Showing posts with label Amy Klobuchar. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Amy Klobuchar. Show all posts

February 25, 2024

In Case You Missed It (v122)

Time to settle into a comfy chair and catch up on last week's posts, in case you missed anything.

I listened to three Democrats for your Sunday School this week: South Carolina Rep. Jim Clyburn, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, and Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro. 

They all put in good words for President Biden, tried to dispel fears about his age, and reminded us why we need him to be re-elected in November.  Here's a bit of Shapiro, referencing Ezra Klein's NYT comments.

Shapiro agrees with Klein that "the stakes could not be higher," but said Biden'll be the guy, and he'll have Shapiro's support.

...we’ve got to go out and make that case. The president, the vice president and those of us who are privileged who support him and have a front-row seat to this, we've got to go out and do this important work now.  

He said we all are "going to have to stand up and be counted" on whether America will continue "to be a voice of freedom and democracy..." and he's confident voters,

 ...just as they did in 2020, they will rise up; they will demand more; they will seek justice; and they will look to defend freedom in this nation, and they will reject Donald Trump.

Switching gears for your Extra Credit, I focused solely on Jake Tapper's chat with former Rep. Liz Cheney who, of course, is persona non grata with the MAGA crowd. She was not impressed with recent comments from Snitty Snitty Bill Barr, who recently said he'd vote for Trump over Biden even though, he also said,

Voting for Trump is playing Russian roulette with the country. Voting for Biden is outright national suicide.

She said he's "absolutely wrong," and even though she hasn't endorsed anyone, she "certainly would never support Donald Trump." Why?

...we know what Donald Trump will do because he's telling us every day. And anybody who has spent any time overseas, who has spent any time studying the history of autocracies and of autocrats knows we have to listen to what Donald Trump's saying. So electing Donald Trump's not Russian roulette. Electing Donald Trump would mean putting in power a man who's committed to unraveling our constitutional framework. So Bill Barr is just wrong on that.

I was Wondering on Wednesday about Choco Tacos, and about a proposed 'trucker boycott' of NYC, among other things,. The boycott was proposed by a trucker named Chicago Ray who tweeted about the boycott as a response to the penalties in the NY financial fraud case.

I'm just one of the many millions of Truckers who believe in God and love this Country. I stand with Trump bc Trump stands with me. Truckers for Trump ain't just a slogan, it's real.
Trump was delighted, as you might imagine, to "have so many Great Patriots" on his side, and so on. But then, Chicago Ray deleted his original tweet, put up another one in which he stressed he was not encouraging anyone to do anything - and then deleted that one, too. And I can't help wondering, is he still a Great Patriot, or not?

I took a more serious turn on Thursday, where I highlighted one more Sunday School interview in a Quick Take. I was not familiar with Charlemagne tha God until I watched his taped conversation with Jon Karl. Here's how things kicked off.

Karl started with a quote from his guest, who said the 2024 campaign is "a race between the cowards, the crooks, and the couch." Here's how he defines those three Cs.

...the crooks are the Republicans. The cowards are the Democrats, because they don't fight hard enough on anything. And, you know, the couch is voter apathy. And, you know, that's -- that's who everybody is up against in 2024. 

He doesn't know if anyone benefits from the couch winning, but that's what it feels like will happen; even his audience isn't energetic. He said "nobody wants to see the rematch" between Biden and Trump, and that's why he feels the couch will win.

Charlamagne's very quotable, and he had a few in the interview that I think really hit the mark, even though a lot of Dems might be mad at him for saying the quiet part out loud. 

Friday was a two-fer: first, an OrangeVerse entry in which I turn former president Donald Trump's words into verse, and there was my usual Friday feature, TGIF, where I attempt to identify folks I think had a good week or a bad one. 

There were political references, of course, including Rep. Dean Phillips, who's running for president on the Dem line, who had a good week.  There also was a culture reference, one that didn't mention Taylor Swift. 

Beyonce has her first #1 single on the Billboard Country chart, the first Black woman with that achievement in the history of the chart. And some folks don't seem happy about it.
Sure, if a Black woman either native to country music or coming up through the country music ranks would have achieved a similar goal, it would speak to the opening up of the genre to women of color. But that’s not what’s happened here at all. Instead, Beyonce is leveraging her global superstar status earned in the pop and R&B/hip-hop world, the enthusiasm of her Stan army the Beyhive, and the coercion of country music’s institutions to ensconce herself atop the genre.

On the other hand, people are line dancing all over the place to the song - including the Savannah Bananas - does that mean this whole thing is a wash?

See a snippet you like? Click the link and check out the full post - and be sure to stop back this week for more of the pastiche.

February 23, 2024

TGIF 2/23/24

Let's get right to the good week / bad week lists, shall we?

Rep. Dean Phillips (D-MN), a 55-year-old guy running for president as a Democrat, thinks Sen. Amy Klobuchar (also D-MN) shouldn't be running for re-election in November. It's not because of her age (63), it's that this is her 18th year as a senator, and if she wins re-election, she'll serve at least 24 years.

Turn it over to other Americans who wish to serve the public. We're precluding other generations of Americans from participating, and what do they do? They kind of give up. And that's what's happening all around our country right now.
He's not wrong - I mean, if folks never leave, what chance do we have for new people, new outlooks, and new ideas to come forward?  I'm all for term limits, I really am. And if Phillips wants to make a point, he'd call out these House colleagues who have declared for re-election: James Clyburn, 83, first elected in 1992; Nancy Pelosi, 83, first elected in 1987; Steny Hoyer, 84, first elected in 1981; Eleanor Holmes Norton, 86, first elected in 1991; Bill Pascrell, 87, first elected in 1996; Hal Rogers, 85, first elected 1981; and Maxine Waters, 85, first elected in 1990. 

I'm giving voters in Wisconsin a shout-out: the Republicans in the state opted not to fight the latest redistricting maps, not out of the goodness of their heart, but because they were afraid if they took the maps to court, they'd end up looking even more fair for voters than they did in the redrawing. And now, a bipartisan ethics group has referred former president Trump's Save America PAC and a host of Republicans for prosecution for their role in trying to skirt campaign finance laws in the 2020 election.
 
