The “Not the Debate” News

June 25, 2024

The run-up to the debate is taking on a circus-like atmosphere. I am making a conscious decision to avoid adding to the hype. It will happen or it won’t, and we will be in a much better position to discuss the debate after it happens than before. Funny how things work that way.

---

The national debt and the deficit: Biden v. Trump

A common lie told by Republicans is that President Biden has increased the debt and deficit to a greater degree than did former president Trump. That is a lie. The opposite is true. President Biden has reduced the deficit by a factor of four compared to Trump. And President Biden contributed to the national debt by half the amount compared to Trump.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget published a study entitled Trump and Biden: The National Debt. Contrary to Republican “talking points” (a.ka. “disinformation), Trump increased long-term borrowing at twice the rate of President Biden. Moreover, Joe Biden cut the deficit by a factor of four compared to Trump.

Per the CRFB,

President Trump approved $8.4 trillion of new ten-year borrowing during his full term in office, or $4.8 trillion excluding the CARES Act and other COVID relief.

President Biden, in his first three years and five months in office, approved $4.3 trillion of new ten-year borrowing, or $2.2 trillion excluding the American Rescue Plan.

President Trump approved $8.8 trillion of gross new borrowing and $443 billion of deficit reduction during his full presidential term. 

President Biden has so far approved $6.2 trillion of gross new borrowing and $1.9 trillion of deficit reduction.

The chart below illustrates the relative amount of ten-year debt approved under Biden versus Trump:

Copyright: Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (crfb.org)

So, next time someone says that President Biden has increased the debt and deficit compared to Trump, point them to the CRFB study and above chart—which factors out the emergency COVID spending to enable a fair comparison (and remove the excuse that Trump had to deal with the initial wave of COVID). Tell a friend!

---

The legal and health effects of Dobbs

Two years ago, the reactionary majority on the Supreme Court did something that no other cohort of justices had done in the history of our nation: It extinguished an existing constitutional right. In a single decision, it denied women equal protection under the Constitution and demoted them to a subservient status with fewer rights than a fertilized ovum.

It is difficult to measure health effects for large populations in a short period of time. Still, the emerging evidence is that Dobbs is increasing the number of risky and dangerous pregnancies, resulting in increased infant and maternal mortality. Predictably, the most extreme effects are felt by women of color and women who live near or below the poverty line.

A study published in Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) examined the health effects of Texas’ 2021 ban on abortion. See JAMA Pediatrics, Infant Deaths After Texas’ 2021 Ban on Abortion in Early Pregnancy.

The finding of the JAMA investigation was that “recorded infant deaths in Texas and 28 comparison states found that the Texas abortion ban was associated with unexpected increases in infant and neonatal mortality in 2022.” Moreover, the results show that Texas experienced a “12.9% increase [in infant mortality], whereas the rest of the US experienced a comparatively lower 1.8% increase.”

The state abortion bans post-Dobbs are also affecting maternal health. Again, the relatively short time since Dobbs makes it difficult to conduct studies, but statistical modeling predicts a significant increase in maternal mortality—with women of color and women living near or below the poverty line showing the greatest risk. See Nicole Narea’s excellent analysis in Vox, What two years without Roe looks like, in 8 charts.

I recommend Narea’s entire article to your attention. The article covers the legal and medical changes in abortion healthcare since Dobbs. The article also discusses efforts to create statistical models predicting maternal mortality in the absence of access to abortions:

So for now, the best information is based on statistical modeling. Researchers at the University of Colorado Boulder projected based on 2020 data on maternal outcomes that, if no abortions were performed nationally, there would be an overall 24 percent increase in maternal deaths after a year. Black mothers would see the biggest increase in mortality.

Finally, OBGYNs have said that their ability to provide reproductive care that meets the medical standard of care has been impacted:

In states where abortion is banned or restricted, for example, six in 10 OBGYNs say their decision-making autonomy has become worse since the Dobbs ruling.

The article also discusses the political dimensions of the post-Dobbs landscape. It repeats a common talking point promoted by (mostly) male political consultants who claim that abortion will not be a decisive factor in 2024. They are wrong—largely because they ignore actual results in 2022 and special elections post-Dobbs and instead rely on flawed polling.

For example, as reported in the Vox article, the survey question that prompts the dismissive attitude toward abortion is this: “What is the most important issue facing the country?” The answers are (in order of frequency of response), “Government,” Immigration,” Inflation,” and “Abortion.”

With all due respect (which is almost none), the question is so poorly phrased as to be meaningless—at least to the extent that it supposedly tests attitudes toward the importance of abortion. It asks about the most important issue “facing the country.” A sensible and reasonable answer to our national crisis is “government”—which encompasses the rule of law, democracy, the Supreme Court, voter suppression, and individual liberty, including reproductive rights. Saying that “government” is the most important issue facing the country does nothing to diminish the importance of reproductive liberty to the women and men affected by Dobbs.

