McConnell’s empty threat.

January 11, 2022

[Audio version here.]

          As the deadline approaches for Senator Schumer’s effort to force a vote on the filibuster, Mitch McConnell countered with a threat intended to send Democrats reeling. In a statement to the Wall Street Journal (of course), McConnell threatened that if Democrats decrease the threshold to begin debate on a bill from 60 to 51 votes, Republicans will bring bills to the Senate floor that have bipartisan support. Horrors!

          Wait, what? Isn’t that how democracy is supposed to work? If a majority of Senators agree that a bill should be brought to the floor for debate, it should be brought to the floor for debate. That is exactly what Democrats want for the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. The fact that Republicans might be able to secure support from a few Democrats to debate other bills—like the XL pipeline—is no excuse for allowing voting rights to languish. There is no chance that the House will approve the XL pipeline, and no chance that President Biden will sign any such bill. So, the only thing that Mitch McConnell is threatening is that centrist Democratic Senators will be forced to take “tough positions” on controversial bills. The GOP Minority Whip, Senator John Thune, said as much in statements reported in The Hill, saying, “There could be some really hard votes for Democrats.”

          Oh, please, spare me! Life is hard, and being a U.S. Senator is tough—at least it should be. The Senate must break free of the “gentlemen’s agreements” designed to spare the tender feelings of entitled Senators that allow them to dodge public scrutiny on matters of great import to the nation. The last thing Democrats should be concerned about is more democracy in the Senate. True, there may be short term pain, but over time Democrats will expand their margin in the Senate and keep control for decades. Don’t believe me? Just ask terrified Republicans who are doing everything possible to shore up their shrinking base by drawing congressional districts that are 100-miles long and one‑mile wide to scoop up every stray Republican within the flying range of a Cessna 172 loaded with elephants.

          We must bring maximum pressure to bear on undecided Senators— including Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, Mark Kelly, Jon Tester, and Jeanne Sheehan. Go to Chop Wood, Carry Water 1/10 by Jessica Craven for contact information for your Senators and suggesting talking points. Jessica is also running a Resistbot campaign that will generate a letter to your Senators with just a few keystrokes from your cellphone. Text SIGN PARCPZ to 50409.

The GOP’s Achilles’ Heel: Lack of Self Awareness.

          Last spring, Ron Johnson wisely announced that he would not seek reelection for the Senate. Johnson has been one of the most unhinged, detached-from-reality Republicans in the last year—and that’s saying a lot. So, what does that get you in today’s GOP? You guessed it, an endorsement from Trump! That was enough to cause Johnson to reconsider his retirement. Johnson officially reversed his prior decision to retire, announcing on Sunday that he would run for re‑election in 2022. Republicans are publicly saying that they are welcoming Johnson’s announcement, but he is viewed as “vulnerable” in most polls. Defeating Johnson is key to expanding the Democratic margin in the Senate. This a race to support in word, deed, and donations. Stay tuned.

Democrats challenge member of Sedition Caucus under 14th Amendment.

          The 14th Amendment provides:

          No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress. . . who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress . . . shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same. . . .

          GOP Rep. Madison Cawthorn sought to overturn Biden’s victory in 2020 by voting against the certification of the electoral ballots. Democrats in North Carolina have challenged Cawthorn’s candidacy in 2022 on the grounds that he is disqualified under the 14th Amendment because he engaged in insurrection while serving as a member of Congress. See Charlotte Observer, “Text of challenge to Madison Cawthorn candidate eligibility.” A hearing will be held on January 12th before the North Carolina State Board of Elections. If North Carolina disqualifies Cawthorn, expect to see similar suits against other members of the Sedition Caucus. Stay tuned.

Kevin McCarthy says he will remove Adam Schiff from Intelligence Committee.

          Minority Leader in the House, Kevin McCarthy, says that he will remove Adam Schiff from the House Intelligence Committee if McCarthy becomes Speaker in 2022. McCarthy’s move is pure retaliation. Democrats have removed two GOP representatives from committees for making violent and hateful comments. Paul Gosar was removed from committee assignments after circulating a cartoon showing him murdering Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Marjorie Taylor Greene was removed from committees for promoting violence against Nancy Pelosi, suggesting that the Sandy Hook and Parkland school shootings were staged "false flag" operations,” and saying that “Jewish space lasers” were responsible for wildfires in California.

