The Sinatra Farewell

I know I said I was taking a break but, FAKE NEWS, and if it’s good enough for Sinatra to say goodbye more than once, it’s good enough for me. Charlottesville, Virginia has intervened and I feel obliged to write a few words. I have visited this small, university town, close to Thomas Jefferson’s ‘Monticello’ home. TJ founded the university. Now, TJ was a slave-holder but I doubt he would have defended Nazism.

The events of last week will remain shocking for many a year. Two things occur to me. I see no reason to tear down statues. The American Civil War is a fact of life and the statues do not honour so much the causes espoused by the likes of Robert E. Lee but their places in history. However, I see every reason to arrest those on the right who came armed to demonstrate, armed with assault rifles and the like. How can this be part of an allegedly peaceful demonstration? The right wing protesters had no intention of keeping the peace. And what, may I ask, caused the police to stand by and watch the mayhem that ensued?

The President, true to himself and his tradition, managed to say the wrong things and upset everyone. How can Nazism or the KKK play any respectable part in American life? In an effort to balance the situation, Trump equated the Nazis with left wing sympathisers. Go ask Bernie Sanders and his followers if they agree. Trump’s posturing was ill-reasoned and disgusting.

However, I say to those who would have Trump removed from office, show me the diminishing support in his political base after Charlottesville. There is no evidence of white, right wing voters walking away from him. Indeed, his followers continue to lap up what he says! Far more important, where are the 67 US Senate votes needed to convict on impeachment. By my count, the President is safe by more than 10 votes. Daily, I receive or am referred to a plethora of anti-Trump articles but no one can jump this final hurdle. The vipers’ nest that is Congress has no interest in an impeachment route, at least for now.

This is not to say Trump has no serious problems on the horizon. So far, Congress has been his main adversary. The Budget is not agreed, nor is a Continuing Resolution, thus the much vaunted tax cuts are not available. The infrastructure works are stuck in Congress, as are changes to healthcare law. There is no sign of a resolution of the North Korean crisis.

Soon the President will be caught in a pincer movement when the other government branch, the Supreme Court, makes its power felt. In the new term, cases relating to partisan gerrymandering, the Muslim ban executive orders, gay rights and religious liberties are scheduled to be heard, all of which will impact on the Presidency. If the decisions are adverse to Republican interests, I doubt Trump will be able to contain his bile, in which event he will open himself up to serious charges of abuse of the Judiciary.

Justice Bader Ginsburg says the gerrymandering case is perhaps the most important of the term. The question is whether there are constitutional limits to gerrymandering, the practice of drawing district lines to maximise one party’s chances of electoral success. Both parties indulge in what I suspect are illegal practices. With the mid-terms looming, the ruling will be crucial.

In the dispute over Donald Trump’s executive order halting the refugee program and freezing travel from several Muslim-majority nations, the plaintiffs allege the unprecedented ban on the entry of millions of foreign nationals has no basis in national security and is fuelled by unconstitutional prejudice toward Muslims. Several district courts and two appeals courts blocked the order. A Trump loss will be another severe blow to Presidential powers, especially as Trump has based his argument on national security and safety.

Over the past century, the Supremes have not shirked when it was time to be a thorn in the side of the Executive. It lashed Roosevelt’s New Deal program to bits, requiring the Executive to pass a Second New Deal into law. Eisenhower did not oppose black civil rights but he wanted to deflect them. He argued: “You can’t change people’s minds by legislation.” The Warren Court didn’t agree. The landmark 1954 ruling in Brown v Board of Education not only ended lawful segregation in public schools but was the harbinger of black civil rights change in many areas of American society. Recently, the Court split 4-4 on immigration issues, putting President Obama's deferred deportation plan on hold.

My point is that there are three power centres in Washington. The President has found he is not all powerful. Congress has already given him a bloody nose. I suspect the Supreme Court will deliver a right hook. But at the end of the day, if the mainstream media is right that people want to see the rear end of this bigoted, opinionated, misogynistic, racist, sexist, linguistically challenged man kicked out of the White House, it won’t happen unless a significant number of US Senators in his own Party believe there will be a massive loss in the 2018 mid-terms. This is politics at the coal face.

 

Have a good rest of the summer. I plan to be back in mid-September when politics will not only relate to Mr Trump.

 

Where Does the Democratic Party Stand?

Eleanor Roosevelt often said that every week you should do something that frightens you. 44 years ago, I was unaware of the quote. I would accompany my late mother-in-law when she shopped at Dayton’s Department Store in downtown Minneapolis. The car park was approached via a spiral ramp. Going up was bad enough but coming down at 25 mph scarred me for life. If only I could have asked Mrs. Roosevelt to sit in the front passenger seat in my place!

