Robert, I presume your mention of the constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United refers to H.J. Res. 48 We the People Amendment. For anyone interested in a detailed description, including its many co-sponsors, one can visit “Move to Amend.”
Additionally, I would note that a Robert Reich Substack subscriber offered, perhaps, the most feasible strategy for getting the Amendment passed. He suggested getting all 26 states (red and blue)with a direct citizens’ ballot initiative process to require their legislatures to pass the Amendment (admittedly, a heavy, albeit possible, lift). Probably the heavier lift would be to get the needed 12 additional state legislatures to sign on.
While this approach would entail extraordinary citizen engagement, in my view, it, at least, should be considered as an alternative to trying to get the amendment passed through Congress.
Hi, Barbara. The "We the People" Amendment is a different proposed amendment. Although it overlaps with Schiff's proposal in permitting regulation of campaign finances, it is much broader in that it states the rights granted under the constitution belong only to "natural persons." ("The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons only..")
That clarification could affect many rights under the constitution that currently apply to corporations, not merely political speech. While that may be a good thing, you can see opposition from corporations who are concerned about curtailment of other rights--like due process, search and seizure, and trial by jury. While that may not be the intent of the WE the People Amendment, it is certainly within the plain language of the text.
I think Schiff's proposal has the benefit of being a single subject Amendment.
Thanks for the mention of Robert Reich's strategy. That seems like a good one
Robert, I greatly appreciate your clarification and will offer it, with proper attribution of course, as circumstances warrant. Additionally, I would mention, were we, in 24, to take back the House, pick up enough Senate seats to reach 50 willing to set aside the filibuster, plus hold the Presidency, my preference would be to resuscitate H.R.1 For the People, which passed the House in 21, and see it re-introduced in the Senate. As I imagine you know, this federal legislation would ensure all eligible votes are cast, counted correctly, and certified without interference and without their being diluted through partisan gerrymandering. The legislation also would provide common sense provisions for getting big money out of politics.
Meantime, despite Schiff’s good intentions, considering the present composition of the House, I will consider any measure that contributes to minimizing the damage over the next 2 years as a great accomplishment.
Thanks for the citation Barbara. Having the legislative number makes it harder for our Congresspeople to respond by saying "if any legislation on that topic should be introduced..." They still respond without commitment, but have to be more specific.
I just went on Schiff's Twitter feed to see the reaction to him introducing this legislation and it was so toxic, it just once again reminded me why I don't have a Twitter account. So many people are uninformed and don't even realize that he introduces this for every new congress. Additionally, they think that even if it is a good idea, Democrats are only introducing it to look good. Like, even if that were true, why don't Republicans just vote for it if it is good then? They tend to think of politics as a zero sum game where only one team can win.
Anyway... I would love for an actual constitutional amendment but from what we've seen is that certain states don't want popular measures to be a ballot measure because it would reduce their ability to stay in power or profit off the status quo. Whether it is abortion access, ranked choice voting, marijuana legalization or in this case overturning Citizens United. Great idea though and we should try it.
@PhillyT, I write, in part, because I agree fully with your commentary. As you concluded, despite the odds, we should try everything that has a shot at succeeding. Having said that, I would ask you note Robert’s response to my comment, wherein he differentiates between Schiff’s proposed amendment and the “We the People” Amendment.
"Supreme Court leak report: The justices don't want to know who leaked Dobbs. (“[T] the fiction that nobody believes it could be a justice is the only thing still holding the court together.”)" The Justices undoubtedly know which one of them leaked the opinion, they're just hoping none of us are paying attention. Mr. Roberts has progressed from being a mediocre and overly "flexible" Chief Justice to being a terrible one.
Re: Peter Navarro, Mr. Bannon has been out on appeal for months since his conviction and sentencing; is there any reason to suspect that Navarro won't get the same treatment? In a country where a speedy trial is a Constitutional right, why does the appeals process take so long? Is it any wonder that people (at least rich people with expensive attorneys) flout the law with impunity?
It's sickening that Bannon appeals a puny five-month sentence when it should be a sentence of years, and that he and Trump and so many are still out and about, making laws, making mischief, being their free and repugnant selves.
