this column that describes the many legislators who have put laws in place expanding voting rights for their states. It's a lot!
I can't help but be proud of Virginia leading the way on voting rights. But this is not a heaven I wish to be in when my fellow country-people are being suppressed.
Thanks for lifting spirits with good news. Listening to a SCOTUS justice spin GOP lies about voter fraud cratered my spirits. I need some hopeful news today. 🙏
I’ve tried to stay away from commenting because so many people find my comments to be cynical or overly pessimistic, but it’s incredibly hard to not feel that way after yesterday’s Supreme Court decision. We are heading back to the era of Jim Crow legislation, and with the high court now having green-lighted openly prejudiced legislation, other red states will now follow suit with laws which are likely to be even worse. We all know how horrifyingly close the last election was. Just imagine if similar (or worse) bills are now passed in Pennsylvania, or Michigan or Wisconsin. The goal all along has been to legislate the Democrats right out of existence and establish permanent Republican control of the country. Thanks to yesterday’s despicable decision by the Supreme Court, that goal is now within reach for the Republicans (and cue my ever- growing anger at Senators Manchin and Sinema for their role in all of this).
I don’t believe “that” goal is anywhere within reach for those Republicans.
My only correction that I implore is that the media now ramp up reporting the successful efforts at preserving democracy and emphatically reduce the reporting of the doings of the former president’s sycophants. I depend on HCR and the likes of her to briefly keep me up on what we need to know that is relevant and timely. My expectation is that the mecía that is aligned with democratic principles will realize sensationalizing sedition and reason is not the answer. Report on it and then move on to the myriad of right action being taken as we speak today in this forum.
Not enough of the media will do this---thanks in part due to their ownership.
The media continues to focus on sensationalizing it because it hits people at an emotional level-----and brings ratings, outrage, and "what's going to happen next!?!" hysteria. I want the same as you, but fear that the media's actions will continue to outweigh our expectations.
Thank you, again, HCR, for the history lesson illuminating current events.
There is a screaming irony in the party of Lincoln, openly, energetically, seeking to undo what was achieved at enormous cost of blood and fortune in 1865.
Pride goeth before a fall, with shame following close behind.
Sadly, the irony is only on the surface. The truth of the matter is that greedy men, hungry for ever greater power, had no compunction about transforming the “Party of Lincoln” into the party of repression and tyranny. This was not done ironically, it was done shamelessly.
But perhaps there is this bit of ironic potential: If only some genuine statesmen would begin to mine Lincoln’s words, they would discover a rhetoric and a clarity of thought which might well push back this darkness that appears to be descending over our country. But where is this statesman!!!???
I’m amazed that Alito could write this with a straight face, “The mere fact that there is some disparity in impact does not necessarily mean that a system is not equally open or that it does not give everyone an equal opportunity to vote.” That there is disparity in impact (by design) means the system is NOT open and equal. The impact of a law on different groups is how you measure its equality.
What Alito meant (but didn’t exactly say) is that “the suppression of minority (Democratic) voters is camouflaged in this law so that we Republicans on the Supreme Court can pretend that it doesn’t exist. Go GOP!”
What he means is that in his opinion some people are too lazy or stupid to fulfill the simple requirements of the law, that they want to be able to vote while lying on the couch watching an episode of real housewives of Atlanta. What he doesn’t understand is that every requirement gives the state an opportunity to frustrate or turn down selected applicants based on technicalities. This is the Jim Crow aspect of the whole business.
Alito doesn't have a clue what a challenge it is for some people to vote, given the economic reality to work so much just to stay barely afloat. Making Election Day a national holiday is imperative.
I think an even better idea is universal vote by mail. We have that in Washington state for all elections, it works very well, and voter fraud is infinitesimal (if it exists at all).
In Oregon, we have no costly voting machines. It's all on paper, which most people mail and others put in drop boxes or deliver to the elections office.
I’m not at all certain that digging into a thriller before bed is a good idea, but, thanks to your Letters from an American, it’s what I do. Today’s chapter was yet another doozy.
What filled me with a measure of pride today, was listening to President Biden’s press conference following his and Jill’s meeting with anxious and grieving families in Surfside, Fl. Such a terrible circumstance requires a kind, empathetic and helpful response. Thank you Mr. President and First Lady.
Perhaps the way around these more restrictive laws is for Dems to focus on getting younger people to vote. That means getting them interested in signing up. We have a "democracy" in the US, yet compared to other countries our participation in the voting process tends to attract about 48% of the eligible population. This past election, 2/3s voted or 63%... because of the Trump turmoil, still What happened to the 1/3 that didn't bother to vote despite being registered?
Even if we registered and turned out every possible vote and the votes were counted and the Dems won, in the states that have or are working to pass the law that the Republican Legislature has the right to overturn that election, all of these efforts won’t matter. Unless the legislatures can be flipped to Democrats.
Exactly why every election is important, including primaries. 10 or 20% turnouts is disgraceful. That’s how ex president/mass murderer won in the first place. The media never bothers to report turnout % just headlines the “victories.”
Don't know what media you follow, but the ones I follow always have turnout percentages. I do read a number of different sources, so I imagine that makes some difference. But in my experience, most media posts the turnout.
Semantics, Dems need to turn out, line up, bring ID (and evidently food and water) and vote, en masse. Younger voters are worried about the mess of a planet they are inheriting, maybe they will pay attention.
Actually, Lynn, the distinction is important, because lots of eligible voters - for an infinity of reasons - do not take the trouble to register to vote. How much trouble this is varies from state to state, and what is trouble for one person may not be trouble for another, but this inconvenience - unnecessary in countries where declaration of place of residence and possession of a picture ID card are required of all adults by law - must be overcome by all American voters.
Some states make it relatively easy to register, others less so. There are certain groups of people for whom having to register acts as a deterrent to voting, and this shows up in statistics. Of course, some people - apparently - just don't want to vote, weird as that may seem. Many easily rationalize not voting (it's a waste of time, it won't change anything, they're a bunch of crooks, I don't follow politics, I'm too busy, I forgot to register, it's raining today, etc.) and many live in situations that make both registering and voting difficult. I suspect that the 1/3 of "eligible" voters are mainly these, and many of them are unregistered and cannot be usefully convinced to vote on voting day.
In Italy, where I live, if people fail to vote it is a conscious choice, but all Italian citizens of voting age who are residents in Italy are automatically issued a voting card, which is renewed automatically and free of charge every ten years. If an Italian moves from one town to another, he declares residence, receives a new ID card and new voting card. The town where he formerly resided is immediately notified and he is struck from the voting rolls. Italians are always registered to vote, whether they like it or not. No doubt there are some Italians who are homeless and living on the street without any form of ID, but I think there are relatively few compared with the USA.
But the fact that many US citizens who are eligible to vote fail to register is a significant part of our low-turnout problem.
I said semantics because making it hard to register to vote, as well as making it hard to vote, as well as gerrymandering the districts all achieve the same thing, Republicans winning. Dems need to pay attention, register and vote, like their lives depend on it.
I agree totally Lynn. Obv it’s time to turn our focus from everything being done to make it difficult. Especially after SCOTUS decision yesterday. Let’s move ahead. Figure out what to do in every state to get every eligible voter registered. That alone will increase their desire to vote even though it might be raining….whatever.