Moreover, “Immigration” is a code word for “I am a MAGA voter.” If the designers of the survey couldn’t figure that out, they should find a new line of work.

And, of course, everyone is concerned about inflation—which is a surrogate for “I am not one of the top 2% that lives on investment returns.” In other words, it is everyone who works for a living saying that their daily economic struggle is the top issue facing America—which says nothing about the passion and anger that surrounds restrictions on reproductive liberty.

I am not a pollster, but I have met people, including women. And anyone who believes that abortion will not be a decisive factor in the 2024 election needs to look up from the spreadsheets and social media to engage with the tens of millions of women and men who are of childbearing age. They care deeply about reproductive liberty and are going to vote on that issue up and down the ballot. Don’t let any political consultant tell you otherwise!

---

Supreme Court grants review of state bans on gender affirming care

The Supreme Court granted review of Tennessee’s ban on gender affirming care. The grant of review is an ominous sign, as explained by Erin Reed in their Substack, Erin in the Morning, Supreme Court Takes Up Trans Care Ban In Tennessee, With Potentially Huge Impacts.

(Erin In The Morning is the leading source on Substack for news regarding legal developments regarding transgender rights. If you or someone you know is interested in or affected by such developments, I highly recommend the newsletter.)

Per Erin Reed,

On Monday morning, the Supreme Court announced it would take up whether gender-affirming care bans for transgender youth violate equal protection rights under the U.S. Constitution. The case under consideration involves the gender-affirming care ban in Tennessee, where the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the ban to take effect. The court ruled that transgender people do not have equal protection rights under the Constitution, citing the Dobbs decision overturning abortion and Geduldig v. Aiello, a ruling on pregnancy discrimination that has gained new traction in conservative courts targeting transgender individuals.

It cannot be said often enough: Transgender people are people. Period. They are entitled to the full protection of the Constitution and the laws of the US. But it appears that the Supreme Court is intent on repeating their travesty in Dobbs—creating a second-class citizenship status based on gender identification.

First Roe v. Wade, next transgender rights, then LGBTQ+ rights (including same-sex marriage), and then contraception. The reactionary majority is coming for it all. They are telling us as loudly and clearly as they can.

The Supreme Court is on the ballot in 2024—we must win both chambers of Congress and the presidency so we can expand the Court and release the death grip of the reactionary majority on the Constitution!

---

It's not your imagination: The media has been unfairly focusing on Joe Biden’s age

Media Matters analyzed news stories in the top five newspapers by circulation in the US from January through June 2024 “that focused on either or both Biden's and Trump's ages or mental acuities.” The analysis shows that the top newspapers were fixated on Biden’s age and mental acuity while nearly ignoring the same issues for Trump. See Media Matters, Top newspapers fixate on Biden's age.

Per Media Matters,

We found 144 articles focused on either or both Biden’s and Trump’s ages or mental acuities in the period studied, with 67% focused just on Biden’s age or mental acuity and only 7% on just Trump’s.

The major newspapers in America have learned nothing from their obsessions with “Hillary’s emails”—a non-story promoted by Russia and Trump that helped push Trump over the line in 2016.

The newspapers included in the survey are: NYTimes, Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and USA Today.

Opportunity for reader engagement

Calling all filmmakers! One Dem Minute Film Festival!

The One Dem Minute Film Festival is crowdsourcing short videos with pro-democracy messaging, to inspire "squishy" Democrats and undecided voters to vote blue in November. You don't need to be a professional filmmaker -- if you have a compelling message, we want to see your vision! Join the producers on a Zoom call Monday, July 1, 5PM PST / 8PM EST to learn more about how you can participate, watch a few past finalist videos, and ask any burning questions you might have. Sign up here via Mobilize!

---

Join the effort to recall Senator Ron Johnson!

On May 31, 2024 Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) signed an open letter with nine other senators in protest to the thirty-four guilty verdicts handed down to Trump by a jury in New York. The letter of protest states those who signed will only consider legislation that is, “directly relevant to the safety of the American people.” By signing this letter of protest Senator Johnson has declared he is unwilling to participate in the legislative processes vital to running our country and representing the citizens of Wisconsin.

There is a grassroots movement in Wisconsin to recall Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI). The Wisconsin state constitution has a provision to recall its US senators and representatives. In fact, there is a manual available at the Wisconsin State Election Office on how to do it. We need just under 650,000 signatures from Wisconsin residents in order to force a recall election. Signers do not need to be registered to vote. While this effort likely will be challenged in court since there is no federal provision for recall, it is important to send a message to Senator Johnson.  He is getting paid to do a job, and he need to do it.

Here is the link to the form that you can print out for signatures.  

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1KZL61nLVCN3QgJf_En3k5gu7E-DfoSRH

This link contains a second pdf that contains the necessary information to send the completed forms to Lana Caywood.  She needs the forms in her possession by July 25^th.

---

Concluding Thoughts

Joe Biden is lying low and doing his homework. Exactly what you would expect of a serious candidate for reelection to the presidency.

Talk to you tomorrow!