Good question. Given the light sentences these people get, they could all have been in and out of jail and (unfortunately) on parole by now. What a disgusting bunch of cons.
But at least they would have done some time, even if it was in a minimum security prison with golf privileges. The current situation is an enduring demonstration that we don't have a system of justice and accountability, we have a system of punishment for people who don't fit in.
I'm sure you know this, too, but their narcissism is too deeply entrenched to let any character assault go unchallenged. Unfortunately, they've gotten away with their endless judicial appeals too often. That seems to be coming to an end as a recent case from Trump was thrown out of court and his lawyers charged almost a $ million for their careless, baseless, and frivolous action.
The founder is Marc Elias. If you are on Post.News you can follow him @marcelias. He has a daily newsletter called Democracy Docket and a weekly podcast called Defending Democracy.
I highly recommend Post.News as the safest social media platform. Many progressives have arrived there but not enough of our elected Democratic officials. There are hashtags such as #BlackPost, #Democracy, #News, #PostBookClub, #Food etc. The founders are getting people off the wait list quickly now. Hope this helps.
I’m tired. I’ve been awake since 2:30 am stressed out about the debt ceiling.
Marc’s podcast this morning with Senator Sheldon Whitehouse was very detailed and quite alarming to me. They covered Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society as well as Leo’s Judicial Crisis Network. They went on to go into great detail on the Citizens United case and dark money.
First, thanks for that "buried" lead, as usual your wise advice relieves a fear engendered by the insane GOP. No Republican I know acknowledges the determination of the GOP party leaders to destroy "Socialist" programs like medicare and Social Security and federal oversight like the IRS.
Good luck to El Jefe del Merde A Loco getting more lawyers after the last crew of idiots got hit with a million dollar sanction. These must be the ones who got their law licenses out of a box of Cracker Jacks. I wonder what he'll get f or defense lawyers when his indictments come down.
He certainly may be running out of big busted, small waisted superhero types: ya know- his lawyers with who storm in with Prada and too much lip gloss.
“Let's take a quick look at the resume of Michael Chertoff, who Chief Justice John Roberts chose to conduct the investigation of the Dobbs case leak:
- Special counsel on the Senate Whitewater investigation of Clinton
- Protege of Rudy Giuliani in the SDNY
- Fundraiser for W Bush and other Republicans
- W Bush campaign advisor on law and order issues
- DOJ appointee who helped establish the CIA's enhanced interrogation program
- Bungled DHS response to Hurricane Katrina
- Appointed by W Bush to US court of appeals
- Member of defense team in US prosecution of Dmitro Firtash, an ally of Vladimir Putin who funneled Russian money to pro-Russian politicians in Ukraine”
All very good points. Asking Chertof to comment on the investigation by the Marshal of the Court was bizarre. Chertof didn't do an investigation; he said that the Marshal did a swell investigation and that there was no evidence anyone did anything that was criminal. As I wrote, "Why??" Why did Roberts want someone to say there was no crime committed?
I usually don’t laugh out loud when I read the newsletter—my smiles and chuckles are reserved for Jill’s—but I loved the hyperlink to “buried the lead.” You may recall long before there was a comment section, we had a somewhat heated email exchange about the use of lede v. lead. It reminded me of “Let’s Call the Whole Thing Off.” I concede that “lead” is now more mainstream and absolutely acceptable. But I beg of you: please don’t go after the Oxford comma or the em dash. 😉
I have a shirt that says, "I survived the Oxford comma wars," and am a firm believer in that necessary punctuation. And the 'em dash' is the most important and underused punctuation in the English language. I use the 'em dash' a dozen times in each newsletter.
lede. Long ago the noun lede was an alternative spelling of lead, but now lede is mainly journalism jargon for the introductory portion of a news story—or what might be called the lead portion of the news story.
"Lede" was and is considered "jargon" from the cognoscenti in the newsroom. It was first recognized as a word of the English language in 2005 by its inclusion in the Merriam Webster dictionary. It is a very recent addition to the language.
A bit of journalistic background regarding LEDE versus lead. Lede avoids confusion with lead, which can be pronounced "led" and can reference the chemical Pb. When on quick-turn editing, confusion is deadly, Hence, shorthand is used to maximize accuracy. So, not a quirk but a quick 😉 reference to that crucial part of every story.