Let’s focus on what we can do. I am over talking about McCarthy and the rest of the seditionists as if they have defeated us already.
Far from it. And my flag will be flying this July 4th. I hope there is a rainbow in the sky that day after the daily rain in Florida. Which I’ll repeat, is not my country. My country is the United States of America and President Biden is the Commander in Chief.
I would imagine most people who habitually don't vote also don't necessarily think of themselves as Dems or as part of any party at all. We Dems do need to get over our divisions at election time, that's for sure. And any self-described Dem who isn't paying attention by now must either be dead or not yet born.
But you're right, there is no good excuse for Dems not registering and voting, though there may be soon if the GOP gets its way. It's easy to imagine the reinstatement poll taxes and literacy tests if things keep going the way they are.
And further, Italians living abroad automatically receive ballots and have parliamentary representation. My husband and kids always vote in Italian elections. It’s great for the kids - they have to research issues and figure out how to vote.
That's great, Kathy. And Boulder County CO automatically emails me a ballot for US citizens residing outside the USA. I copy it, fill it out, scan it and then send it back via secure email, and they email me when the ballot has arrived and when it's been counted. I'm not sure all the states do this well, but they should.
This is great and rather surprising, David. I mean no offense here at all when I say that in 2009 my son lived in northern Italy for a semester on exchange. He loved his experience but found much frustration. Buses that didn't run as consistently as one would expect in a US city, a poor postal service, etc. So it's interesting to hear that voting in Italy is so well coordinated and it makes so much sense that we should be ashamed our systems here are so convoluted. I live in a small rural NH town. My son has not lived or voted here in at least 8 years. Yet he has remained on the rolls all this time (I see his name on the spreadsheet when I check in to vote) . THIS week he received a letter from the town saying since he hadn't voted here in the last 4 years, per NH law, he would need to re-register. Mind you, in those 8+ years he has voted in NY and CT so clearly there is a lack of communication between states. It seems voter fraud could be possible as a result of being registered in more than one place, but still it doesn't happen. As someone on IG recently memed, millions of people daily can securely transfer money by the press of a button on their phone but we can't make it easier to vote and avoid fraud???
Hi Beth! I think most big Italian cities are pretty easy to move around in on public transport, and the small cities and larger towns often offer surprisingly good bus service, but things screw up occasionally, even the Italian postal service. Takes time to really learn the ropes. Anyway, no offense taken.
Voting in Italy is regulated by the central government and the Constitution, and there is no one here suggesting that voting should be limited or restricted in any unreasonable way. Sometimes the date of the vote can lead to squabbling among political parties, but that's pretty normal for a parliamentary system. More importantly, the principle that each person's vote should carry the same weight is unquestioned.
Of course, there are often problems forming a majority able to govern, and there are confusing party lists and a million other complications I am not able to describe here, due in part to space and time but mostly to my totally inadequate grasp of how it all works. Voting is a snap, however, and happens (usually) all day Sunday plus Monday morning before votes are counted.
And of course, Italy only has 60 million people, and roughly the same land area as the state of Oregon. The USA -- being much bigger -- is also messier in quite a few ways. And yes, you would think that in our high-tech America voter registration systems would all be tied into a single data bank, but the GOP would clearly prefer to self-destruct before letting this happen.
In Denmark, citizens and residents are registered where they live. At election time a poll card is sent out to each registered person. They get cards for their local and regional elections, everyone gets cards for national elections. As you move you must re-register with the govt. This is done by contacting the equivalent of the social security dept in the US. It reissues your health/ID card which has your personal ID number, (sort of like a social security number). These id numbers are used to get bank cards, do financial activities, etc. The cards and numbers are used as ID, no photo on them. To reduce fraud, you are asked to sign up with NETS, which issues you single use log-in numbers for each transaction. The idea is that you keep these in safe places so that even if someone gets hold of your id number, that alone is not enough to do transactions. It works pretty well. The state issued "health card" (again no photo is on it) is used to id people at Polling stations, which are quite numerous and supervised by volunteers from several different parties at the same time. Thanks for sharing
Correct, there are "eligible" people who are not "registered", and registered folks who don't vote. A pew trust 2017 survey found the following: "Official statistics vary, but a conservative estimate, calculated using data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s most recent Voting and Registration Supplement, indicates that 21.4 percent (of eligible people) were not registered to vote in 2014." https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2017/06/why-are-millions-of-citizens-not-registered-to-vote
How do you factor in currently applied voter restrictions to these stats? I’m pretty sure we’re already seeing the effects of voter suppression. What do you think?
And wouldn't it be cool to send "democratic national guards" to places where black people and others have a hard time getting to the polls? Create an "army" of enablers! Show the disablers that we have the strength of purpose and believe in democracy to work around whatever they want to throw our way. In the spirit of Stacey Abrams.
Can't you just see a parade/cavalcade of Priuses flying U.S. and Biden flags on the highways of Texas? Go ahead, tough boys in your pickup trucks. Shove us off the road. That won't stop us. "Those Priuses just kept coming." (except for the bad news about Toyota :()
Please do not comment on or engage with trolls here (Sandy Lewis is but one). It only serves their purpose of posting here and elevates their comments in the conversation thread. Best to ignore them as background noise.
Agreed. Sandy flouts here in an attempt to prove his intelligence and relevance - in doing so he unveils his idiocy and inconsequentiality—unless we blow in his sails, if we don’t he won’t get anywhere.
The Court also issued a decision in Americans for Prosperity v Bonta that decreases transparency into dark money in politics. The decision, in a case brought by one of the Koch brothers ‘charitable’ entities, concludes that a California law requiring these charities to disclose the identities of donors, violates the First Amendment. Answering who is buying a politician or an election is becoming perhaps even more difficult than casting a vote.
So riddle me that one, how can one’s right to freedom of speech be impeded if WE DON’T KNOW WHO IS SPEAKING!? Not yelling at you fellow commenters, at the zealots who maintain such spurious reasoning!
Thank you for highlighting the historical parallels to SCOTUS' devastating today. Racism is alive and well in the pro-right wing SCOTUS that the previous administration bequeathed to us. Maybe this is the time for President Biden to increase the number of judges on that hallowed bench. Nothing can be accomplished without a more balanced judicial membership. Not. One. Single. Solitary. Thing! Nothing!
As a British person following this column with huge interest, and worry, I am really grateful for the comment that the 'confederate lobby' stole and distorted the word 'Socialism' in 1871 to mean, apparently, any sort of social intervention which might have a redistributive effect, and above all one which would shift the balance of power against their side within the states. It seems to me that this gives an understanding as to why the USA seems to have a fear of 'socialism' which is to us totally irrational and bigoted, and which extends way beyond any meaning we would accept for the term. It has to be kept as a term of tribal belonging, as opposed to rational discourse, so that the rich can persuade the poor to support them.
"Socialism" is used as a pejorative, shorthand for anyone who espouses ideas that are not lock-step conservative.
Enslaved people created a lot of wealth; their enslavers stole it all. White supremacy was invented to give white workers just enough privilege to get them to support slavery, and later its close cousins. Screaming socialism at the very idea of returning a small fraction of that stolen wealth has been effective for a long time.
Absolutely! Slavery and its current prison-based economic cousin might even be called a form of “socialism”. But keep your government hands off my Medicare.
