Open thread June 25, 2021 Dan Crawford | June 25, 2021 6:36 am Comments (25) | Digg Facebook Twitter |
“Steps To An American Voting Rights Act” Unfortunately, Democrats have already skipped some critical steps in the process, but all is not lost. I’ve posted a couple of Updates and an Epilogue #1.
BTW, I think Biden has set himself up for a big failure on the so-called “Infrastructure Deal”… I can’t imagine that Mitch McConnell is going to allow Biden to get a big win by taking what he can get with bipartisanship and then taking everything else with reconciliation. McConnell is already out there running with this and having a heyday…!!!! While progressives are out there crying “We want the whole thing.” Why do Democrats have such a hard time with basic political strategy and communications?
Why is Manchin and Sinema holding out? I look at what Biden is doing and see a trap for those two and McConnell. If Repubs balk at their own plan, its on them. If Manchin and Sinema balk after they have their compromise and McConnell says no to Reconciliation, it is on them. It is a out-in-the-open setup with Biden saying he is doing Reconciliation too. Will it matter if they do not include the things passed in a bipartisan compromise? Biden, “Come-on Man, we compromised with you on these things.”
The only thing I would have done differently is not to openly state I was going through with Reconciliation.
Exactly what has gone wrong in the approach to infrastructure? There is a bipartisan proposal that most Dems hate, but it is not even fully written yet. The Senate is at work on the reconciliation bill that most Dems love.
What’s wrong with that process? Nothing. What have Dems given up? Nothing
If you think Biden is going to go up against Pelosi you need to think again.
“But make sure you understand this: that when people say, ‘Well, I’m not going to vote for this unless I see that.’ There ain’t gonna be no bipartisan bill, unless we are going to have the reconciliation bill. “
“…Why do Democrats have such a hard time with basic political strategy and communications?”
[It is inherent in their position in our two party political system. The Democratic Party is constrained by evidence although still detached from reality. The Republican Party adheres to biases grounded in fear, emotion, and insecurity thereby reaching the political bottom line directly and without encumberment. The two party system developed from the constitutional rule of majority within the limitations of separation of powers. Divided government, which emanates from this conflict of control, benefits the political party for which the goal is to sustain the status quo. So, the Republican Party has the easier job and the easier access to the motivations of their own constituents and no need for flimsy objectively rational argument. There is little more intrinsically rational than immediate self-interest.
A liberal party for change cannot succeed with a first past the post voting system except in times of crisis, when a clear majority wants change however dubious and risky that prospect might be. Conservative goals are inherently met by our constitutional government’s framework. Change is difficult and not what our Founding Fathers ever intended. A status quo determined by the power of wealth was a natural outcome from our Revolutionary War, which really was not all that revolutionary. Most of Europe accomplished the same thing without any need for war. The republican form of government, when guided by property ownership rights above all other things, is just a very small adjustment to the concept of inherited aristocracy. The best republics, mostly small ones, lend some credibility the concepts of egalitarian rule of the people, but money still talks and most of the winners are born with such advantages that privilege is a birthright far more than something earned.]
P.S., First past the post voting creates a political atmosphere where ideological purity is perpetually reinforced. This is also easier for conservatives. Needing no evidence leaves no room for doubt either. The stark duality of a two party political competition pushes each side towards its own relative extreme wherein acting convinced is seen a strength among natural constituents. This is very difficult to reconcile within liberalism as the rational evaluation of evidence must leave space for probability and uncertainty. However, polarization is easier to achieve than realism.
If one considers the state of political affairs pathetic even with the best efforts of the conventional contemporary liberal elite then one might do well to imagine the state of political affairs without the conventional contemporary liberal elite. Well, it always works for me anyway :<)
‘Blindsided’ GOP senators put infrastructure deal in doubt MSN
Like I said, Biden laid a trap. He did a McConnell on McConnell the triple chin piece of garbage. The Republicans do not want bi-partisanship, they want to run the clock out so nothing is accomplished.
i don’t know that i agree with bill maher about everything, but he seems to agree with something i have been trying to say about free college for all”
meanwhile, i think the dems are shooting themselves in the foot: we need green development (aka anti global warming). we don’t so much need free day care. i know that sounds like i am a terrible person. actually it just means i can understand the need to prioritize, and the need not to shut off the patient’s oxygen in order to fluff his pillow. i do favor a much higher min wage so women who want to work can afford day care.
i think most women who WANT to work can afford day care. it’s the women who HAVE to work who can’t, in either case God help the children.