The right wing Supreme Court justices have done everything possible to imitate the behavior of the referees in a professional wrestling match. While the spectators are screaming "Foul play" as the villain chokes his opponent, the referee claims he didn't see it. The Court now goes out of its way to not see fairness so obvious to all of us as spectators.
Are there any GOP lawmakers who see the virtue of Schiff's amendment? I hope so. The dark money swirling through our political bloodstream is carrying toxins that'll kill us as a country.
"...some Evangelical leaders are interviewing potential 2024 challengers to Trump." Interesting. Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. If interviewing potential 2024 presidential challengers isn't participating in political campaigns, what is? They should be paying taxes like any other entity.
This is another 'elephant in the room ' — the Catholic Church has taken control of the Supreme Court, and heavily influences elections in the US, lobbying shamelessly and openly from the pulpit. All organizations — and certainly wealthy, powerful ones like the CC — who lobby political positions and influence political processes are legally and morally bound to pay taxes, and not hide behind a false 501 (c) 3 claim. I can hear Jefferson, Washington, Adams, Franklin and a host of other founding fathers waxing eloquent on this gross violation of the separation of church and state that the founders intended. The 'originalist' hypocrites should be ashamed - if they have any. This issue is at the heart of the corruption of our democracy; I wish we could be working on this as hard as we are on voter suppression, dark money and insurrection. It may be a slower-burning fire but it does no less damage.
The phrase "Christian Evangelicals" has become a PC euphemism for "White Christian Nationalists." It has become increasingly difficult to distinguish between the two.
Ahhhh. I missed the Krugman list of four ways to end the Crazies chaos so chosen and performed with such flair. Thanks for putting that list of possible paths into my morning view.
Already the media is just repeating itself about the debt crisis. You know what they will say and don't even have to listen. But what they don't say is what really matters in terms of public opinion: we are in this position because Trump gave huge tax breaks to the wealthy (the ones he sees as his peers) and ran up deficit spending as no other president has. That is not a balanced budget - give to your friends and refuse to pay your debts. Trump has lived this way all his career, it was a sorry performance by the media in 2015 that they did not publish any info on his way of business.
Here in Montana we had a law against Dark Money. The Copper Kings used their money to influence politics back in the day. In the ancient 20th Century Montana made it illegal for this outside money or dark money to influence politics. Not perfect but it worked. Then came Citizens United...A corporation can have free speech? Dark money is okay and Montana's sensible rule became unconstitutional.
Once again, I’m trying to be encouraged by your reassurance that there are a variety of avenues the Dems can take to avoid the debt ceiling default…the only two I was familiar with are the discharge petition and the minting of the trillion dollar coin, which sounds intriguing and rather mysterious…
I hope that one of these will work. Sadly, Sinema and Manchin, in Switzerland, joined hands to reject eliminating the filibuster in regard to any action re the debt ceiling in the Senate! Even w Raphael Warnock back in the Senate, I don’t think we would still have a majority to do so without at least one of them, would we?
I’m hoping the Dems are quietly and strategically working on the discharge petition at this very minute, because as I understand it, the process is intricate and takes months to make happen.
And so I say “from your mouth to God’s ear!” About all of this!
I naively view dark money as a luxury, because It's betting on fickle and/or corrupt politicians. A heavy luxury tax should be imposed. Just think how many people could be helped by that money here and abroad. The election process should not be the industry it has become.......
Robert, I presume your mention of the constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United refers to H.J. Res. 48 We the People Amendment. For anyone interested in a detailed description, including its many co-sponsors, one can visit “Move to Amend.”
Additionally, I would note that a Robert Reich Substack subscriber offered, perhaps, the most feasible strategy for getting the Amendment passed. He suggested getting all 26 states (red and blue)with a direct citizens’ ballot initiative process to require their legislatures to pass the Amendment (admittedly, a heavy, albeit possible, lift). Probably the heavier lift would be to get the needed 12 additional state legislatures to sign on.
While this approach would entail extraordinary citizen engagement, in my view, it, at least, should be considered as an alternative to trying to get the amendment passed through Congress.