I hit the "heart" button before reading your entire post, Joan, because I knew it would be to the point, along with being all-inclusive, and it was!
Shorthand for any government program that benefits anyone but whites.
Make that "Shorthand for any government program that benefits anyone but WEALTHY whites", and I'll agree wholeheartedly.
The conservative pols are very much against spending public money on public programs. They think it is better used to subsidize and underwrite private enterprises. And of course, private enterprise should never be taxed to benefit the public.
I have seen these folks use both 'antifascist' and 'fascist' to identify us. Marxist and Communist, Leninist and Stalinist. It is only for deflection and redirection. When you don't have an argument you have to just throw dust in the air.
Most of my lesser historically informed neighbors here in Georgia equate “socialism” with communist anti-Americanism. Radical, and therefore bad. Their association, not mine. They won’t hold still for long enough to discuss it, or react at some point with real dismissive anger. You just can’t have a productive conversation when one person brings facts and reason, and the other brings emotional reactivity —
Indeed, Gustav. My experience with these types of people/conversations is that I can say something, they come back with a 'whataboutism' and I ask them to stay on the subject, and they reply "I'm done talking." Because they got nothin'
I had a realization yesterday that struck me with some force, even though I already understood it on a subconscious level. It was that those of us who read and comment on this newsletter are the bad guys, and the enemy, to Q-anon, Maga Nation, the conservative/Christian Right. We are the people who do not willingly accept the blatant or subtle lies and falsehoods propounded by political leaders in service of maintaining power hierarchies that are classist, racist, sexist, etc. etc.
I accept this distinction as a point of pride, but it gives me pause. I will forcefully contest any who come to me with explanations or reasoning that defends right wing ideologies, based mostly on my opposition to creeping corporatization and commodification of seemingly every aspect of modern life. But I am willing (very willing!) to engage in those dialogues. The idea of being an enemy hit me so hard because I feel like the people in my life who disagree with me are unwilling or unable to take up these arguments, and I am wondering if it's because of the hardening of political rhetoric that is casting the people of our country into opposing camps, where reasoned discourse is not valued.
I know this has been brewing a long time, but it's very disheartening. If we are truly unable to talk out our differences, the alternatives are truly scary.
I suggest seeking the Independents (40% of voters) for dialogues. That's where we get the most bang for the buck--and retention of sanity. The far right Heritage Foundation types are aggressively and systematically pursuing the Independents.
HCR has suggested treating Q types like victims of DV. They're not ready to listen, so don't waste your breath, but do continue to set the example and keep the line of communication open.
It's yet another example of GOP voters not liking to read, and GOP leaders taking advantage of that.
Not only that they despise and hiss at people who do read simply because they read!
This is nothing new. My family is poor white ... (well I won't continue with the "trash," but some of them actually are). My mom told me that when she dropped out of 8th grade in St. Louis in 1944 and ran off with my dad to Mississippi, she was helping some of my younger uncles with their high school homework. In the late '50s when I visited family in MS, I was derided by cousins for being that book learnin' yankee. (No a horse hair dropped in water won't turn into a snake, No that brightly colored skink lizard it not poisonous, No toad pee will not give you warts) My St. Louis public school education was either far superior to their backwater school system or perhaps we just knew the value of knowledge over folk tales and superstition.
You just encapsulated an entire Paul Krugman column in the New York Times about why Republicans actually love to have leaders who lack any expertise on the matters they are charged with tending in the public interest.
True! There's something wrong with you if you read or educate yourself anywhere but Fox.
You’re absolute correct Phillip, rational discourse has given way to tribalism. The typical responses I get when talking with these folks are: “it’s my choice; I don’t have to tell anyone why; I’m a free American.” Discussion closed.
Its a waste of time to try to discuss facts and reason with them
1871 was the year that Paris Commune was crushed by the French Army in a brutal and savage response to the "Communards." the revolutionary people of Paris. This event no doubt resonated with the fear that Whites in America and the South of revolution that could in any way challenge their power.
Not trying to put words into the mouth of Ms. Richardson, I think she avoided going into this event and the repercussions in depth to stay on focus, of the current goal of the far right and that is to stay in power through voter suppression. By eliminating African Americans and people of color from voting in close elections and especially in the South, the Fascist Republicans will maintain power.
The "Socialist" label really was revived during the McCarthy era as synonymous with the "Evil Empire" of Communism.
But yes at the heart of this fear among the Whites in power is essentially the same fear they have always had of a revenge seeking black population coming to power.
As a white guy, I've never had such fears. African Americans have somehow endured and bourne decades of prejudice, discrimination and simply being marginalized from a decent life in this nation. I welcome the day when they can not be gerrymandered and voter suppressed from the life all whites enjoy without a thought.
The stain of slavery is the curse that will destroy the nation and end Democracy alright, but by the hands of the whites who live in fearnot the blacks who are oppressed.
I’m not sure they live in fear because white people have never experienced the kind of fear that severely marginalized groups of people have experienced. And I speak of “white people” as being top of the caste ladder with privilege many white people just take for granted because it’s always been there.
I believe that what is happening now is that the caste, the decision to base all on color of skin for convenience, the idea of white privilege moving from “norm” to a racist maneuver is gnawing at folks. There is a history of guilt of many many knowing the wrong and injustice of it but accepting it because it’s easier. And who truly wants to wake up “black”tomorrow morning if given the choice in this country?
It is a greed to keep the status quo. That is the only thing that scares me. Not McCarthy, the former, Boebert, or any of the charlatans. It’s the “toppling of the ladder of caste” argument they use to incite those against equity, equality of opportunity, and freedom for all.
I think every day about how enlightened can somehow win this argument and not the darkness. Darkness. Ironic, isn’t it?
If we can get through this time and still have an intact country I think history will look back and marvel at the contribution of the many African-American thinkers of the past and present who have shared their wisdom. In my lifetime of 70 years they include Martin Luther King Jr; Malcolm X; John Lewis; Bryan Stevenson; Heather McGhee; Michele Alexander; Colson Whitehead; Ibram X. Kendi; Ava DuVernay; Ta-Nehisi Coates; Nikole Hannah-Jones; Isabel Wilkerson; August Wilson...I could go on...these are just the folks I can think of at the moment. If their thinking prevails and we white folks face our history squarely then we really will have a "more perfect union."
Well said.
Here's a possible response when being accused of being a socialist: "I am...
Sensible
Observant
Caring
Intelligent
Aware
Learned
Inspiring (or more modestly, "Inspired"
Solid and
Thoughtful
At one point in time, the conservatives did this with the word “liberal.” Then some liberals reclaimed the word by having ads that said, I am a proud, card carrying Liberal.” Might have been Dukakis, who didn’t fare well—destroyed possibly by Roger Stone and the whole Willie Horton debacle. But still, maybe we can reclaim the word “socialism.”
I've been known to say, "I'm not a socialist as you mean the word, but I am a Bernie Buddy."
Wow! Nicely done
Amen to the tribal belonging.
“The mere fact that there is some disparity in impact does not necessarily mean that a system is not equally open or that it does not give everyone an equal opportunity to vote.”
Are you freaking kidding me?!?! 😡 That is EXACTLY what it means! If “John” can no longer vote because he doesn’t have a car to get to the poll, and it is no longer legal for someone with a car to deliver his ballot, then he has effectively lost his right to vote.