There's a measles outbreak in Florida, which is really sad, especially since there's a highly effective vaccine that's been available since 1968; it's so effective the disease was declared eliminated from the US in 2000.  The outbreak is only a few cases now, but time will tell how long that'll be the case, thanks to the state's Surgeon General, Joseph Ladapo. Per the Miami Herald, Ladapo sent a letter to parents acknowledging the common practice -- keeping unvaccinated kids home from school - but  

Ladapo, then, however, wrote that, “due to the high immunity rate in the community,” the Department of Health “is deferring to parents or guardians to make decisions about school attendance.”

It's too hard, I guess, to follow the science.

Remember the My Pillow Guy, and his "Prove Mike Wrong" contest, offering to pay $5M to anyone who could prove he didn't find evidence of election fraud? Yeah, a guy named Robert Zeidman proved it and asked for the $5M. Feet were dragged, arbitration ensued, and a judge ordered the payment, plus interest from last April be paid within 30 days. 

Beyonce has her first #1 single on the Billboard Country chart, the first Black woman with that achievement in the history of the chart. And some folks don't seem happy about it.
Sure, if a Black woman either native to country music or coming up through the country music ranks would have achieved a similar goal, it would speak to the opening up of the genre to women of color. But that’s not what’s happened here at all. Instead, Beyonce is leveraging her global superstar status earned in the pop and R&B/hip-hop world, the enthusiasm of her Stan army the Beyhive, and the coercion of country music’s institutions to ensconce herself atop the genre.

On the other hand, people are line dancing all over the place to the song - including the Savannah Bananas - does that mean this whole thing is a wash?

Who made your lists this week?


February 19, 2024

Sunday School 2/18/24

I visited three classrooms Sunday to hear what the Democrats were saying, starting with the This Week classroom, where Jon Karl talked with Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro. 

Karl asked, "What worries you about... a Biden-Trump rematch?" In part, the gov said

this election really is about all of us and whether or not we’re going to rise up and use our voices and ultimately our vote to protect our fundamental freedoms, to scream out for the kind of country that we want, to protect this 247-year experience that began right here... 

Regarding the tight polls in PA, Shapiro correctly noted that the campaign hasn't really started yet, and polls have frequently been wrong in his state. Echoing Jon Stewart, he added

And I would say to folks who are worried about the numbers, stop worrying and start working. 

He gave several examples of how Pennsylvanians "voted for freedom and against extremism," over the past few years, and promised that he'd "do everything in my political power" to make the case against Trump and for Biden.  

Karl mentioned Ezra Klein commenting in the NY Times that Biden should bow out of the race and let the delegates choose the nominee. 

I think Biden, as painful as this is, should find a way (of) stepping down as a hero, that the party should help him find his way to do that, to being the thing he said he would be in 2020, a bridge to the next generation of Democrats... Retirement can be, often is, a trauma. But losing to Donald Trump would be far worse."

Shapiro agrees with Klein that "the stakes could not be higher," but said Biden'll be the guy, and he'll have Shapiro's support.

...we’ve got to go out and make that case. The president, the vice president and those of us who are privileged who support him and have a front-row seat to this, we've got to go out and do this important work now.  

He said we all are "going to have to stand up and be counted" on whether America will continue "to be a voice of freedom and democracy..." and he's confident voters,

 ...just as they did in 2020, they will rise up; they will demand more; they will seek justice; and they will look to defend freedom in this nation, and they will reject Donald Trump.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) was in the Meet the Press classroom with Kristen Welker, who asked if the Senate Intelligence Committee was going to call Robert Hur to testify. Klobuchar suggested in the upper chamber, they have "many other things" they need to do, legislating tech and dealing with fentanyl among them. 

She also said it would be "up to the president and his lawyers," to address Hur's comments about Biden, but said she's been with him, talking about both domestic and international issues, and she said "he was focused. His recall was good." Her colleagues have said had similar experiences, she said.

...I think that we've got to evaluate what's happening right now by, one, what he has done... and focus on what matters to the American people and compare what he is doing to what we've got as the alternative on the Republican side, which is Donald Trump who is nothing but standing up week by week for chaos.

Welker mentioned growing chatter from Dems about Biden's ability to win a second term, and like Karl, she picked something from Klein's column.

He is not up for this. He is not the campaigner he was even five years ago. The way he moves, the energy in his voice. The Democrats denying decline are only fooling themselves.

Klobuchar disagreed; she listed several Dem wins, none of which really rebutted Klein's point. And, she added,

Time and time again the American people have stood with the policies and the work of Joe Biden because they do not want to go back to the chaos and madness of Donald Trump.

Welker said that "the vast majority of Americans say they are not feeling it" on Biden's handling of the economy, and asked whether it was time for Biden to hang it up. 

Again, I'm a believer in President Biden because I believe he is a good moral person that has the backs of the people of this country... I am proud to be supporting Joe Biden for president.

Welker pushed back about voters not feeling it, and after listing more policy wins, Klobuchar said

He is not running, as the president has said, against the almighty. He is running against Donald Trump. And time and time again, the voters have made clear where they stand on Donald Trump.

Given the choice, moderates and independent voters will go for "someone who believes in democracy" and fights against the Putins of the world, 

as opposed to Donald Trump, who literally a week ago said that Vladimir Putin should be able to do whatever the hell he wants... 

My last stop? The Face the Nation classroom where Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC) spoke with Robert Costa. Noting the Congressman was "optimistic" about Biden's re-election campaign, Costa asked, "What keeps you up at night, politically? "

Clyburn said "the misinformation efforts that are underway throughout this campaign" keep him "wide awake."

I've heard so much from people sharing with me things that just aren't true. So much from people who seem to feel that everything they see or hear via the internet has some substance to them. And so that's the thing that keeps me up, whether or not we're going to have a campaign for the presidency free of all of these interruptions and all of the misinformation.

When prompted, he mentioned the AI robocalls in New Hampshire and said similar shenanigans are happening in his state; for example, Dems are being invited to participate in the GOP primary, and folks "saying things over the air that just aren't true." 