What has this to do with an exploration of the Democratic Party? Simply this. Minnesota Governor, Mark Dayton, is the scion of the Dayton family. He is the great-grandson of the founder of Dayton’s which is now better known as Target. I have no idea how many billions of dollars belong to the Governor but I’d guess he might make the Trump alleged billions look like chump change.

Dayton has had quite an up and down political career. In 1992, he ran unsuccessfully for the US Senate. Six years later he ran for Governor and lost. But Dayton has stickability, or what we Brits would call tenacity. From 1991-1995, he was Minnesota State Auditor. In 2001, he was elected as US State Senator but lost his seat in 2007. Four years later, he was elected Governor. It was a bit of a poisoned chalice. He inherited a $6.2 billion budget deficit and a 7% unemployment rate.

During his first four years in office, Dayton raised the state income tax from 7.85% to 9.85% on individuals earning over $150,000and on couples earning over $250,000 when filing jointly. The tax take was $2.1 billion. He approved the Minnesota’s minimum wage increase to $9.50 an hour by 2018 and a state law guaranteeing equal pay for women. Republicans warned against Dayton’s tax increases, saying, “The job creators, the big corporations, the small corporations, they will leave. It’s all dollars and cents to them.” Only a few left. The nay-sayers were wrong.

Between 2011 and 2015, 172,000 new jobs were added to Minnesota’s economy. Even though Minnesota’s top income tax rate is the fourth highest in the country, it has the fifth lowest unemployment rate in the country. By late 2013, Minnesota’s private sector job growth exceeded pre-recession levels and the state’s economy was the fifth fastest-growing in the United States. Despite the fearmongering over businesses fleeing from Dayton’s tax regime, 6,230 more Minnesotans filed in the top income tax bracket in 2013. As of January 2015, Minnesota has a $1 billion budget surplus, and Dayton has pledged to reinvest more than one third of that money into public schools. And according to Gallup, Minnesota’s economic confidence is higher than any other state.

The reason Dayton was able to radically transform Minnesota’s economy into one of the best in the nation is simple maths. Raising taxes on those who can afford to pay more turns a deficit into a surplus. Raising the minimum wage will increase the median income. And in a state where education is a budget priority and economic growth is one of the highest in the nation, it makes perfect sense that more businesses would stay. So, it’s official: trickle-down economics is bunk. Minnesota has proven it once and for all.

Despite his immense wealth, Dayton lives modestly. He is a recovering alcoholic and has been treated for mild depression. He revealed this information on his own initiative, saying he felt "people have the right to know." Whether Dayton will return to the national stage is an unknown. He is no orator and does not possess a JFK-like personality. However, his politics are evidence that sound, centrist Democratic policies work.

What of the larger picture? What is happening to the Democratic Party? Last weekend, the Democratic Socialists of America failed in obtaining a resolution to break away from the Democratic Party. Representative Tim Ryan, (D-Ohio) said the Party has become a toxic brand and a failed party. “Why should DSA tie themselves to a sinking ship?”

Are the Democrats truly in disarray? Public disagreements over abortion rights, the decision of West Virginia Governor Jim Justice to abandon the Democrats for the Republicans, while embracing Donald Trump into the bargain, the endorsement of a $15 per hour minimum wage and a $1trillion budget deficit proposal all make one question: will this brand of politics attract moderate Democratic and Republican voters?

What of its national leaders? Bernie Sanders seems to have evolved into a Jeremy Corbyn figure, or maybe vice-versa. Both stand for socialist principles and currently enjoy a standing in the respective parties and nations, higher than would be expected had there been strong, acceptable alternatives. Chuck Schumer in the US Senate and Nancy Pelosi in the House are old guard leaders, people whose sell-by date has passed but who retain a mirage of power. Their cause is helped because the Republican majority in Congress is in such disarray.

Is this the moment for the Democratic Party to seize the initiative and regain control of both Houses of Congress in the 2018 mid-terms? History seems to say “no.” A recent Quinnipac poll showed that only 40% of Democrats had heard of their party’s new platform, “The Better Deal”, which itself seems to change from week to week. Going back a decade, in 2006, Democrats unveiled their new agenda less than four months before the mid-term elections. In 1994 and 2010, Republicans did not release their platforms until just a few weeks before mid-terms. In all three elections the House majority changed hands, and in two of them the Senate changed majority.