This is a disgraceful decision.
I agree, these 6 justices are worse than incompetent. They're hacks.
Hacks with an agenda...
Yup, Gustav, goes back at least 40 years, if not 150 or more....
For anyone who still does not understand the difference between equality and equity, this decision epitomizes it
Neatly explained. Is there a legal remedy? If not, AZ will need many, many volunteers organized ( I don't exactly know how) ready and willing to drive needy voters to the polls.
Justice Alito and his merry band are so entitled that, if their analysis truly reflects their thought process, they have absolutely no concept of the trials many people have to deal with.
I was getting ready to post the same except with the same reaction. Un effing real.
Excerpt!
Thank you! I had the exact same thought. In fact, I had to read that quote about 7 times to make sure I wasn't misinterpreting it. Sheesh.
Question: How can a "disparity in impact" = "an equal opportunity to vote" for everyone? That's like saying, I'm going to destroy everyone's left shoe, but that doesn't mean that everyone still has a Pair of shoes.
Yes, and the consequences are dire.
I think it’s also time for Biden to seriously consider adding 4 more justices to the Supreme Court.
Jeanne, I agree the time has come to add Supreme Court justices, but I'm pretty sure it is the US Congress that has to make it happen, not so much Joe Biden (who would certainly sign the bill, I hope!). Not sure if the end of SCOTUS nominations being subject to the Senate filibuster would apply in this case or not, but I am sure that getting 50 votes (+ the VP) in the Senate will be no piece of cake. Then it is time to add DC and Puerto Rico as states, too, but all this could well run aground on the Manchin/Sinema shoals. Think Cape Fear. The Drake Passage. The Maelstrom!
The larger and more urgent question is how to prevent the GOP from retaking one or both houses of Congress in 2022. And if the answer is "there is no way to prevent the GOP from retaking one or both houses of Congress," then we are screwed. We may have already been screwed when Trump was elected. Someday the historians will sort this out for our great, great grandchildren, assuming our species survives climate change.
But in the short term, I believe the USA risks secessions, widespread and organized violence and a general descent into chaos if the GOP retakes power. Similar things have happened to other countries in living memory and throughout history. Lots of Americans still believe chaos can't happen here: we're Americans, right? Ask the Russians or the Chinese or the Europeans or almost anyone who is not American if chaos can happen. The Trump crazies have already headed down this road and have a head start on the rest of us. So if we want to avoid Armageddon, perhaps it is not too early for massive non-violent protest focused on voting rights, climate change, and economic justice. Massive measured not in tens of thousands, but in millions.
Jeanne & David -- Better than increasing the size of the Supreme Court is a very well thought out proposal to "Fix the Court" with 18-year term limits, with a new judge appointed every 2 years by whoever is President. For details, see https://fixthecourt.com/fix/term-limits/
Thank you for this excellent SCOTUS term limit article, Steve. I fear, though, it may be too late to be the only solution.
And putting the SCOTUS back to the more limited role that the Constitution intended.
Absolutely love this idea. So much more sensible.
This needs to be better known. Another compelling effort that should be better known and promoted is the National Popular Vote (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact) -- This already has traction.
Yes, this!
This would be great.
Just trying to spread the word. ;-)
David, I think violence is likely whether or not the GOP retakes power. In fact, more likely if they don’t. If you think their tantrum after losing this last election was excessive, imagine what it will be in 2022 or 2024. As for secession, perhaps we shouldn’t fear it. Whether or not it succeeds, it will force the seceders (Texas? Other Confederate states? Libertarian states like Idaho and South Dakota?) to debate the meaning of the “united states”. They might argue they would be better off without us. I am certain we would be better off with them gone. If they begin a secession movement, we should let them. Do nothing to stop them, take no military or police action. This would be on them.
Please don't forget about us "blue" folks in the middle of red states. We can't really move, even if we would like to.
I watched a movie last night on Montbatten's role as Vice-Roy in the independence of India in 1948. The big question was indeed the mixed Muslim/Hindu populations in the interior of Punjab and the Bengal....and not the much less mixed other states. They were given to Hindu India and not to Pakistan and the biggest mass emmigration/immigration that the world has ever seen was started amidst constant and overwhelming massacres by both sides of those of 'the other' religion. When it comes to secession, a 50.1% local majority for it is obviously nowhere near enough and we've seen what non-contiguous Countries perform like...the Palestine for example. Secession will be the ruin of both sides and be a disaster for the people and needs to be resisted with all our force..
So true.
Yep! It's not a simple, or inexpensive, thing to do and for some folks, it's virtually impossible to relocate to a different state.
Which is why I cringe when people believe the notion that moving to another city or state to live a better life is just a matter of deciding to pick up and go. Having that kind of ability is a luxury for a vast number of people. It smacks of the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps", Horatio Alger nonsense that if you work hard and are honest, you will always be rewarded. Life simply doesn't work that way.
You are absolutely right. And no one should have to move because of demented and power hungry politicians plying their manipulative skills to maintain their seats and plunder the wealth of the people. How can we allow so few to manipulate so many while doing so little (nothing in fact) to promote the common good? We are at a critical point and the very idea of abandoning democracy and those who believe in it to "separate states" is unequivocally detestable. We read Heather because we want to defeat these people and these ideas. Maybe a march of 10 million is not a bad idea.
It truly doesn't, Daria, and I cringe & curl my lip when I hear that, too.
Not to say that the property you own will be pretty worthless in a secession attempt.
Excellent points all the way around Daria.
But could you if you really needed to?
Nope
Annette, I too live in FL. My husband and I are retired, we could sell our house and move to another state. However, my daughter is a teacher and my son-in-law is the owner of a successful business, that was started by his father. He has worked 20 years to continue and expand the business. They have three children, all born in FL. Furthermore, I have a 26 year old grandson, he is my late son’s only child. How do I leave? Becky I truly respect what you did, but can you see how difficult it can be for others?
I do wonder though, if the states do leave the union, do they think that their SS and Medicare go with them?
Prices went waaaay up here in VT due to Covid. If blue people wanted to move here, they would really pay a price, that is if there is anything left for sale.
Yes, I have seen real estate prices soar. I am also in Vermont, and I fled Florida 6 years ago to return to a saner place, bringing nothing with me but a little cash. I was a live-in caregiver for a few years in exchange for a place to live. New prospects unfolded in time because I am in a place that values people. I know that not everyone could have done that, but I was pretty desperate.
It's not as easy a thing as you may think, Becky.
I do not think it would be easy. And I hope we never have to find out.
The problem with secession this round is that we don’t have a clear geographical boundary. Even during our Civil War we ended up with West Virginia splitting off.
Our current situation has a lot of blue cities surrounded by rural red counties, so how does anyone secede. Even if you try to go state by state, I’m sitting in purple, currently leaning blue, New Mexico. We are bounded by Arizona and Texas and as a former NM Territorial Governor commented “Poor New Mexico, so far from Heaven and so close to Texas.”