Costa switched gears, asking if the administration's support of Israel's war with Hamas could dampen turnout "among young voters and others," Clyburn expressed concern about Israel/Hamas, and Russia/Ukraine, too. People are looking for someone

who can lead us through this stuff. And nobody is better equipped to do that than Joe Biden. He – has the experience. He has the wisdom. He has the demeanor. He has the relationships. He has what it takes to get this country to where it needs to be and to maintain the relationships we need to have with our allies around the world. That you're not going to find on the other side of the aisle.

He's shared his personal thoughts about Netanyahu with Biden, he said, and interestingly, I thought, Clyburn added that while Biden doesn't share all his thoughts publicly

...I know this, he feels about the way I feel when it comes to Netanyahu... his leadership has not been good for Israel. We stand firmly with the people of Israel. But I've always had a real problem with Netanyahu, and that continues to be today.

Costa, the former newspaper guy, did something remarkable - he asked a follow-up question! Two of them!

Costa: You say you have a problem with Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, and you say you've spoken to the president privately about this. Does he have a problem with Netanyahu?

Clyburn: I've shared with the president what my feelings are about Netanyahu. He is going to develop his own feelings about that. He hasn't told me exactly what –

Costa: But does he agree or disagree with your assessment, Congressman?

Clyburn: Well, he's accepted my assessment. I have not asked him whether or not he agreed with me. In fact, I just let him know, 'This is the way I feel. I'm not running the country. You do what you feel is in the best interest of the country.'

Last two questions. First, in 2020, Biden pledged to nominate a Black woman to the Supreme Court; he got Clyburn's endorsement in return. Is there a pledge this time around, too?

He should continue to manage the country the way he's managing it... I would say to him, keep doing what you're doing.

And finally, 83-year-old Clyburn is running for re-election in November. Costa wondered how 81-year-old Biden should handle the age question as the campaign progresses. The answer? talk about his experience and wisdom, and maintain connections with people.

Clyburn's going to be visiting New York, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia, he said, 

carrying the president's message of experience, of a steady hand, of maintaining our trek toward a more perfect union, doing the things that are necessary to maintain our relationships around the world and move this country forward on behalf of all.

He closed by telling Costa he's "fond of saying, this is a great country, in no need of being made great. We've just got to figure out ways to make this country's greatness accessible and affordable for all of our citizens. And Joe Biden is doing that. And we have got to stay focused on that."

Out of the mouths of octogenarians, or something.  

See you around campus. 

August 21, 2022

In Case You Missed It (v103)

I'll be honest, gang - I wasn't much into writing last week. 

Was it the barrage of news from Trumpworld? The never-ending proclamations of obsequious devotion to Trump from frightened pols on the right? The attempts at a graceful retreat from supporting him by the pundits who have shamelessly promoted him for the past seven years? Was it the weather? I don't know... 

Here's your recap of the two posts I squeezed out of my head.

For your Sunday School, I offered up dueling senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Mike Rounds (R-SD), who were in the MTP classroom with Andrea Mitchell. We'll start with Klobuchar, who described the process for viewing documents labeled SCI, which stands for sensitive compartmented information.

...special room, no staff, no phone, not even a Fitbit, both because of the information in them, and because we don't want them to fall into enemy hands, in any way. And, she noted, that's why they shouldn't be removed from secure spots.

And Mar-a-Lago, where you can check out croquet sets and tennis rackets and golf clubs, that's not one of them.

Later in the interview, she talked about the former president's supporters, including elected officials.

...This is the kind of thing that result(s) when you've got a president that attacks law enforcement and attacks the law. I thought in the old days the Republican Party used to stand with law enforcement. And I hope some of them do today because this kind of rhetoric is very dangerous to our country... These are career men and women that are simply doing their job... this is beyond politics. 

Rounds, for his part, did what the good RINOs do: he questioned the move to search the former president's home, and doubted AG Merrick Garland's statement that they exhausted all other options. 

... you know, this is a very historic attempt and a challenge really in, with regard to looking at a former president, and whether or not they want to bring any kind of charges against him. This is a change, and this is something that will go down in history, and it will be studied for years to come. 

I hope Rounds understands that not only will the search of Mar-a-Lago be studied for years to come, but so will the fealty of politicians like him, the elected officials that sold their souls (and assorted other body parts) to a man singularly undeserving of their devotion. 

Another official RINO attack? (And yes, here at veritable pastiche, the RINOs are the Trumpers), there was the whole gamut of 'concern,' and of 'trust' that they themselves have been shattering in defense of the Orange Menace. For example,

...there's concern out there. And believe me, Republicans out there are questioning, "Why in the world are you going after a former president right now, but you didn't go after other individuals who clearly had classified documents or information that was sensitive and you did not do that in the previous administration?"

Here's the thing about that part: folks on the Right (and others, to be sure) screamed from the rooftops that Hillary Clinton got a pass from the FBI and the DOJ. But the FBI is led by a Trump appointee, and there's a new AG, and they're doing exactly what everyone said should have been done last time out. But now, of course, it's somehow wrong to do the right thing? 

Yeah, we'll be studying this stuff for years...

My other post was what a post-search Trump fundraising letter would have looked like. The letter, Let's Fight This - TOGETHER!  led us down the twisted, tangled mess of excuses we've heard from the horse's mouth. And, of course, he attacked everyone close to him. Well, almost everyone close to him...

Those worthless sons of mine were probably out golfing or something, or maybe Donny Jr was home waiting for what's her name, the "The Best is Yet To Come!" girl I paid $60,000 to for introducing Don Jr. to the crowd at the Ellipse on January 6th - what a waste of money she is! And how on earth was she married to that incompetent commie nutjob in California, Gavin Newsom? And now she's my son's fiancé? What did I do to deserve this?

And my beloved Ivanka was home with those Beautiful grandchildren of mine, aren't they Beautiful? They are the most beautiful grandchildren a man could have, right? Just Beautiful, through and through.

And toilets. Don't forget the toilets. 