Today’s Democrats have decided to move very early, unveiling portions of their “Better Deal” agenda last week. The pressure point seems to be crafting an agenda that balances the needs of energizing anti-Trump liberal activists without driving away centrist voters and Republicans disillusioned both with Trump and the lack of results coming from the Republican-led Congress. Would they not have been better advised to keep their powder dry on new policy while attacking Republican Congressional failures?

Without winning a significant bloc of Republican voters in next year’s Senate races, Democrats will likely fall deeper into the minority. It is no better in the House, where Democrats need a net gain of 24 seats for the majority and there are 23 districts held by Republicans that Trump lost in 2016. The Democratic path to a House majority requires big gains in several dozen districts that supported Trump.

Perhaps it is time for Democrats to trumpet successes like Governor Dayton in Minnesota and adopt some of his policies nationwide as they seek a new set of young, centrist leaders like the new US Senator for California, Kamala Harris to energise party members and voters alike.

 

I intended to post this blog last week but six days in hospital intervened. I’m fine but I have decided to take a leaf of out Congress’s book and take a holiday. Back next month.

 

Plan B, President Trump?

Plan B, President Trump?

So, we have a beleaguered, multi-millionaire President. He faces a missile threat from a rogue nation. At home, he has found that although his Party has a majority in Congress, he is unable to get any meaningful legislation through. His flagship Bill cannot get any mileage. In private, he rants about the difficulties of presidency. He ignores charges of nepotism as relatives are placed in positions of power and he spends time in a virtual palace. His sole advantage seems to be that he has a beautiful wife. I am writing, of course, about John F. Kennedy.

Substitute North Korea for Cuba, new healthcare laws for black civil rights, random mass shootings for protests on the streets of Birmingham, Alabama, choose Mar-a-Lago instead of Camelot and the Kushners for Bobby Kennedy. I think this proves my point. There is another parallel. Consider Trump as the Wizard of Oz. Pull the curtains aside on The Great and Terrible Donald and what do you find? Someone who thought he could run America as a personal fiefdom with all bending to his will, only to find that in the real world of D.C., things don’t work that way. Well, the Dorothy’s of Congress have shown they are not so small and weak. Trump has brought bullying instead of leading as the new presidential skill.

JFK bought into the domino theory to combat communism. Trump has created his own set of dominoes. He needs the removal of Obamacare to help pay for tax cuts, the Mexican Wall and the infrastructure program. No funds are available for the moment. Who does Trump blame? His tweets last weekend blamed “8 Democrats who won’t vote with us and defeat this stupid 60 votes rule.” In other words, he sees Senate process as the villain, not the proposed legislation which would have deprived health insurance for millions of Americans. He sees no virtue in the Senate filibuster. This means he gives no credit for minority opinion. It seems our Donald’s credo is “my way or the highway.” In comparison, FDR knew his New Deal legislation was unconstitutional because it transgressed separation of powers but he did listen to his Brains Trust and minority views.

Back to present day. Obamacare has flaws, three of which are major. First, a 2012 Supreme Court ruling has allowed the states to opt out of Medicaid expansion. This forced poor and working class people who did not qualify for Medicaid either to pay for private insurance which they could barely afford or pay a fine. Second, health insurers have withdrawn from Obamacare, mainly because too few Americans are signing up. As a result, the smaller market has resulted in insurance costs rising, with the knock-on effect of even less participation. Subsidies available to low and middle-income Americans for buying healthcare policies are inadequate and fines for not participating are not high enough to persuade those needing insurance to buy it. Third, health premiums are expected to rise by 25% this year, as was predicted in 2012, and subsidies will increase too but those who would be covered by Medicaid expansion are not entitled to these subsidies.

American healthcare costs account for approximately 18% of federal government spend. It is a big deal. Therefore it is all the more regrettable that 535 D.C. legislators cannot put their heads together to find solutions to the legislation flaws. None of those I have listed are cemented by ideology. They are practical, i.e. how best to spend money. There is no argument about Obamacare needing to work better. It is political ideology that gets in the way. For example, the Republicans do not want to fund Planned Parenthood out of federal funds. Why on earth is this a major stumbling block? Democrats and Republicans alike are pro-choice and pro-life. The ideological stance of those wanting change is repulsive for liberals but essential for conservatives. A way out can be found by defying the extremes of both parties.

Trump has not helped solve the differences, despite his self-vaunting as a deal maker. He campaigned on “repeal and replace” of Obamacare. It was one of the important pillars of his campaign but seven months into his presidency, the executive branch has produced no viable alternative. Is Trump one of those leaders who believes if you say it loud enough for long enough, it will become true? Where is the Plan B, the beautiful new law you often speak about, Mr President? I live in the UK where most of the time government business is limited to collecting and disbursing money to best effect. The Conservatives’ austerity policies have run their course but at least we don’t deny medical help to our citizens on grounds they don’t have insurance and can’t afford to pay.