Based on my quick research about what Biden actually proposed, Maher was arguing against a straw man.
what did Biden propose?
to be honest, I wasn’t thinking about a Biden proposal, but just the Left’s enthusiasm for free college for all….something I would agree with if I thought colleges were going to deliver value for the country…or even for the students.
my own experience was that that was not necessarily so. not that you couldn’t get an education at a college, but that the colleges did very little to ensure that would be the outcome.
Abigail Disney talks about dynastic wealth and a whole lot more (Lewis Powell, Milton Friedman, Goldwater, the Republican party, ….)
thanks. i could go for all that still would like to see the college doing a better job than they did when i was an undergraduate. it’s possible they aredoing better now, but i still think Maher made some good points.
Day care is not really an infrastructure problem. Plenty of leaseable space out there, no shortage of key equipment and a still slack labor market. The problem – if you think it’s a problem – is pricing. Bite the bullet and just give parents bigger child tax credits. “Child under 5? Here is $7000. Use it any way that you think helps you and your family.”
I like to see creative solutions that avoid the “tax and spend” hammer. Nothing against tax and spend when needed and politically possible, but when not politically possible, and the problem still exists, people need to start looking for other ways.
I don’t know that your suggestion would work, or that any I might offer would work, but I’d like to see other people offering their thoughts and seeing what emerges.
Two thoughts from me: higher minimum wage….needs to be much higher in any case. neighborhood day care: small groups of women find neighbors willing and capable of doing good job with kids (“good job” very important) pay that person “living wage” out of their own living wage: someone watching five kids for 15 dollars per hour would cost each of five mothers about 2 dollars per hour. might be more cost effective and possibly better for the kids if larger “school” was staffed with more caretakers at about the ratio of one caretaker to five kids. again, paid for …and supervised by the mothers themselves.
one thing that welfare as we knew it got wrong was cutting people off welfare if there was a dad in the home. real incentive to destroy families… but part of that old “conservative” self-lie that people won’t work if you give them money for not working. need to ask them (conservatives) how many of them would quit their jobs to go on welfare. my guess is not many. might pay to look at their reason why not.
i personally think…maybe no one agrees with me any more… that kids need their moms (as well as dads), amd that most mothers would rather be home with their kids if they didn’t “have” to work, and that mothers who “want” to work, don’t want to care for their kids anyway, and usually have high enough incomes that they don’t need government support for day care. if I am right about this, there needs to be a much better solution than government day-prisons for kids so moms cancontribute to the reserve army of cheap labor.
typo (brain-o) in above was left in (too late to change). gives people a chance to fix it with their own best guess as to the cost per mom.
we had “kindergarten” in Chicago school when i was not quite five…because the teacher saw that my mother…who “had to” work was exhausted.
that teacher ran a class of about thirty kids. after the first shock to me of being “abandoned” it worked out pretty well. experiences with day care when my own kids were small were not so pleasant. so my (two income) family became a one income family with stay-at-home mom. worked much better even though there was less money.
but this all depends on the quality of teachers as well as moms and dads. my own opinion is that many people need help achieving the needed quality. it’s a great danger that “help” often turns into “stupid interference” but no one ever said life would be easy.
how are those kibbutzes working out?
my guess is “okay” if ant-farm is your idea of the good life.
There appear to be a handful of GOP senators who are behind the new ‘lite’ infrastructure bill. Maybe they will bring their friends. Maybe an equal number of progressive Dems won’t turn against it. C’mon, centrists! Make something happen!!
The ‘Free College’ movement usually seems to involve public/state universities only. Totally ignoring their private colleagues it seems. That’s just as well. There’s no particular reason why states, especially with federal help, can’t do much more to provide decent free-ish public higher education, if it is demanded of them.
yeah. i agree-is. “decent” though, is a problem. when i went, mostly free, to state schools, most of them were run like the DMV. (the DMV has gotten better. maybe the schools have, too. and to be honest, the private school I went to first, was worse than the state schools.)
and, as Bill Maher mentions above, “certification” is a real problem: that is “you gotta get certified” to do the job you have been doing for years. even in the first graduate school i went to, the departments were exchanging “required courses” to help each other out with enrollments. evil seems to always find a way.
“agree-is” above should have been “agree-ish” . going back to school won’t help me with that problem. [although while i was typing this, spell check insisted that i meant agree-is after all.]
could happen, i suppose. but centrists in the past have always played the role of seeing that things don’t happen. would certainly be nice if all the evil of the past four years (and before) surprisingly resulted in a new breed of independent thinkers. real thinkers, not jsut free-booters[spell check wanted free-boosters, but i think i have beat it into submission. on the other hand it was fine with jsut.]
Centrists do seem to hide, as if there were only a few. They are of course the many. Step forward, show yourselves and accomplish stuff.