Hi, Barbara. The "We the People" Amendment is a different proposed amendment. Although it overlaps with Schiff's proposal in permitting regulation of campaign finances, it is much broader in that it states the rights granted under the constitution belong only to "natural persons." ("The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons only..")
That clarification could affect many rights under the constitution that currently apply to corporations, not merely political speech. While that may be a good thing, you can see opposition from corporations who are concerned about curtailment of other rights--like due process, search and seizure, and trial by jury. While that may not be the intent of the WE the People Amendment, it is certainly within the plain language of the text.
I think Schiff's proposal has the benefit of being a single subject Amendment.
Thanks for the mention of Robert Reich's strategy. That seems like a good one
Thanks for the clarification Robert.
Robert, I greatly appreciate your clarification and will offer it, with proper attribution of course, as circumstances warrant. Additionally, I would mention, were we, in 24, to take back the House, pick up enough Senate seats to reach 50 willing to set aside the filibuster, plus hold the Presidency, my preference would be to resuscitate H.R.1 For the People, which passed the House in 21, and see it re-introduced in the Senate. As I imagine you know, this federal legislation would ensure all eligible votes are cast, counted correctly, and certified without interference and without their being diluted through partisan gerrymandering. The legislation also would provide common sense provisions for getting big money out of politics.
Meantime, despite Schiff’s good intentions, considering the present composition of the House, I will consider any measure that contributes to minimizing the damage over the next 2 years as a great accomplishment.
Thanks for the citation Barbara. Having the legislative number makes it harder for our Congresspeople to respond by saying "if any legislation on that topic should be introduced..." They still respond without commitment, but have to be more specific.
Dave, Thank you for replying. I particularly appreciate your intent to follow-up.
I just went on Schiff's Twitter feed to see the reaction to him introducing this legislation and it was so toxic, it just once again reminded me why I don't have a Twitter account. So many people are uninformed and don't even realize that he introduces this for every new congress. Additionally, they think that even if it is a good idea, Democrats are only introducing it to look good. Like, even if that were true, why don't Republicans just vote for it if it is good then? They tend to think of politics as a zero sum game where only one team can win.
Anyway... I would love for an actual constitutional amendment but from what we've seen is that certain states don't want popular measures to be a ballot measure because it would reduce their ability to stay in power or profit off the status quo. Whether it is abortion access, ranked choice voting, marijuana legalization or in this case overturning Citizens United. Great idea though and we should try it.
@PhillyT, I write, in part, because I agree fully with your commentary. As you concluded, despite the odds, we should try everything that has a shot at succeeding. Having said that, I would ask you note Robert’s response to my comment, wherein he differentiates between Schiff’s proposed amendment and the “We the People” Amendment.
I could not bear to read any more than three of those toxic, ugly, hateful comments on Schiff's Twitter feed.
Me either!
"Supreme Court leak report: The justices don't want to know who leaked Dobbs. (“[T] the fiction that nobody believes it could be a justice is the only thing still holding the court together.”)" The Justices undoubtedly know which one of them leaked the opinion, they're just hoping none of us are paying attention. Mr. Roberts has progressed from being a mediocre and overly "flexible" Chief Justice to being a terrible one.
Re: Peter Navarro, Mr. Bannon has been out on appeal for months since his conviction and sentencing; is there any reason to suspect that Navarro won't get the same treatment? In a country where a speedy trial is a Constitutional right, why does the appeals process take so long? Is it any wonder that people (at least rich people with expensive attorneys) flout the law with impunity?
It's sickening that Bannon appeals a puny five-month sentence when it should be a sentence of years, and that he and Trump and so many are still out and about, making laws, making mischief, being their free and repugnant selves.
Good question. Given the light sentences these people get, they could all have been in and out of jail and (unfortunately) on parole by now. What a disgusting bunch of cons.
But at least they would have done some time, even if it was in a minimum security prison with golf privileges. The current situation is an enduring demonstration that we don't have a system of justice and accountability, we have a system of punishment for people who don't fit in.
I'm sure you know this, too, but their narcissism is too deeply entrenched to let any character assault go unchallenged. Unfortunately, they've gotten away with their endless judicial appeals too often. That seems to be coming to an end as a recent case from Trump was thrown out of court and his lawyers charged almost a $ million for their careless, baseless, and frivolous action.