And then, when they reached out to me last year, I had no idea there was anything being stored at my beloved Mar-a-Lago that I wasn't supposed to have. I thought I had taken care of most of the stuff anyone would worry about; that was ripped up and disposed of at the White House. 

And what about that Crooked Hillary flunky, Maggie Haberman, the third-rate NY Times reporter - half the kid her parents were, for sure, sharing those pictures... who takes pictures of other peoples' toilets?

And remember when I complained about having to flush and flush and flush? Yeah, well now you understand right? Damn 'green' toilets. You gotta flush and flush and flush them, it's a mess. Horrible.

There was more, of course - lots more - in the fake mother of all fundraising letters. The sad part is, the real letters will include much of what I had in the fake one - maybe not the part about the kids and the toilets. The worst part? The real letters will be damned effective - he'll take in a few nother million bucks from the faithful, for sure, like all good cult leaders do.

So - you're all caught up with last week; we'll see what this week brings. 

August 14, 2022

Sunday School 8/14/22

I'm picking and choosing my guests today, starting with Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) who talked with Andrea Mitchell in the Meet the Press classroom. Here's a recap of their conversations related to the FBI's Mar-a-Lago search.

Klobuchar said her first reaction to what occurred is "to stand with the men and women of the FBI who are simply doing their jobs," and cautioned even though we know many of the documents recovered were marked some level of classified, we don't know what's in them. She also described the process for senators to view this type of document: special room, no staff, no phone, not even a Fitbit, both because of the information in them, and because we don't want them to fall into enemy hands, in any way. And, she noted, that why they shouldn't be removed from secure spots

And Mar-a-Lago, where you can check out croquet sets and tennis rackets and golf clubs, that's not one of them.

Mitchell asked if maybe there was a different way to get the documents, and Klobuchar reminded her what AG Merrick Garland ("someone of just utmost credibility and integrity") that negotiating hadn't worked. 

But what really happened here was a judge looked at this and said, "Yeah, there's evidence, enough evidence to warrant a search warrant to go in there and retrieve those documents that are of high national security classification." These are the nation's secrets.

She wouldn't play the "should Trump be indicted?" game, other than to say that, in America, "the law is king. The president isn't king. And I would add to that, the former president isn't king. Everyone has to follow the laws." 

And finally, she didn't mince words on the rhetoric from Trump supporters, including elected officials.

...This is the kind of thing that result(s) when you've got a president that attacks law enforcement and attacks the law. I thought in the old days the Republican Party used to stand with law enforcement. And I hope some of them do today because this kind of rhetoric is very dangerous to our country... These are career men and women that are simply doing their job... this is beyond politics. 

Switching to Rounds who, according to Mitchell, "earlier this week" said the search "must be justified" and that he "had serious questions about the integrity of the Justice Department," she wondered if his questions have been answered, given what was found and why they went in. 

Uh, that's a no. He says there's more information to be released; certainly, releasing the affidavit used to get the signed search warrant would help.

At least that would confirm that there was justification for this raid. But remember, this is also a case of where we're going to have more questions as they continue to develop, as they look through the information, the material that they've garnered at Mar-a-Lago. Perhaps they will share some of what their concern was...

He seems to think the AG is not believable when he said they exhausted all other options, saying

... you know, this is a very historic attempt and a challenge really in, with regard to looking at a former president, and whether or not they want to bring any kind of charges against him. This is a change, and this is something that will go down in history, and it will be studied for years to come. 

After sharing pointed, partisan comments from three fellow GOP senators (Graham, Paul, and Tim Scott), Mitchell wondered if what was found justified the search, after "months and months" of trying to get cooperation. Again, Rounds said DOJ needs to prove they did everything they could - but also, he noted, there's "one constitutional issue that has not been talked about" - whether a "president can declassify or classify certain items."

And I think constitutionally back, I believe it was in 1988, there was a Supreme Court decision, U.S. Navy v. Egan, in which they actually talked about whether or not a president could classify and declassify. And it's never really been litigated. But it appears that a president can classify or perhaps declassify information. And if that's the case, then the question would be, and I think it will be litigated as this moves forward, whether or not that was completed while the president was in the White House at that time.

And, of course,  

...there's concern out there. And believe me, Republicans out there are questioning, "Why in the world are you going after a former president right now, but you didn't go after other individuals who clearly had classified documents or information that was sensitive and you did not do that in the previous administrations?"

Again, he raised the trust issue, saying if they (DOJ/Garland) can come forward and put all their cards on the table (even though this is an ongoing investigation), they should, and fast.

...they should do that as quickly as they can, and they should share that with the American people because this is a time in which -- with regard to the institutions in this country -- we want the American people to have faith in their institutions. We want them to see that they're not, that they're not political, and that they're not being politicized, particularly during an election year.

Of course, in the meantime, his fellow Republicans, and the former president himself, will continue sowing thousands of pounds of seeds of distrust with the American people in an election year, because they really don't want us having faith in our institutions. They've shown that, repeatedly, in the past seven years.

I trust I'll see you around campus. 

May 9, 2022

Sunday School 5/8/22

A governor, a state official, a member of Congress, and a US Senator walk in to a classroom - well, four classrooms - to talk about abortion. We'll take them in that order.

Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves talked with Jake Tapper in the State of the Union classroom. Mississippi has a 'trigger law' that will make all abortions illegal, except in cases of rape or where the mother's life is at risk; currently around 3500 abortions are performed annually. 

Reeves said that his state has "started doing the hard work of what a post-Roe-Mississippi will look like," and that if a majority of the SCOTUS justices are going to overturn Roe

we must understand that, while this is a great victory for the pro-life movement, it is not the end. In fact, it is just the beginning. And the beginning is we must show that being pro-life is not just about being anti-abortion. And so, in our state, that -- the work that is being done goes in two directions.

He said they have to do whatever they can to "make it easier on those moms who may be in unwanted pregnancies" and so, 

...I have signed legislation to provide help and resources and money to the 37 pregnancy resource centers that are located in every region of our state. We want to make sure that we get those individuals, ladies and women and expectant mothers, the help that they need from a health care standpoint, but it's not just about the health care. It's about other resources that are available to those moms.

