While reading this excellent long-form profile of Justin Amash’s recent quitting streak and where he goes next, I came across this whopper from a GOP consultant in his state (emphasis mine):
For a time, said Sellek, Amash fit that desire for a congressman who got stuff done—he was quite good at spending time in his district and meeting with his constituents—but as he began growing vocally anti-Trump, “that kind of unique principled stance of voting no on nearly everything has worn thin with voters over there. He was already facing growing opposition from inside just the community of Republicans and business in West Michigan who were looking for a representative in Congress that was trying to get end results that benefited the community, instead of using their representation purely as a philosophical standing point.”
This is why we can’t have nice things.
Amash has always been “vocally anti-Trump”, but we can assume Sellek means this year when Amash left the House Freedom Caucus, came out for impeachment, and left the GOP. So has Amash voted “no on nearly everything” (read: against Trump and “the community of Republicans and business in West Michigan”)? Not just no, but fuck no.
One of the many ideas around which Democratic presidential candidates are rapidly coalescing is the elimination of the Electoral College, our system for electing the president. They have several arguments in support of their proposal, but the primary one is that because of the “red” and “blue” nature of most states, candidates only campaign in a handful of swing states and ignore the rest of the country.
The job of the House of Representatives and Senate is to pass legislation and send it to the President for approval. It is not the job of legislators to only pass legislation that the President says he will sign. The Constitution specifically allows Congress to make laws that the President doesn’t sign by overriding his veto with a supermajority in both houses.
The recent Shut-Show, the longest partial shutdown of the federal government, proves that many US senators are no longer legislating. They are so beholden to the whims of the chief executive that they will only vote for bills that he vows to sign. This is exactly the opposite of what the Founders intended.
On December 20th, the Senate passed a continuing budget resolution to fund the government through February. They passed it by voice vote, without taking a roll call, so in effect it was a unanimous approval. Not one senator opposed the measure enough to send it to a recorded vote.
Immediately after the Senate did their job, President Trump demanded wall funding be added to the measure, so the House Republicans obliged and voted for government and wall funding 217-185, with only two weeks left in their term before the new class of Democrats were sworn in January 2nd. Although Republicans still controlled the Senate, they didn’t have the 60 votes it would take to pass a new resolution with wall funding. So the government shut down.
Since the President vowed to veto any bill without wall funding, it took the Senate until January 24th to even bring a bill to the floor. The clean bill with no wall failed with only 52 of the 60 votes needed, with these senators voting against:
Less than 24 hours later (just 6 hours after one of his closest advisers was arrested by the FBI 🤔), Trump caved and agreed to sign a bill with no wall. The Senate then immediately passed with another unanimous voice vote the same measure they had rejected the day before.
The only thing that had changed was the President’s mind. But that’s all it took for 44 US senators to table their objection and allow the bill to pass.
These people are not acting as legislators in the spirit of a federal republic under the Constitution. They’re puppets of the executive, stooges of their party, and should be ashamed of their behavior that left a million federal employees and contractors working without pay for more than a month.
Republican leadership in Congress is now moving to censure King in an as yet unspecified way. This is an entirely political decision, not a moral one. For how can it be legitimate outrage when King backs up his racist rhetoric with fairly standard Republican positions?
King’s racism by definition informs his views on issues that affect different races of people in different ways, primarily immigration and civil rights. But those same views are standard conservative fare.
On immigration, Steve King wants to build a border wall, reduce legal immigration, mandate E-verify, and end birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants. King’s own bill to restrict birthright citizenship to legal immigrants was cosponsored by 48 other House Republicans (all of them white men).
If King wants to reduce immigration because he doesn’t want Americans replaced by “somebody else’s babies” and Joe Wilson (R-SC) wants to do it because of jobs or the Rule of Law™ or something, the effect is the same – fewer immigrants and new citizens of mostly racial minorities.
On civil rights, Steve King supports mandatory voter ID, voter registration purges, and reduced early and absentee voting. Whether intentionally or not, these policies disproportionately disenfranchise minority voters, and the “problem” they purport to solve are effectively nonexistent.
As a committed white supremacist, Steve King necessarily supports these policies because they reduce the electoral power of people of color. Are the many Republican states who have actually enacted them any better because they’ve convinced themselves that they are protecting “the integrity of our elections”, which isn’t under threat in the first place?
On these issues and more, conservative ideology has been developed gradually over the last 60+ years on a steady diet of “welfare queens” and “anchor babies” and “family values” and “inner city” problems and “tough on crime” solutions. When an otherwise mainstream Republican who hews to this standard conservative rhetoric takes it one step further and talks explicitly about white nationalism, everyone reaches for their pearls, but no one reflects inward.
Condemning, censuring, and removing Steve King is good, yes! Condemning, censuring, and removing President Trump, who agrees with Steve King on everything for exactly the same reasons, would be better. Fundamentally reconsidering policies endorsed by white supremacists because of their white supremacist effects would be best. I’m not holding my breath.
Add some live instruments and a feature or two, and the Scottish Cover Faeries come up with their best album yet.
Panic! At the Disco – Pray for the Wicked
The slow evolution from alt-goth twinks to power pop kings is complete. Urie even sounds like Robin Thicke on one song.
Dead Sara – Temporary Things Taking Up Space
Yes, it’s just an EP, but it’s also the most confident songwriting and powerful delivery the garage heroes from LA have released yet. Every song here is better than all the Grammy nominees this year in the rock categories.
As President Trump and other Republicans have been trolling her to do for years now, Senator Elizabeth Warren released the results of a DNA test showing her American Indian ancestry. The data, while satisfying for Warren and her fans, was predictably mocked and maligned by the same Republicans who’ve been literally betting her to do it.
The test showed that Warren, whose family is originally from Oklahoma, does in fact have American Indian ancestry, though it dates back between 6 and 10 generations in the past. The Stanford professor who studied the data estimate that Warren is between 1/32 (8%) and 1/1024 (0.09%) American Indian.
I’ve done DNA tests from both 23 & Me and Ancestry, because I was curious about my genetic makeup as well. The results were wildly divergent, especially with Ancestry’s recent updates to their data pool. But the amount of African and Jewish genetic material was surprising.
23 & Me
Ancestry DNA pre-update
Ancestry DNA post-update
23 & Me suggests I am 0.3% Jewish and 0.2% African, Ancestry DNA’s older model suggests a full 3% Jewish and less than 1% African, while Ancestry’s updated model has removed the Jewish and African components altogether. The possibility that I’m more than twice as black (0.2%) as Elizabeth Warren is American Indian (0.09%, the lower estimate) is fascinating, on many levels.
Republicans often get labeled “anti-science” for their skepticism on climate change. It certainly doesn’t help their cause that some of them resort to absurd conspiracy-mongering on the issue. The issue of scientific apostasy is indeed bipartisan; Democrats also oppose scientific consensus on a whole host of issues.
But on climate change, “scientists” keeps proving Republicans’ point. The IPCC today announced that without massive societal change across the globe, climate catastrophes will be overwhelming within just a few years.
As one meteorologist put it:
If you are wondering what you can do about climate change:
The world’s top scientists just gave rigorous backing to systematically dismantle capitalism as a key requirement to maintaining civilization and a habitable planet.