          What is Adam Schiff’s offense? That he is an American hero and patriot who carried the republic on his shoulders during Trump’s impeachment hearings for extorting Ukraine. If Kevin McCarthy is going to “go after” Adam Schiff, then we need to support Adam. Today, my wife and I made a contribution to Adam Schiff for Congress to ensure that Adam has all of the resources he needs to win reelection—and can continue to focus on more pressing matters, like the January 6th investigation. (Adam is a member of the House Select Committee.).

          Let’s send Kevin McCarthy a message: Don’t mess with Adam Schiff, because his supporters will do everything they can to ensure that the GOP and Kevin McCarthy go down to defeat in 2022.

What’s with all of the headlines predicting another American civil war?

          Barbara F. Walter recently wrote a book entitled “How Civil Wars Start.” She is a professor of Political Science at U.C. San Diego and has spent her career as a researcher studying civil war across the globe. I haven’t read Ms. Walter’s book, but per the NYTimes review, it is written from an empirical, case-study, data driven point of view. Per the NYTimes description of her conclusions, she says

that the United States is firmly within the “danger zone” of a “five-point scale” measuring factionalism and a “21-point scale” measuring a country’s “polity index,” where a full autocracy gets a -10 and a full democracy gets +10.

          In other words, Professor Walter brings a scholarly approach to a serious question. Except when she drifts into fantasy. Professor Walter engages in “thought experiments” that imagine the outbreak of violence in Texas that spreads nationally. That is all that irresponsible media organizations need to publish alarmist headlines: NPR, “Imagine another American Civil War, but this time in every state,” The New Yorker, “A New Civil War in America?,” NYTimes, “‘How Civil Wars Start,’ a Warning About the State of the Union,” and CNN, “How close is the US to civil war? Closer than you think, study says.”

          Please do not misinterpret my comments, and read to the end, but these headlines are more of a reflection of the marketing skills of Ms. Walter’s book publisher than what she actually writes in her book. Oh, and let’s not forget the headline writer’s compulsion to use fear to sell soap and cell phones. There is not going to be a civil war in the United States. That concept doesn’t even translate into the U.S. Take the State of Georgia, for instance. In a “civil war,” what side is Georgia on? It’s “red” state, right? Wrong! It is a heterogeneous state where the population centers are predominantly blue, and the rural areas are predominantly red—but not exclusively so in either case! So, are the farmers in the “red” rural areas going to wage war on their customers in the “blue” population centers that provide a living for the farmers? To pose the question demonstrates the underlying fallacy of the premise.

          And what, exactly, will the civil war be fought over? As Politico notes in discussing the spate of “civil war” predictions, there is no “great question” that divides the nation. There are a multitude of cultural, religious, scientific, economic, and political areas of disagreement, but no “overarching” cause that can be settled by a civil war. See Politico, “We Are In a New Civil War … About What Exactly?” While I don’t question the quality of Professor Walter’s research, I do question its applicability to a vast, integrated, interdependent union of states that form the world’s largest and most stable economy. As angry as people are over many things, they still want to provide a safe home for their families and the promise of a better life for their kids. Let’s not forget that.

          For those of you who have read to end: Is our democracy threatened? Yes. Could we experience political turmoil? Yes. Could there be scattered political violence? Yes, see e.g., January 6th. Will there be a “new civil war”? No. Indeed, the greatest threat of a civil war comes from headline writers who incessantly tell us that there will be one. They are “normalizing” the belief that civil war is an option. As consumers of those publications, we should tell them to knock it off. Politely, but firmly.

          And above all else, we must strive every day to preserve democracy. Nothing I wrote above changes that imperative one iota.

Concluding Thoughts.

          Yesterday, I published a link to a document prepared by a reader (Cathy Murphree) that listed ways to contact corporations that continue to support the Sedition Caucus. Although I don’t have exact numbers, it appears that thousands of you accessed that document; dozens of you sent me copies of emails / letters that you sent to those corporations. Thank you for your action! The link to the document is here: “Corporations and Contributions to Congresspersons Not Certifying Election.”

          Let’s bring the same level of engagement (and more) to lobbying our Senators to bring the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to the Senate floor for a vote. While it is virtually certain that no Senator will read your letter or listen to your voicemail, the cumulative heft of those messages will make a difference. Manchin and Sinema and Tester and Kelly and others are weighing their constituent’s wishes—and their political futures. Let’s make sure that there is no ambiguity in what their constituents are saying to them. Expressing yourself will take only a few minutes—but may help strengthen and preserve our democracy!

          Talk to you tomorrow!