And, the other piece of making things better while forcing women to bear unwanted children is about "the next phase of the pro-life movement."

And what we're trying to do is focus on making adoption easier in Mississippi. We're focusing on improving our foster care system... we're investing in that system over $100 million to improve technology at the Department of Human Services and at our Child Protection Service (CPS).

Tapper gave some grim Mississippi stats: the highest rates of infant mortality and child poverty in the country; no guaranteed paid maternity leave; a rejection of extended paid post-partum care through Medicaid; and a "long-running federal lawsuit" against CPS. He asked why anyone should believe Reeves saying he's concerned about taking care of these babies, or the women. Reeves said he didn't want to hide his state's problem, he wanted to fix them.

It's due in large part to poverty. And so we are focusing every day on fixing the challenges that are before us... when you talk about these young ladies, the best thing we can do for them is to provide and improve educational opportunities for them... We have got to continue to work to provide workforce opportunities, jobs for these individuals. But to do that, they have got to improve the quality of their skills. And we as a state are investing heavily in that.

In 2012, Mississippi was 47th in spending on education; in 2022, the state is ranked 46th; it plans on investing $49M in American Rescue Plan funding in education over the next couple of years. And, the state has only the $7.25 federal minimum wage. Notably,

The 2019 Mississippi Minimum Wage Act, or Senate Bill 2150, aimed to gradually increase the Mississippi minimum wage to $10 an hour by 2022, but this proposal died in committee. In 2021, Mississippi lawmakers continue to debate if and how the state should go about increasing the minimum wage. With Mississippi being the last state to not have a law requiring equal pay for women and men, there is still much discussion to be had.

Seems there's a tough row to hoe there... Maybe taking care of those other things first would make sense? 

Down the hall in the Meet the Press classroom, Michigan's AG Dana Nessel talked with What's-his-name. Her state also has had an abortion ban on the books since 1931; the ban would go into effect when Roe is overturned. Nessel has said she won't enforce that law, but she can't prevent the 83 prosecutors in the state from doing so. She called the law "incredibly draconian and strict," saying it has "virtually no exceptions - no exception for rape, for incest, no exception for medical emergencies." 

Not only that, but there's also a law against selling any drug or combination of drugs "designed expressly for the use of females for the purpose of procuring an abortion," with misdemeanor penalties in play. There's a registry requirement (name of purchaser, date of sale, and the name - and residence - of the prescribing physician.) Nessel also agreed with What's-his-name that even when a woman has a miscarriage, doctors may not want to perform the standards procedures to remove the fetus for fear they could end up in prison. 

To protect female Michiganders of child-bearing age, 

... I think each and every eligible voter in the state should be signing on to the you know, Reproductive Rights for All petition, and then coming to the polls and voting on it in November and voting for every pro-choice Democrat up and down the ticket, whether it's for federal office or for state office.

She'll also fully support lawsuits going to her state's Supreme Court arguing that the right to an abortion is a fundamental right in the Michigan Constitution "under our equal protection clause, under our due process clause...even if the US Supreme Court decides otherwise.  

She'd like to see both a constitutional amendment and a favorable decision from the state Supreme Court.

Let's be clear: women in my state, and in states all over America are going to die because of this position. And I heard the Mississippi governor when you interviewed him, he refused to answer the question of whether or not he would sign a bill completely outlawing the use of birth control. That is not in line at all with how Americans see their rights. And politicians do not belong in our doctor's offices. They don't belong in our bedrooms. And they should not be making these kinds of decisions on behalf of the American public and on behalf of women across America.

Moving south down the hall we meet Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC), who talked at length with Margaret Brennan in the Face the Nation classroom. Grace has been outspoken about being molested at 14 and raped at 16, and that she's pro-life, with exceptions for rape victims. Mace said the fetal heartbeat bill that South Carolina passed has exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the mother, in part because she told her story.

I felt it was really -- a really important story. A story that's often missed and not told because women are afraid. And you can even see in public comments and on social media when I talk about it, the ways in which that I get attacked for telling that story. And one of the things that I think, you know, partially that's missing in this conversation is that, when you have victims... And it's important for -- for some of us to step forward and tell those stories that are often missed in all of this as well.  

She said she would support Congress passing a bill with those protections, but that what people are missing is that if Roe is overturned, 

it's not an all-out federal ban on abortion, but it puts it back into state legislators and into Congress. You saw Congress a couple of years ago ban late- term abortions, for example. And so, what this does is it puts it back to the states, it puts it back into Congress to deal with and figure out.

They talked about polling; Brennan noted national polling shows "a majority of Americans want to kind of keep the status qu0, but "more than two-thirds of Republicans say abortion should be generally available or available with stricter limits" and wondered if it's a mistake to "just paint this as pro-life, pro-choice?" 

Mace (correctly, I believe), pointed out that "some of the polling is murky, too." It depends on "how you ask the question and who's paying for the polling." And, she gave examples of where we're more liberal on this than they are in Europe, and that it seems, based on some polls, that only 25% - 30% of Americans support abortion without restriction.

Finally, we turn to Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), who stopped by the This Week with George Stephanopoulos classroom to talk with Martha Raddatz about some of the political aspects of the Alito Draft. You know, things like "Do you believe there should be a litmus test? The Democrats have several candidates who do not support abortion rights." Klobuchar didn't gasp, which is more than I can say for myself. 

Instead, she talked about the Dems being a party where people recognize the difference between their personal beliefs and the rights of women to make their own personal choice. And, she added,

I think what you see in our party, is a party that is clearly pro-choice. It believes that a woman should have a right to make her own reproductive health decision when it comes to abortion. That is a position of our party and I think you see it in primary (after) primary. That matters to our voters, certainly now more than ever.

Next question? Senate Dems are going to push for a vote to codify abortion rights, "but it's almost certainly going to be blocked..." That being the case, Raddatz wondered about the options abortion rights advocates - and Democrats - have. Klobuchar said

If we are not successful, then we go to the ballot box. We march straight to the ballot box. And the women of this country and the men who stand with them will vote like they've never voted before because this is 50 years of rights in a leaked opinion where Justice Alito is literally not just taking us back to the 1950s, he's taking us back to the 1850s. He actually cites the fact that abortion was criminalized back when the 14th Amendment was adopted. And so this is a really extreme thought.