Annette and Danielle, I’m not necessarily advocating for secession (it is very tempting to imagine not having to deal with belligerent idiots like DeSantis and MTGreene and Ted Cruz and Matt Gaetz - such sweet release!) Secession would be exceedingly difficult - not just drawing borders, but relocating people who didn’t want to stay where they were, allocating resources and revenues, etc. I am advocating for a response of “sure, go ahead” when states like Texas threaten to secede. Texas (and their fellow “you’re not the boss of me” states like Florida, South Carolina, South Dakota et al) are like petulant teenagers railing against restrictive parents, and threatening to run away. Let ‘em try. Don’t try to reason with them. Don’t try to stop them. I doubt they’d get far, but they have to be the ones to decide to stay. It’s on them.
JR, having raised two children who are now very responsible adults and having taught K-8 for 22 years, the petulant teenager “You’re not the boss of me!” gave me a good laugh to start my day on a better note. Spot on!
Well, JR, you may be right. There's no denying it. But I don't fear secession as much as I fear what might happen between now and then.
Few of those states are on the donor end of federal monies. I’d love to see how they plan to manage. Maybe reinstating slavery?
You are the only one today that had actually stated this. I think it will be in their fake “constitution”.
Sucession is a terrible idea that pulls our heart strings to talk about but it is really really terrible. Imagine having a separate country next door where the crazies can run free and you need a passport just to cross what used to be State lines.
Imagine that the crazies aren’t in a separate country, and they’re running free in our country.
Or running it.
The capitalists. the church, and the GOP had waited for decades for Trump to come along. The triad has been in place a long time, waiting for the trigger man. Now they are determined to everything in an uproar.
Crisis is the rallying cry of the tyrant.
James Madison
Well said, Mr. Goss.
You’re right, that the midterm elections are more important, and that getting a firmer foothold in congress has to be the focus.
The wheels of justice seem to grind so slowly. I want him to pull out all the stops. I’m grateful for him, and I’m sure he knows better than I do about what can backfire, but I also fear what can happen if the voter restriction laws work and we get stuck with the current crop of Republicans. Further devastating climate change, more racial injustice, the erosion of our Democracy are all possible outcomes. I am cheering Biden on! Come on, For the People Act!!
A good idea, just as soon as there is 60% national approval for the idea and it isn't done in an election year.
Jeanne, that time should have been his first day in Office.
Let’s not forget how many executive orders he signed, Linda, as soon as he sat down in the chair at the Oval Office after the inauguration. Considering there had not been a peaceful transfer of power and little transition accomplished to facilitate the new administration, I believe the speed that Biden has moved is a reflection of his years of experience in Washington DC, including the White House. Time to focus on our strengths right now. Obv, we are aware of the regrets of what the former president has done.
Thanks, Christine. It offends me when people pile on to criticize Biden, after four years of chaos. While not admirable, the Republicans' ability to march in lockstep to accomplish their goals has proved very effective. To get Democrats to agree on anything is like herding cats. No, Biden isn't perfect - nobody is - but we need to stop the infighting.
“Herding cats”. Hahahahahahahaha. So true. My first real laugh today in this forum. Thank you Nancy. Ha!
Glad to accommodate! We've continued to have a shortage of laughs, even with a sane leader!
I agree that Biden moved with tremendous and thoughtful speed. Given the sh** show he was handed, it is even more remarkable. The steadiness of this administration with smart, compassionate, experienced, knowledgeable, and ethical people at the helm is the bright light. As a retiree a decade younger than Biden, I have trouble getting to the gym and one Zoom meeting done in the same day and neither requires much in the way of cognitive prowess on my part, thank goodness! :)
And with a very limited and fraught transition period to boot - where the access to sensitive info was withheld just to make things difficult. That should never be allowed again.
Yes, he and his team had thought it through and knew exactly what and when and how, right away.
I do agree with you, Christine, about President Biden’s work so far: it has been wonderful to see some of the awful orders from TFG overturned immediately. I am so impressed with how he has met the needs of our country in this terrible turning point. I know there is so much I don’t know about what is going on behind the scenes, what can be done legally, which changes require Congress and a super majority and which changes can be made with executive orders. It seems to me we need to win a few more seats in the Senate and in the House before we can
End the filibuster
Put term limits on SCOTUS justices
Make DC a state with voting rights
Protect voting and our elections
End the Electoral College.
Let’s get out the vote! 🌊🌊🌊
Christine, I don't disregard what he has done. I just wish this problem was front and center on his desk as well. We are now in a "shutting the door after the cows have left" mode.
Cows are still in the barn. Not dawn yet. Dems are bringing light of day. Watch fir for those rays of light!
*for
And the filibuster needs to go. It's time to fight to keep this country from ruin.
Hearing the SCOTUS decision yesterday filled me with dread, much like the day I was diagnosed with cancer. I knew then, what I know now, we are in for a long painful fight with no certainty that it will end well.
Today is a day of reflection and gathering inner strength. Tomorrow the fight begins. We have numbers on our side. Strategy, will and hard work are what’s needed now.
Thank you, Diane for expressing my feeling of dread and anxious thoughts when I heard about the SCOTUS ruling, yesterday. The Robert’s Court with ACB and BK. And all the conservative federal judges appointed during the Trump years spread across the land. The recent rulings feel like just the beginning of the bombardment. I have the will and can work hard. It’s the strategy that I’m looking for - the leadership that has to come from the top. So far, it’s Stacey Abrams sounding the alarm. And, Ron Klein is the station master. That’s reassuring. But. Now or very soon, Joe Biden, it’s time to step out from behind the curtain and lead. This is war. ❤️🤍💙
And you are one of the most resolute warriors!
1000%, Diane. And courage.
Reflect. Gather inner strength. Yes, Thank You Diane. And tomorrow, literally, the fight begins: Heather's Herd meeting, 1pm.
How do I access the Herd meeting? Is it on Substack, or another another platform?
As a long time reader, and recent subscriber, I still have a lot to learn. If it is not appropriate to discuss it here, I’ll put my email in my profile.
Heather's Herd is an email group dedicated to political action based on what we learn here. Ellie will want your email, but wait to post it until I hear from her on where. Thanks.
Can I be added also?
I will let Ellie Kona know, Kathy.
Oooh, I am interested too!
I will let Ellie et al know!
Glad for your interest! Email a note of your issues of interest and where in the world you are to:
heathersherd@gmail.com
Could you please place me on the Herd List, MaryPat? Thanks very much!
~ Frederick
You should recieve an email about it Frederick.
Ellie has sent you info! Let me know if you need anything else. Thanks.
Please check your e-mail for more information.
I will check with Ellie Kona
Yes, Diane, and we can't lose sight of the fact that we have the numbers. We can overcome this, and other insults, and see to it that we organize to overcome this travesty. Secure the house and Senate, and reclaim a large enough majority in both that we can't be held hostage by the Manchins and Sinemas, and in the meantime, find a way to pass the For the People Act.
Amen to this, Diane!
The following is from an article by David Badash posted on Alternet:
"Ezra Klein, in his New York Times opinion piece Thursday titled "The Rest of the World Is Worried About America," spoke to scholars of democracy from other countries.
"I'm positive that American democracy is not what Americans think it is," David Altman, a political scientist in Chile, told me. "There is a cognitive dissonance between what American citizens believe their institutions are and what they actually are."
Thanks, I just read it. Klein’s story is a great addition to this discussion.
“Today’s decision by the Supreme Court undercuts voting rights in this country ... and makes it all the more crucial to pass the For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to restore and expand voting protections.”