Good morning everyone! Ohio and Florida are being sued by Elias Law Group, our heroes in voter protection and election fraud litigation.
https://www.elias.law/team.
The founder is Marc Elias. If you are on Post.News you can follow him @marcelias. He has a daily newsletter called Democracy Docket and a weekly podcast called Defending Democracy.
I highly recommend Post.News as the safest social media platform. Many progressives have arrived there but not enough of our elected Democratic officials. There are hashtags such as #BlackPost, #Democracy, #News, #PostBookClub, #Food etc. The founders are getting people off the wait list quickly now. Hope this helps.
I’m tired. I’ve been awake since 2:30 am stressed out about the debt ceiling.
Thanks for the reference to Marc Elias. I was thinking of making Democracy Docket the single subject of this evening's newsletter.
Marc’s podcast this morning with Senator Sheldon Whitehouse was very detailed and quite alarming to me. They covered Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society as well as Leo’s Judicial Crisis Network. They went on to go into great detail on the Citizens United case and dark money.
First, thanks for that "buried" lead, as usual your wise advice relieves a fear engendered by the insane GOP. No Republican I know acknowledges the determination of the GOP party leaders to destroy "Socialist" programs like medicare and Social Security and federal oversight like the IRS.
But they ALL know
Good luck to El Jefe del Merde A Loco getting more lawyers after the last crew of idiots got hit with a million dollar sanction. These must be the ones who got their law licenses out of a box of Cracker Jacks. I wonder what he'll get f or defense lawyers when his indictments come down.
I’m certain that T#%?@ University offers a J.D., for free. Reimbursement comes from defending TFG without compensation for the rest of the century.
He certainly may be running out of big busted, small waisted superhero types: ya know- his lawyers with who storm in with Prada and too much lip gloss.
LOVE your nickname for TFG!
From HCR commenter Phillip Diehl:
“Let's take a quick look at the resume of Michael Chertoff, who Chief Justice John Roberts chose to conduct the investigation of the Dobbs case leak:
- Special counsel on the Senate Whitewater investigation of Clinton
- Protege of Rudy Giuliani in the SDNY
- Fundraiser for W Bush and other Republicans
- W Bush campaign advisor on law and order issues
- DOJ appointee who helped establish the CIA's enhanced interrogation program
- Bungled DHS response to Hurricane Katrina
- Appointed by W Bush to US court of appeals
- Member of defense team in US prosecution of Dmitro Firtash, an ally of Vladimir Putin who funneled Russian money to pro-Russian politicians in Ukraine”
All very good points. Asking Chertof to comment on the investigation by the Marshal of the Court was bizarre. Chertof didn't do an investigation; he said that the Marshal did a swell investigation and that there was no evidence anyone did anything that was criminal. As I wrote, "Why??" Why did Roberts want someone to say there was no crime committed?
Thank you. And the Chief Justice insists the Court isn't politicized? He's a fool, and a duplicitous one at that.
Worse than a fool, a Machiavellian evil doer with a power “delusion.”
OMG, thought he went to prison
I usually don’t laugh out loud when I read the newsletter—my smiles and chuckles are reserved for Jill’s—but I loved the hyperlink to “buried the lead.” You may recall long before there was a comment section, we had a somewhat heated email exchange about the use of lede v. lead. It reminded me of “Let’s Call the Whole Thing Off.” I concede that “lead” is now more mainstream and absolutely acceptable. But I beg of you: please don’t go after the Oxford comma or the em dash. 😉
I have a shirt that says, "I survived the Oxford comma wars," and am a firm believer in that necessary punctuation. And the 'em dash' is the most important and underused punctuation in the English language. I use the 'em dash' a dozen times in each newsletter.
Marilyn,
I am not so much a friend to commas -- at least not to too many commas in a run-on sentence.
The renowned New Yorker Copyeditor
Mary Norris wrote an article about the comma shaker she kept on her desk.
I would be in despair editing without the em dash.
Am heartened by your affection for the em dash.
I use the 'em dash' liberally in my columns. It is an under-appreciated punctuation mark.