And, Raddatz asked if abortion rights should be "the principal issue for Democrats at the ballot box." The senator said "it will not be the only issue." She mentioned the economy, the president's leadership vis-à-vis Ukraine, preserving our democracy, and the extremism the Rs are showing as issues that matter to voters.

But, clearly, when... especially a new generation of women are looking at this and saying, wait a minute, my mom and my grandma are going to have more rights than I'm going to have going forward? I'm going to have to look at a patchwork of states laws with 15 of them already looking to ban medication abortion, which is what people do online and things like that. They're going to look at this and say, what world do I live in?

So, yes, "it's going to be a major issue going into the fall." 

And the final question from Raddatz: in states where abortion would "almost immediately be banned" if Roe is overturned, polling shows most adults "believe abortion should be illegal in most or all cases." Doesn't that mean the laws reflect what the people want?

Klobuchar said, like many people, she thinks 

why should a woman in Texas have different rights and a different future and a different ability to make decisions about her body and her reproductive choices than a woman in Minnesota?

She asked, rhetorically, about putting yourself in someone else's shoes, no matter how hard it might be, and thinking about "a waitress in the middle of Texas who has to make a decision...she's going to quit her job to get on a bus and go 250 miles" to have an abortion.

Those are the kinds of things that are going to be happening. It's especially going to fall on the backs of poor women, women of color. This is just wrong. And that is part of why Justice Blackmun, who is a Republican-appointed justice no less, made that thoughtful decision, looked at the Constitution and said, the right to privacy includes the right for women to make a choice like this.

Four people, all coming from different places, talking about one of the most contention issues we have. 

See you around campus. 

March 14, 2022

Sunday School 3/13/22

We've got three Senators in the classrooms this morning: Rob Portman (R-OH) and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), members of the Ukraine Caucus, and Jim Risch (R-ID), the ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which is where we'll start.

Risch talked with Brett Baier in the Fox News Sunday classroom. He expressed dismay at how things are going on the new Iran nuclear deal, noting that US representatives aren't even doing the negotiating. Since the Iranians refuse to talk with us, they're working with European, Russian, and Chinese teams, while we wait for updates. Risch seems to think this whole thing is a waste of time, saying unless they get an actual treaty, rather than an executive agreement, it

will not last past the next Republican president that's elected, just as the last deal didn't last the minute that the Republicans took over.

Shifting to Ukraine, he thinks we must "be wary" of getting into direct confrontation with Russia, although he suggests the "ineptness" they've shown so far might lead to a quick end if we did. He also said the Biden administration "has projected weakness throughout," and that they've only done stuff after our allies stepped up first.

Look, when you're dealing with these people, if you project weakness, you're going to have a real problem. And that's going on with both Iran and with Russia right now and it is a serious situation. We need them to project some strength.

Finally, Risch told Baier he voted against the omnibus spending bill, with its billions for Ukraine, because of a bunch of "other pork" in the bill. He mentioned "earmarks, for crying out loud," and "some gun legislation... that a couple of the gun lobbies were very much against... some provisions in there that a number of the pro-life groups were against." 

Whenever we have these doggone big bills, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't, whether you vote yes or no. But I -- I have -- I hope that no one would take this as not being the support for -- for the Ukrainian people, the Ukrainian war.

I've said that myself, many times before. 

September 5, 2021

Sunday School 9/5/21

Today's Sunday School focuses solely on the Texas abortion law. We'll start in the State of the Union classroom, where host Dana Bash talked with Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Hot Dish).

Bash wondered if the SCOTUS "is about to overturn" the decision. Klobuchar said she hoped not, but said the decision to let the law stand (for now, anyway) was "unbelievable." In the past, she said,

when they had cases that were so blatantly against Roe v Wade, they would stay those cases when such requests came up. They did it with another Texas law. They did it in 2015. They did it in 2019. And so here you have them, this year, this week, basically telling women in Texas that 85% of them seeking abortion services cannot exercise their constitutional rights... They did at midnight with just less than 72 hours of debate, in Justice Kagan's words, and basically green-lighted a law that is blatantly against Roe v Wade.

Klobuchar believes that a Congressional solution is an answer, and she's glad that the House is going to codify Roe. In the Senate, they can't get to 60 votes, though. So, the senator said,

I believe we should abolish the filibuster. I do not believe an archaic rule should be used to allow us... to use Justice Sotomayor's words, to put our heads in the sand, and not take action on the important issues, the challenges that are facing our country right now.... We just will get nowhere if we keep this filibuster in place.

Klobuchar s in favor of requiring a standing filibuster, so the Rs must at least work to fight things that are unpopular with most Americans. She's also in favor of carveouts for constitutional issues (e.g., abortion and voting). And, 

I think, "what is the best way to get to a result that's the right policy, that's consistent with where the American people are, that will not wreak havoc in this country?" And, to me, the best thing is to get rid of the filibuster. But (expanding the Court) is an option, and President Biden has a commission in place right now that is considering it.

Finally, on the potential retirement of Justice Stephen Breyer, Bash wondered where Klobuchar stood.

I believe, if he is seriously considering retirement -- and he has said he would do it based on not only his own health, but also the future of the court -- if this decision doesn't cry out for that, I don't know what does. 

In the Face the Nation classroom, guest host Weijia Jiang spoke with Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-TX), about the shenanigans. Jiang wondered what the Congresswoman heard from constituents; "shocked, horrified, outraged" were three words she used. She pointed to the two "very awful" consequences of the law: incentivizing "bounty hunters," noting it was "incredible that we live in a state that is willing to incentivize that." The other "real-life" and "deadly consequences" are worse.

...what this law and other laws like it will do is simply make it deadlier, more dangerous. Women are going to take their health into their own hands. It will impact young women, poor women, and women of color. And I am really afraid of the lives that will be lost as a result.

Jiang asked about the outsourcing of enforcement to private citizens. Escobar said she doesn't think we really understand the consequences, and gave an example.