President Joseph Biden
It is imperative to heed President Biden's words, and more, to do all that we can by writing to and placing pressure on our representatives in Congress. The previous president shouldn't be given the last word!
“Our democracy depends on it.”
Here’s what I don’t understand. The Supreme Court has already overturned significant portions of the Voting Rights Act. Which was passed by Congress. What is to stop them from overturning the For The People act, if it is passed? Isn’t it likely that this same SCOTUS will overturn the For the People act’s ban on gerrymandering, on excessive campaign donations and on voting restrictions? Given the way the Republican majority on SCOTUS has ruled on these issues, the For The People act seems like a waste of time.
If it passes both houses, I doubt that they would interfere.
You're wrong. It didn't stop them from interfering with the Voting Rights Act passed in both houses in 1965 and re-endorsed by both houses in 2006. The SCOTUS is no longer a judicial body, but no more than a political extension of the other two branches of our government. I am even beginning to think that our three headed system of government, depending on checks and balances which don't seem to work any longer, isn't as democratic as a one-house parliamentary system, with all of its warts, would be.
To Rowshan, Christine, Jack and Barbara, what this debate about the likelihood of the For The People act being dismantled by the Republican SCOTUS demonstrates is that we need to remake the Supreme Court. It’s not enough to hold a slim majority in Congress and pass laws that strengthen democracy and votings. Not when an anti-democratic Republican majority controls the court. Mitch McConnell and the Federalist Society have played the long game well. We need to undo the damage they’ve done. If we had a fair-minded court of justices dedicated to the Constitution and democracy we wouldn’t need the For The People act. No court dedicated to the rule of law and free and fair elections would have ruled gerrymandering legal, or found for Citizens United, or ruled Arizona’s voter suppression to be legal. McConnell was right, it’s all about the courts.
Ummmmm, I don’t believe McConnell was, is, or will be right. I don’t believe the solution is remaking the Supreme Court right now, I do believe the decision yesterday by SCOTUS Is questionable but not unexpected with Justice Roberts’ known opinion of the VRA. I don’t believe our focus is to be on “undoing the damage the Federalist Society has done”. I do believe that legislation for the benefit of, by, and for the people must be passed. Progressive work on infrastructure both physical and social must move ahead.
And most of all? All people of every color and gender and religion that believe in a democracy must fight NOW to keep it. Including choosing our words well and not bowing to wringing hands and helplessness that the scourge of political leaders are trying to create.
Standing proud, sure, and vocally supporting our current administration in word and deed is what is called for. Not changing the structure of the Supreme Court. Yet.
You make my point about the make-up of the Supreme Court, when you say “with Justice Roberts’ known opinion of the VRA”. Of course we knew how Roberts would rule on voter suppression. Roberts is on the Supreme Court because of his endorsement by the Federalist Society. Why did the Federalist Society select Roberts? Because they knew how he’d rule on voting rights, Citizens United, corporate power, workers’ rights, minority rights, abortion, etc. Which of the current justices were selected by the Federalist Society? These six - Alito, Thomas, Roberts, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Bryant. Which six justices ruled in favor of voter suppression in Arizona? The same six. Coincidence? No. Mitch McConnell and the Federalist Society have built a repressive, white supremacist, corporatist, fundamentalist Christian Supreme Court majority. While we weren’t paying close attention. We can pass For The People (maybe, there are other hurdles there). It won’t matter if these six reactionary justices throw it out. We need to change the make-up of the Supreme Court if we’re going to have any chance of defending democracy. Because we’re twenty years behind McConnell and the Federalist Society, who are bound and determined to destroy democracy and install a plutocracy.
Really, why wouldn’t they? The Voting Rights Act was passed by Congress. SCOTUS dismantled it, case by case (culminating in yesterday’s decision). Why wouldn’t they do the same to For The People, if it is passed by Congress (doubtful, I know)? SCOTUS has demonstrated in recent cases that they support gerrymandering, support unlimited campaign donations, support voting rights restrictions, support racial discrimination and support dark money. All things covered in For The People. SCOTUS has established precedents demonstrating that, when cases are filed challenging For The People, they will find against it. We should not put our faith in For The People.
Yes we should. I follow my president in determining that.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/05/us/voting-rights-bill-legal.html?
Thanks for posting this link. I found it more optimistic than your earlier comment suggesting that SCOTUS would dismantle FTP. As cited in the NY TImes article, Harvard Professor Nicholas Stephanopoulos asserts not only (to your point) that “I have no doubt that if H.R. 1 passes, we’re going to have a dozen major Supreme Court cases on different pieces of it,” but also (to the contrary) that “Part of why the attack on H.R. 1 is unlikely to be successful in the end is that the law is not a single coherent structure the way Obamacare was. It’s a hundred different proposals, all packaged together...The Roberts court would dislike on policy grounds almost the entire law, but I think even this court would end up upholding most — big, big swaths — of the law. It would still leave the most important election bill in American history intact even after the court took its pound of flesh.”
Rowshan, the Movement Conservatives will immediately challenge bits and pieces in court, which will work their way up to SCOTUS. That's how women's reproductive/health rights are being chipped away now too.
I realize that, but if they have a sliver of conscience, they can't prove its unconstitutionality.
Thank you Rowshan. Facing the light.
You bet, Christine. This is such an important act! If only the white-hearted Qlarence would see the light from within the skewed tunnel in which he has positioned himself since time immemorial!
He needs to resign, given the seditious acts of his spouse
Biden needs to do a national tour, addressing voter suppression and related issues. Now. With passion. With urgency. It should be part of a comprehensive campaign, not just involving politicians but well-known, admired people.
Morning, all!! Morning, Dr. R!! As Gayle King (CBS) would say, "There's a whole lot of ugly on our plate." That said, I'll get right to it.
As a lead-in to this article, the Washington Post commentator (I forgot her name!) acknowledged the media's penchant for delivering only bad news. So with that in mind, she sent us subscribers this column that describes the many legislators who have put laws in place expanding voting rights for their states. It's a lot!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/voting-rights-expansion-states/2021/06/22/1699a6b0-cf87-11eb-8014-2f3926ca24d9_story.html
This one has a map(!) showing in shades of green which states where it's easiest to vote to which are harder. The article was written in October 2020, so not sure where it all stands now: https://bigthink.com/politics-current-affairs/states-easy-voting?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1
This one is another explanation in the same ilk as we have been hearing/reading:
https://www.theroot.com/supreme-court-upholds-restrictive-arizona-voting-laws-t-1847213916
I can't help but be proud of Virginia leading the way on voting rights. But this is not a heaven I wish to be in when my fellow country-people are being suppressed.
Thanks for lifting spirits with good news. Listening to a SCOTUS justice spin GOP lies about voter fraud cratered my spirits. I need some hopeful news today. 🙏
Thank you Lynell. Your focus is exactly where mine is turned. Towards the light.
Thank you, Lynell. We so need this kind of news to lift our spirits and to show us our strengths that we may build on them.
You're welcome, Michael. I think a lifted spirit is just what we all need every now and then!
