On today’s BradCast, I’m with you one more time, then Brad and Desi are back! I’m visiting from In Deep with Angie Coiro, sharing the airwaves and streams with the BradCast.
A troop of Dems led by Nancy Pelosi made a promising presentation on HR-1. Right now the sweeping proposal to reform elections, campaign funding and oversight is nothing but a proposal. Republicans will certainly work against many of its provisions, including its voting rights measures efforts to stem the flow of politicians to lobbying corps. Even so, some of the rhetoric today from the likes of Elijah Cummings and John Lewis was genuinely moving and full of real passion. I’ve brought you long chunks of it.
Likewise, Sen. Chuck Schumer spoke frankly and with few punches pulled addressing the shutdown, which is cruising into Day 15.
I spend a lot of well-deserved time today on this essay by Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. Now that Trump is throwing around not-so-veiled threats about declaring a national emergency and his willingness to keep the shutdown in effect for “years”, it’s good to know exactly what he can get away with. Hint: a lot.
To wrap up the week: Part Two of my conversation with health care futurist JOE FLOWER. You’re welcome!
Download MP3 or listen online below…
[audio:http://bradblog.com/audio/ BradCast_AngieCoiro_JoeFlower_010419.mp3]
Snoring While Woke
The Reichstag Fire was touted as a national emergency as well. In declaring that incident as an emergency, it led to complete control being handed over the The Chancellor of Germany to rule by diktat – something it’s quite clear that Trump desires. The feckless Congress will likely do nothing to stop this from happening here.
Before we get too excited about Pelosi and company, let’s look at the first bill voted by the House. It was an exact copy of what Republicans in the Senate passed before Christmas. I know all you political junkies are saying/thinking this is just like Bill Clinton who was able to take Conservative ideas and call them his own, and the Republicans were freaked out because they wanted to be against anything Clinton did. If they did rail against them, they would look like hypocrites. The only problem was that Clinton’s political jujitsu also moved the political discussions to the right nationally. We enacted many (previously thought) right wing policies under a “liberal” administration. In the name of compromise Progressive thinking liberals were shunned and ignored throughout the 90s and 2000s because of that.
If you don’t like the Clinton analogy, how about the Obama comparison of giving the bargaining away to the Republicans by compromising before they’ve given up anything. By using the Republican bill, you have already compromised.
Pelosi needs to be very careful because almost half of her delegation are members of the progressive caucus. She can’t do many of these kinds of political maneuvers without alienating (creating a rebellion in) her ranks.
So far Pelosi has talked decent progressive game, but she doesn’t have a very good track record of following the progressive line. Her caucus and the voters need to hold her feet to the progressive fire, so she doesn’t compromise away the farm, and end up alienating the voters who thought they were going to get a Congress that would enact what the majority wanted, not what the minority wants.
If she’s playing 3-d Chess then if her bill is rejected, she should come back with the most liberal bill her caucus can come up with and then tell the Republicans they had their chance with an easy negotiation. The Republicans in the administration and Senate are going to need to compromise many of their important priorities. Make the compromises on both sides of the spectrum, so that the majority feels they voted for the correct group of Democrats.
We shall find out if she is a neoliberal or a 3-d chess playing progressive.
Spot on Neo @ #2 … well said.
Alex @ #2 wrote:
You might want to read the link @ #1 which points out why it was brilliant for the House to do what you complained about.
If McConnell does not present it to the president after the Senate previously passing it ~unanimously, it will show his subversive, Putin oriented psyche.
He is subverting the Constitution which is the supreme law of our country.
correction to comment @5: passed it rather that “passing it”