If, for example, I had a young daughter who was the victim of a sexual assault, and I was taking my young daughter to a clinic. Her assault-- the person who perpetrated the assault could take me to court incentivized by that $10,000. And let's say that my young daughter was not pregnant. There was no abortion involved. But I still had to defend myself in court. I can't even recover legal fees. There are layers upon layers upon layers of injustices written into this law, intended to really send the most severe chilling effect on women and women's reproductive rights in the state of Texas.

As to Jiang's question on how she can find common ground with the 41% of Texans who oppose abortion rights. She said it's "very hard to find common ground."  We need to "do more for young women and men" - sex education, access to contraceptives, legal protections for women and the like.

Instead, what we are seeing is an elimination of those things... It's a very backward way of addressing what is a concern. But that's why I say there's no law that you can create that will eliminate abortion. All that's happening is you're eliminating safe, legal abortion, causing women significant harm.

Down the hall, George Stephanopoulos talked with Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-Not a Fan of Planned Parenthood) in the This Week classroom. Cassidy said he's pro-life, and he made a point that the others did not about the SCOTUS ruling

It had nothing to do with the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade. It was only on if the plaintiffs had standing. People are using it to gin up their base to distract from the disastrous policies in Afghanistan, and maybe for fundraising appeals. I wish we would focus on issues as opposed to -- as opposed to theater. It was about if they had standing, nothing to do with constitutionality. I think we should move on to other issues.

George wanted to stay on topic, particularly the part about how the law "actually tasks private citizens with enforcing this law,", which "conservatives should hate," according to the Wall Street Journal. He asked Cassidy what he thought about that.

I think the Supreme Court will swat it away once it comes to them in an appropriate manner. If it is as terrible as people say it is, it will be destroyed by the Supreme Court. But to act like this is an assault upon Roe v. Wade is, again, something the president is doing I think to distract from his other issues. And it is clearly not an assault upon the -- by the way, I'm pro-life. But just to say, the facts are this is about standing, about nothing else. And the Supreme Court will decide how to affect standing before all these other things play out.

And George then asked, "you don't think it signals the Court is prepared to undo Roe v. Wade now?" 

You know, so, we can always talk about eventualities. We can always talk theoreticals. It makes good fodder. But I’m kind of a guy who’s in the middle of a state in which 700,000 people don't have electricity, in which we’ve got a disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the administration is pushing a $3.5 trillion bill which will be to inflation what the withdrawal was to Afghanistan. Now, if you -- you know, in my mind, I don’t think about theoreticals. I think about those things that are before me and that’s what I focused on.

I'm going to give the last word on this to former Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) who was on the panel today.

But what this has done is ignited a political debate for the first time because for generations after generations, since Roe v. Wade, women have accepted that this is settled law. For the first time we've seen an earthquake among the activists, among people who were concerned about reproductive rights saying this could happen. Now all of a sudden we are at a spot where this could happen. And I think the reason why you saw Senator Cassidy duck this issue it's politically very dangerous for the Republican Party to have to explain to a suburban mother why her daughter who was raped, you know, three months ago no longer has a choice. And so I think that politically the reason why you don't see the Republicans talking about this as a major pro-life victory is because politically it's extraordinarily dangerous and it has dominated the discussion in a week that should have been pretty good for the Republicans.

I hope that's not too theoretical for Cassidy and the rest of the GOP.

See you around campus.

November 12, 2020

Email of the Week 11/12/20

Even though the election was more than a week ago, the outcome was not projected until Saturday, putting it well within the seven-day window I use for the Email of the Week feature. 

That gave me a chance to look at messages from some of Joe Biden's primary challengers in trying to find this week's winner. For example, Tom Steyer sent me a note saying, in part,

We knew this was the biggest election of our lifetimes... This win was critical.

The vision and leadership that President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris projected was exactly the antidote needed to the divisiveness and recklessness of the last four years. The American people made it clear that we are ready to turn the page on Mr. Trump's disastrous presidency and tackle our climate crisis.

In addition to hitting on his pet issue, he also called out a key demographic: young voters, who he said "were a decisive part in delivering this win," and what that means.

We have a new electorate, a new president and a new hope for getting the bold, urgent, equitable economic recovery and climate leadership we need. 

Let's get to work.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar's email was short and to the point:

We can now say President-Elect and Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris! The American people have spoken. This is a moment of major celebration but I also know that Joe and Kamala understand the major challenges ahead.

Joe Biden is going to be a president for everyone, not just the people who voted for him. We have to come together as a nation, and Joe Biden is the perfect person for this moment.

Thank you for standing with us.

 Also offering congratulations? Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

 It feels so good to say it: President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris.

Warren noted that history was made in this election.

And for the very first time, we've elected a woman as our vice president. Millions of little girls who see themselves in Kamala will dream a little bigger tonight. 

After talking about how Biden and Harris will "bring decency and competence to the White House," she turned to our economic situation and the pandemic. "We have a mandate for action on bold plans," she said, and "we need structural change." And she's planning on staying in the game. 

Yes, our country is divided, but whenever they are asked, voters of both parties make it clear in overwhelming numbers that they don't want a government controlled by giant corporations and their lobbyists. In the past, steps to build unity and consensus in Washington have often meant turning over the keys to those corporations and lobbyists. We must resist this. 

In a nutshell, the Dems have got to walk the talk, and rise to the occasion.

Mayor Pete also reached out, looking to ensure that we stay in the fight, and that our wallets were, too, by donating to the Biden Fight Fund. And, contrary to what the Rs have been suggesting, the Ds are looking more broadly at votes.

We know not every vote that comes in from now until the end will be a vote for Joe, but we still believe that all votes should be counted. The hypocrisy we're seeing from Trump's allies across the country is telling - but we will do whatever it takes to ensure voters are protected and all valid votes are counted.

Hear, hear.  

And finally, the congratulatory note that I was most looking forward to? It wasn't in the form of an email, but rather in a tweet - but I'm still handing this one the coveted Email of the Week award. Not for what it says, but for what it doesn't. 