I’ve tried to stay away from commenting because so many people find my comments to be cynical or overly pessimistic, but it’s incredibly hard to not feel that way after yesterday’s Supreme Court decision. We are heading back to the era of Jim Crow legislation, and with the high court now having green-lighted openly prejudiced legislation, other red states will now follow suit with laws which are likely to be even worse. We all know how horrifyingly close the last election was. Just imagine if similar (or worse) bills are now passed in Pennsylvania, or Michigan or Wisconsin. The goal all along has been to legislate the Democrats right out of existence and establish permanent Republican control of the country. Thanks to yesterday’s despicable decision by the Supreme Court, that goal is now within reach for the Republicans (and cue my ever- growing anger at Senators Manchin and Sinema for their role in all of this).
I don’t believe “that” goal is anywhere within reach for those Republicans.
My only correction that I implore is that the media now ramp up reporting the successful efforts at preserving democracy and emphatically reduce the reporting of the doings of the former president’s sycophants. I depend on HCR and the likes of her to briefly keep me up on what we need to know that is relevant and timely. My expectation is that the mecía that is aligned with democratic principles will realize sensationalizing sedition and reason is not the answer. Report on it and then move on to the myriad of right action being taken as we speak today in this forum.
Not enough of the media will do this---thanks in part due to their ownership.
The media continues to focus on sensationalizing it because it hits people at an emotional level-----and brings ratings, outrage, and "what's going to happen next!?!" hysteria. I want the same as you, but fear that the media's actions will continue to outweigh our expectations.
*media
*treason
Thank you, again, HCR, for the history lesson illuminating current events.
There is a screaming irony in the party of Lincoln, openly, energetically, seeking to undo what was achieved at enormous cost of blood and fortune in 1865.
Pride goeth before a fall, with shame following close behind.
Sadly, the irony is only on the surface. The truth of the matter is that greedy men, hungry for ever greater power, had no compunction about transforming the “Party of Lincoln” into the party of repression and tyranny. This was not done ironically, it was done shamelessly.
But perhaps there is this bit of ironic potential: If only some genuine statesmen would begin to mine Lincoln’s words, they would discover a rhetoric and a clarity of thought which might well push back this darkness that appears to be descending over our country. But where is this statesman!!!???
Or stateswoman.
Lincoln's words were uttered before the 19th Amendment was passed.
From Adam Kinzinger. And thousands of young voters who know no other way except progressive.
I’m amazed that Alito could write this with a straight face, “The mere fact that there is some disparity in impact does not necessarily mean that a system is not equally open or that it does not give everyone an equal opportunity to vote.” That there is disparity in impact (by design) means the system is NOT open and equal. The impact of a law on different groups is how you measure its equality.
What Alito meant (but didn’t exactly say) is that “the suppression of minority (Democratic) voters is camouflaged in this law so that we Republicans on the Supreme Court can pretend that it doesn’t exist. Go GOP!”
What he means is that in his opinion some people are too lazy or stupid to fulfill the simple requirements of the law, that they want to be able to vote while lying on the couch watching an episode of real housewives of Atlanta. What he doesn’t understand is that every requirement gives the state an opportunity to frustrate or turn down selected applicants based on technicalities. This is the Jim Crow aspect of the whole business.
The Justices probably vote by mail....
Just like the former guy and his family.
Alito doesn't have a clue what a challenge it is for some people to vote, given the economic reality to work so much just to stay barely afloat. Making Election Day a national holiday is imperative.
I think an even better idea is universal vote by mail. We have that in Washington state for all elections, it works very well, and voter fraud is infinitesimal (if it exists at all).
Agree! I lived in Oregon where mail-in is the right of all registered voters. No known problems, ever.
In Oregon, we have no costly voting machines. It's all on paper, which most people mail and others put in drop boxes or deliver to the elections office.
Exactly my thoughts.
I read that statement and thought, "Plessy v. Ferguson rides again." This, of course is the "separate but equal" decision in 1896. Sigh.
Dear Heather -
I’m not at all certain that digging into a thriller before bed is a good idea, but, thanks to your Letters from an American, it’s what I do. Today’s chapter was yet another doozy.
What filled me with a measure of pride today, was listening to President Biden’s press conference following his and Jill’s meeting with anxious and grieving families in Surfside, Fl. Such a terrible circumstance requires a kind, empathetic and helpful response. Thank you Mr. President and First Lady.
Any Republican Qevin McQarthy (R-Oklafornia) would nominate would probably be on the list of those traitors to be subpoenaed as witnesses.
which is why Pelosi has the right of approval/refusal, thankfully
Looooove Quevin McQarthy!😂😂😂😂😂
Perhaps the way around these more restrictive laws is for Dems to focus on getting younger people to vote. That means getting them interested in signing up. We have a "democracy" in the US, yet compared to other countries our participation in the voting process tends to attract about 48% of the eligible population. This past election, 2/3s voted or 63%... because of the Trump turmoil, still What happened to the 1/3 that didn't bother to vote despite being registered?
Even if we registered and turned out every possible vote and the votes were counted and the Dems won, in the states that have or are working to pass the law that the Republican Legislature has the right to overturn that election, all of these efforts won’t matter. Unless the legislatures can be flipped to Democrats.
Then flip we shall. That’s the whole point.
Unless the current legislatures can overturn the election results...
Exactly why every election is important, including primaries. 10 or 20% turnouts is disgraceful. That’s how ex president/mass murderer won in the first place. The media never bothers to report turnout % just headlines the “victories.”
Don't know what media you follow, but the ones I follow always have turnout percentages. I do read a number of different sources, so I imagine that makes some difference. But in my experience, most media posts the turnout.
Karvicto, part of the problem is that "eligible" and "registered" are not the same thing.
Semantics, Dems need to turn out, line up, bring ID (and evidently food and water) and vote, en masse. Younger voters are worried about the mess of a planet they are inheriting, maybe they will pay attention.
Actually, Lynn, the distinction is important, because lots of eligible voters - for an infinity of reasons - do not take the trouble to register to vote. How much trouble this is varies from state to state, and what is trouble for one person may not be trouble for another, but this inconvenience - unnecessary in countries where declaration of place of residence and possession of a picture ID card are required of all adults by law - must be overcome by all American voters.
Some states make it relatively easy to register, others less so. There are certain groups of people for whom having to register acts as a deterrent to voting, and this shows up in statistics. Of course, some people - apparently - just don't want to vote, weird as that may seem. Many easily rationalize not voting (it's a waste of time, it won't change anything, they're a bunch of crooks, I don't follow politics, I'm too busy, I forgot to register, it's raining today, etc.) and many live in situations that make both registering and voting difficult. I suspect that the 1/3 of "eligible" voters are mainly these, and many of them are unregistered and cannot be usefully convinced to vote on voting day.
In Italy, where I live, if people fail to vote it is a conscious choice, but all Italian citizens of voting age who are residents in Italy are automatically issued a voting card, which is renewed automatically and free of charge every ten years. If an Italian moves from one town to another, he declares residence, receives a new ID card and new voting card. The town where he formerly resided is immediately notified and he is struck from the voting rolls. Italians are always registered to vote, whether they like it or not. No doubt there are some Italians who are homeless and living on the street without any form of ID, but I think there are relatively few compared with the USA.
But the fact that many US citizens who are eligible to vote fail to register is a significant part of our low-turnout problem.
I said semantics because making it hard to register to vote, as well as making it hard to vote, as well as gerrymandering the districts all achieve the same thing, Republicans winning. Dems need to pay attention, register and vote, like their lives depend on it.