Is it lead or lede?
lede. Long ago the noun lede was an alternative spelling of lead, but now lede is mainly journalism jargon for the introductory portion of a news story—or what might be called the lead portion of the news story.
"Lede" was and is considered "jargon" from the cognoscenti in the newsroom. It was first recognized as a word of the English language in 2005 by its inclusion in the Merriam Webster dictionary. It is a very recent addition to the language.
A bit of journalistic background regarding LEDE versus lead. Lede avoids confusion with lead, which can be pronounced "led" and can reference the chemical Pb. When on quick-turn editing, confusion is deadly, Hence, shorthand is used to maximize accuracy. So, not a quirk but a quick 😉 reference to that crucial part of every story.
The right wing Supreme Court justices have done everything possible to imitate the behavior of the referees in a professional wrestling match. While the spectators are screaming "Foul play" as the villain chokes his opponent, the referee claims he didn't see it. The Court now goes out of its way to not see fairness so obvious to all of us as spectators.
Good analogy
Action on Peter Navarro’s ignored J6 subpoena. Again, what about Jim Jordan and the House others???
Are there any GOP lawmakers who see the virtue of Schiff's amendment? I hope so. The dark money swirling through our political bloodstream is carrying toxins that'll kill us as a country.
"...some Evangelical leaders are interviewing potential 2024 challengers to Trump." Interesting. Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. If interviewing potential 2024 presidential challengers isn't participating in political campaigns, what is? They should be paying taxes like any other entity.
This is another 'elephant in the room ' — the Catholic Church has taken control of the Supreme Court, and heavily influences elections in the US, lobbying shamelessly and openly from the pulpit. All organizations — and certainly wealthy, powerful ones like the CC — who lobby political positions and influence political processes are legally and morally bound to pay taxes, and not hide behind a false 501 (c) 3 claim. I can hear Jefferson, Washington, Adams, Franklin and a host of other founding fathers waxing eloquent on this gross violation of the separation of church and state that the founders intended. The 'originalist' hypocrites should be ashamed - if they have any. This issue is at the heart of the corruption of our democracy; I wish we could be working on this as hard as we are on voter suppression, dark money and insurrection. It may be a slower-burning fire but it does no less damage.
The phrase "Christian Evangelicals" has become a PC euphemism for "White Christian Nationalists." It has become increasingly difficult to distinguish between the two.
All evil, no diff.
--->>> "They should be paying taxes like any other entity." <<<---
Ahhhh. I missed the Krugman list of four ways to end the Crazies chaos so chosen and performed with such flair. Thanks for putting that list of possible paths into my morning view.
Already the media is just repeating itself about the debt crisis. You know what they will say and don't even have to listen. But what they don't say is what really matters in terms of public opinion: we are in this position because Trump gave huge tax breaks to the wealthy (the ones he sees as his peers) and ran up deficit spending as no other president has. That is not a balanced budget - give to your friends and refuse to pay your debts. Trump has lived this way all his career, it was a sorry performance by the media in 2015 that they did not publish any info on his way of business.
Here in Montana we had a law against Dark Money. The Copper Kings used their money to influence politics back in the day. In the ancient 20th Century Montana made it illegal for this outside money or dark money to influence politics. Not perfect but it worked. Then came Citizens United...A corporation can have free speech? Dark money is okay and Montana's sensible rule became unconstitutional.
Once again, I’m trying to be encouraged by your reassurance that there are a variety of avenues the Dems can take to avoid the debt ceiling default…the only two I was familiar with are the discharge petition and the minting of the trillion dollar coin, which sounds intriguing and rather mysterious…
I hope that one of these will work. Sadly, Sinema and Manchin, in Switzerland, joined hands to reject eliminating the filibuster in regard to any action re the debt ceiling in the Senate! Even w Raphael Warnock back in the Senate, I don’t think we would still have a majority to do so without at least one of them, would we?
I’m hoping the Dems are quietly and strategically working on the discharge petition at this very minute, because as I understand it, the process is intricate and takes months to make happen.
And so I say “from your mouth to God’s ear!” About all of this!
I naively view dark money as a luxury, because It's betting on fickle and/or corrupt politicians. A heavy luxury tax should be imposed. Just think how many people could be helped by that money here and abroad. The election process should not be the industry it has become.......