Now, don't get me wrong - I don't want greed and bigotry to rule the day, any more than Sanders does. But would it have killed him to actually offer congratulations to the people who won the election? Say their names, maybe, or say anything about them at all? 

Nah -- it's not about them, those winners, it's about us - the people who didn't win. It's about what we want, not what the people who voted want. 

As usual, color me unimpressed with That Guy from Vermont.

September 20, 2020

Sunday School 9/20/20

Where to hang out today for Sunday School... let's see... how about with a bunch of senators? 

Let's start with New Jersey's Cory Booker, who joined Margaret Brennan in the Face the Nation classroom on CBS. Here are some highlights.

He's not sure how things will play out, with Mitch McConnell controlling things, but that "we've seen moments like this before," where some of his colleagues listened to the American people and changed their vote and did the right thing.

As to what the Dems might do to stop things, what leverage they have, Brennan mentioned the upcoming spending bill, but Booker kept to the high road, saying one thing 

is to appeal - a moral appeal to people who clearly stated what they would do under these circumstances. For them to go against their word is pretty significant in the public space in terms of their own honor and legitimacy. 

And what's different, in his eyes, now vs. back in 2016?  Back then, we were 269 days from the election, not already in the process of the election, and for his Republican colleagues to violate their own words, "does a tremendous amount of damage to the institution of the Senate as well as to the legitimacy of the court."

This is one of those moments where I wish we would step back and take a beat and understand what we're doing and the consequences and how they could radiate throughout time.

On whether Biden should release a list of potential nominees, Booker noted that Trump did it as an appeal to the far-right base, and that it broke with tradition. Biden doesn't have to follow suit, first of all, and if he chooses to release a list, that's "secondary to the urgency of this election" and to those who understand the issues, from health care to climate change to voting rights - and "what's important right now is the urgency of this election to a lot of the fundamental issues that affect our daily lives."

And finally, on calls to expand the court, Booker was clear.

Unless we win the Senate back, unless we win the White House, all these questions are just hypothetical and moot. We need to focus on what is at hand. We have already begun voting in a number of United States. Early ballots are going out across this country. We need to win this election. Everything is on the line and that should be, in my opinion, the focus right now.

Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar was also making the rounds, with a couple of appearances including one with Chuck Todd on Meet the Press.  Here are highlights of that conversation.

She's not interested in talking about the Senate rules and what the Dems might be able to do to stop a nomination from going forward, "for a very important reason."

I'm not going to concede that when you already have several of my colleagues saying that the way this happened, so close to the election, that the next president should be able to make the decision. The people pick the president, and the president picks the justice. That is how this works. Look at what Abraham Lincoln did the last time someone died this close to the election. He waited. He waited until after the election.

To me, the fact that you've got people voting right now, including in my state, everything is on the line here. Health care is on the line. There's literally going to be an argument on the Affordable Care Act, whether or not people will continue to have health care and not get kicked off for preexisting conditions, on November 10th. So I think my Republican colleagues are the ones. They have to decide, based on what they said before. They set this new precedent in the last -- in 2016, and they've got to follow their own words.

Chuck asked her about specifics, going further than Brennan did with Booker. He asked if 'nothing is off the table' meant packing the court, or getting rid of the filibuster, or granting statehood to DC and Puerto Rico. She again said she wasn't conceding this, referencing RBG, a woman who never gave up, and saying

Well, I'm not going to give up that some of my colleagues here, when we already have three of them, three of them, having said that they believe that the next president, whoever wins the election. They're not saying who that's going to be. Whoever wins the election should be able to pick the justice. Then we can talk about the reforms. Because what matters right now is what mattered three days ago before she died. And that is that people have to vote. And they vote. And they have to vote, as Michelle Obama said, like their life depends on it.

Also on MTP? Wyoming's John Barrasso, who four years ago said "I want to give the American people a voice in this."  This time around, he doesn't want to do that because, he says without evidence,

Well, first, let's be very clear. If the shoe were on the other foot and the Democrats had the White House and the Senate, they would right now be trying to confirm another member of the Supreme Court. What we're proposing is completely consistent, completely consistent with the precedent. What happened in 2016, and let's go back, we were following the Joe Biden rule.

The "Biden Rule" is something the Democratic nominee said back in 1992, when addressing a hypothetical vacancy on the court. It is not a rule, and it did not have any practical application when he said it.  

Todd says he had scoured all of the notes from 2016 looking for any reference to this new explanation they're using now, and he quoted Barrasso extensively.

When an election is just months away in 2016," you said that, "people should be allowed to consider possible Supreme Court nominees as one factor in deciding who they'll support for president. This shouldn't even really be controversial." Then you said, "This is not about the person. It's about the principle involved, and I want to give the American people a voice in this." Republicans have said there should not be a bitter political fight. "We have called on the president to spare the country this fight. The best way to avoid the fight is to agree to let the people decide." Senator, these are your words. Not once did you say, "Oh, it depends on what party the Senate holds versus the party of the president." This just sounds like a power grab, pure and simple.

Well, Barrasso said, "it is the Biden rule" and precedent and Schumer and Harry Reid and

I'll tell you what's going to happen here I'll tell you what's going to happen.  The Senate is going to be back in session and the president's going to make a nomination I believe this week.

And whether viewers should "Just not believe anything you're saying today because whatever you're saying today will change depending on the politics of the moment?"

Well, I can tell you what's going to happen, Chuck. For viewers who are watching, the president is going to make a nomination. I believe it's going to be this week. And Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, we will hold hearings. And there will be a vote on the floor of the United States Senate this year. The president has a list of 20 potential nominees. He's mentioned several of them last night. And I think, I really do think that if the president really wanted to make a powerful positive statement by coming forth with a woman nominee, there are many qualified women on his list, somebody who could then be a role model for future attorneys, for young women and young men looking into the law --I think that would be the right move for this president, soon.

He did say that

Every Senate candidate and every senator speaks for himself or herself. As chairman of the conference, I have great respect for that. But each one is going to be called upon to make a decision in their role as advise and consent. The president is going to nominate, and we're going to vote this year, Chuck.