There will now be a breathing space whilst Congress is in recess, giving time for the legislators to do what the Founding Fathers intended. Meetings of minds can be difficult but this is why the legislators are sent to Washington, namely to overcome problems and find solutions that are best for the most.

The President is beset with many problems, mainly of his own making. His first problem is “America First.” This is one of those statements that is bound to result in people getting hot under the collar, allies and foes alike. I know of no President whose policy was anything other than America first. It might be a good slogan for an election but any experienced statesman will tell you it is a hindrance in talks with other nations. Trump’s bravado withdrawal from the Paris Accords might have played well with Johnny-blue collar-never-been-west-of-the-Dakotas-I-hate-everyone-not-like-me but the damage Trump’s withdrawal will cause has been challenged by governors of several states, who say they will continue to abide by the Accords. The administration’s energy policies hark back to the dark ages. Where is the investment in renewable energies? Coal is not the answer. Clean coal is FAKE.

Congress opens for business again on 5^th September. The Budget Continuing Resolution keeps the government open for business until 30^th September. Will the parties in Congress agree a budget? It depends on Mr Trump. He will continue to demand funds for his precious wall, which I suspect will be laughed off. Tax cuts will be contentious because they are bound to favour the rich more than the middle class and working America. But these were campaign promises which Trump will not give up without a fight. Infrastructure improvements should find favour because renewal of roads, repair of bridges, construction of new public schools and other amenities not only provide jobs but have long term benefits.

Trump has so many other problems. The West Wing is in disarray, to put it mildly. He has recently replaced his Chief of Staff and Communications Director, twice, he has publicly castigated his Attorney General, and he is briefing against Robert Mueller, the special counsel in the Russian election influence scandal. In addition his son-in-law, Jared Kushner has put his son, Donald, in the frame for the Russian influence business. The new Chief of Staff might steady the ship but the West Wing sounds like a nest of vipers. All that is missing is evidence that Trump has covered up wrongdoing by his son and we are off to the Watergate races.

I foresee another stumbling block. Last weekend, the President threatened members of Congress about their heavily subsidised healthcare insurance. He tweeted: “if a new HealthCare Bill is not approved quickly, BAILOUTS for Insurance Companies and BAILOUTS for Members of Congress will end very soon!” Either Trump does not know or has forgotten what Congress did to FDR in 1937. After winning the Presidency for the second time with massive majorities in both Houses of Congress, FDR proposed the Court Packing Plan, to increase the size of the Supreme Court from 9 to 15 judges. The rationale was to help the existing judges with a heavy case workload. The truth was FDR wanted to punish the Supremes for wrecking his New Deal legislation. The proposal went to Congress for approval. After the vote, Vice-President John Garner went to see the President. “So?” FDR asked. “Do you want it with the bark on or off?” was the reply. Congress had delivered a huge black eye to the executive branch. The moral, “don’t interfere with other branches of Congress.” If Trump exercises his threat, look out for Congressional reprisals ten times over.

Ideology has been the root cause of American governmental problems for decades. Trump cannot control it. But he is a great example of why a politically inexperienced, braggart businessman should not be the chief executive and commander-in-chief. The current crop of Republicans remind me of the 1930s and President Hoover’s exhortation to the poor, defeated, unemployed Americans to practice “rugged individualism” when government help was desperately needed. On the other hand, the left of the Democratic Party vocalises the importance of benefits, entitlements and ‘soak the rich’ while forgetting that the rich pay for a huge share of welfare and other government programs. Quite how this cycle can be broken is hard to see.

Wouldn’t it be great if large numbers of moderates stood for election in the 2018 mid-term, not only for the federal government but also the states? Sadly there is no evidence that this will happen. Interest groups like the NRA will find sufficient funds to put up their own small-minded candidates to ensure no watering down of gun laws. The left are no different.

What is needed is a robust Supreme Court to rule that money is not “speech”, that ‘soft money’ is unlawful and that the interpretation of the First Amendment by previous Courts is wrong. After this, the administration should embark on the process of re-writing the First Amendment so that freedoms have a sufficient element of equality to prevent individuals and corporation skewing elections. While reforms are being made, tackle the Second Amendment to bring sense to the right to bear arms. I suspect if I went to America to voice these views, I would be regarded as an enemy of the people!