I agree totally Lynn. Obv it’s time to turn our focus from everything being done to make it difficult. Especially after SCOTUS decision yesterday. Let’s move ahead. Figure out what to do in every state to get every eligible voter registered. That alone will increase their desire to vote even though it might be raining….whatever.
Let’s focus on what we can do. I am over talking about McCarthy and the rest of the seditionists as if they have defeated us already.
Far from it. And my flag will be flying this July 4th. I hope there is a rainbow in the sky that day after the daily rain in Florida. Which I’ll repeat, is not my country. My country is the United States of America and President Biden is the Commander in Chief.
Because they do depend on it, these days....
I would imagine most people who habitually don't vote also don't necessarily think of themselves as Dems or as part of any party at all. We Dems do need to get over our divisions at election time, that's for sure. And any self-described Dem who isn't paying attention by now must either be dead or not yet born.
But you're right, there is no good excuse for Dems not registering and voting, though there may be soon if the GOP gets its way. It's easy to imagine the reinstatement poll taxes and literacy tests if things keep going the way they are.
And further, Italians living abroad automatically receive ballots and have parliamentary representation. My husband and kids always vote in Italian elections. It’s great for the kids - they have to research issues and figure out how to vote.
That's great, Kathy. And Boulder County CO automatically emails me a ballot for US citizens residing outside the USA. I copy it, fill it out, scan it and then send it back via secure email, and they email me when the ballot has arrived and when it's been counted. I'm not sure all the states do this well, but they should.
Voter registration should be automatic, like in Italy. Thanks for this David.
Or even mandatory to vote, like in Australia!
This is great and rather surprising, David. I mean no offense here at all when I say that in 2009 my son lived in northern Italy for a semester on exchange. He loved his experience but found much frustration. Buses that didn't run as consistently as one would expect in a US city, a poor postal service, etc. So it's interesting to hear that voting in Italy is so well coordinated and it makes so much sense that we should be ashamed our systems here are so convoluted. I live in a small rural NH town. My son has not lived or voted here in at least 8 years. Yet he has remained on the rolls all this time (I see his name on the spreadsheet when I check in to vote) . THIS week he received a letter from the town saying since he hadn't voted here in the last 4 years, per NH law, he would need to re-register. Mind you, in those 8+ years he has voted in NY and CT so clearly there is a lack of communication between states. It seems voter fraud could be possible as a result of being registered in more than one place, but still it doesn't happen. As someone on IG recently memed, millions of people daily can securely transfer money by the press of a button on their phone but we can't make it easier to vote and avoid fraud???
Hi Beth! I think most big Italian cities are pretty easy to move around in on public transport, and the small cities and larger towns often offer surprisingly good bus service, but things screw up occasionally, even the Italian postal service. Takes time to really learn the ropes. Anyway, no offense taken.
Voting in Italy is regulated by the central government and the Constitution, and there is no one here suggesting that voting should be limited or restricted in any unreasonable way. Sometimes the date of the vote can lead to squabbling among political parties, but that's pretty normal for a parliamentary system. More importantly, the principle that each person's vote should carry the same weight is unquestioned.
Of course, there are often problems forming a majority able to govern, and there are confusing party lists and a million other complications I am not able to describe here, due in part to space and time but mostly to my totally inadequate grasp of how it all works. Voting is a snap, however, and happens (usually) all day Sunday plus Monday morning before votes are counted.
And of course, Italy only has 60 million people, and roughly the same land area as the state of Oregon. The USA -- being much bigger -- is also messier in quite a few ways. And yes, you would think that in our high-tech America voter registration systems would all be tied into a single data bank, but the GOP would clearly prefer to self-destruct before letting this happen.
And Italy has the "Commedia Dell'Arte" on every street corner. Life is sweet and so all such foibles are forgiven and forgotten.
Thank you for the description of the Italian voting system. It's refreshing to hear about a system that works in the best interests of the citizens.
In Denmark, citizens and residents are registered where they live. At election time a poll card is sent out to each registered person. They get cards for their local and regional elections, everyone gets cards for national elections. As you move you must re-register with the govt. This is done by contacting the equivalent of the social security dept in the US. It reissues your health/ID card which has your personal ID number, (sort of like a social security number). These id numbers are used to get bank cards, do financial activities, etc. The cards and numbers are used as ID, no photo on them. To reduce fraud, you are asked to sign up with NETS, which issues you single use log-in numbers for each transaction. The idea is that you keep these in safe places so that even if someone gets hold of your id number, that alone is not enough to do transactions. It works pretty well. The state issued "health card" (again no photo is on it) is used to id people at Polling stations, which are quite numerous and supervised by volunteers from several different parties at the same time. Thanks for sharing
And I totally agree with the rest of your comment, just after "semantics".
Correct, there are "eligible" people who are not "registered", and registered folks who don't vote. A pew trust 2017 survey found the following: "Official statistics vary, but a conservative estimate, calculated using data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s most recent Voting and Registration Supplement, indicates that 21.4 percent (of eligible people) were not registered to vote in 2014." https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2017/06/why-are-millions-of-citizens-not-registered-to-vote
How do you factor in currently applied voter restrictions to these stats? I’m pretty sure we’re already seeing the effects of voter suppression. What do you think?
And wouldn't it be cool to send "democratic national guards" to places where black people and others have a hard time getting to the polls? Create an "army" of enablers! Show the disablers that we have the strength of purpose and believe in democracy to work around whatever they want to throw our way. In the spirit of Stacey Abrams.
Can't you just see a parade/cavalcade of Priuses flying U.S. and Biden flags on the highways of Texas? Go ahead, tough boys in your pickup trucks. Shove us off the road. That won't stop us. "Those Priuses just kept coming." (except for the bad news about Toyota :()
I think this is a great idea, Kimberly!
It'd only work if the license plates said Texas.
Please do not comment on or engage with trolls here (Sandy Lewis is but one). It only serves their purpose of posting here and elevates their comments in the conversation thread. Best to ignore them as background noise.
Was Sandy with us today? I didn't notice.
;-)
Agreed. Sandy flouts here in an attempt to prove his intelligence and relevance - in doing so he unveils his idiocy and inconsequentiality—unless we blow in his sails, if we don’t he won’t get anywhere.
Go away little man.
You’re right. I’m guilty.🙋🏼♀️Time to take a break for something more constructive. Thanks for the reminder!
The Court also issued a decision in Americans for Prosperity v Bonta that decreases transparency into dark money in politics. The decision, in a case brought by one of the Koch brothers ‘charitable’ entities, concludes that a California law requiring these charities to disclose the identities of donors, violates the First Amendment. Answering who is buying a politician or an election is becoming perhaps even more difficult than casting a vote.
So riddle me that one, how can one’s right to freedom of speech be impeded if WE DON’T KNOW WHO IS SPEAKING!? Not yelling at you fellow commenters, at the zealots who maintain such spurious reasoning!
Dear Professor HCR,
Thank you for highlighting the historical parallels to SCOTUS' devastating today. Racism is alive and well in the pro-right wing SCOTUS that the previous administration bequeathed to us. Maybe this is the time for President Biden to increase the number of judges on that hallowed bench. Nothing can be accomplished without a more balanced judicial membership. Not. One. Single. Solitary. Thing! Nothing!