In Case You Missed It (v112)

I'm chuckling this morning doing my 'week in review' post - it feels like I missed last week! Only two posts escaped my head, although I had the best of intentions.

 If I had to pin it down, I'd say my ADD and my Maine Coons and our other cats got the best of me after vacation. (As I write this, I've got a MC on my lap, and another on my desk, her head resting against my laptop and her feathery white fur covering the tab, caps lock and shift keys, so this could be fun.)

Anyway - two it was, and here they are. For your Sunday School I focused on a couple of US Senate races - Colorado, where Joe O'Dea (R) and incumbent Michael Bennet (D)  are battling it out, and Utah, where Evan McMullin is mounting an independent bid to oust incumbent Mike Lee (R).  And, it was purely coincidence that Utah and Colorado were the states were I spent my vacation...

First up? Dana Bash in the State of the Union classroom with the candidates for the Colorado seat. O'Dea was pushing a 'tough on crime' message, although the specific message would have made more sense if he was running for a state office, not the US Senate. 

He said Dems in his state are ignoring the laws on the books, that we "need more cops on the street" and to "make sure we're enforcing the laws we have." And, specifically on red flag laws, like the one in Colorado that's focused on mental health? 

Sheriffs tell him it doesn't work, "it puts them at risk. They're not happy with that law," and it needs to be rewritten.

...We need to do more with mental health here to get these people off the street. But we have hundreds of laws on the books. We need to enforce them.  We need more cops on our street right now. If you talk to Chief Pazen here of the city and county of Denver -- he's the chief of police -- he will tell you he's short 250 officers. That's because Democrats across the state of Colorado have defunded, demoralized the police. And we need to do better.

Bash followed up, noting that Colorado's approved 146 applications to take guns away from dangerous people in two years, and asked if that didn't make his state safer.

He said no, citing stats saying it's the "the third worst state for violent crime in the United States," and "they just deemed Denver as one of the most unsafe cities in the nation." He said they have record crime everywhere, cashless bail issues, and again, the laws on the books need to be enforced.

I wish, as I do every Sunday, that the interviews were more about getting questions answered than about getting questions asked.  

Meanwhile, down the hall in the MTP classroom, What's-his-name talked with McMullin. His opponent has said that voting for the independent is "a vote for the Democrats to keep their majority," and W-H-N wondered if that was correct. McMullin said no.

... look, I'm building a coalition of Republicans, Democrats, Independents, and members of third parties to better represent Utah and to help lead our country forward. And I'm not going to Washington to join a party or to caucus or to play the party power game. I'm going to represent our coalition. 

... He said he'll maintain his independence, and that would help Utah and give it "an added value of influence." After blasting Lee ("He sits on his hands until it's time to vote no and then he goes and complains about our country on cable news."), he said he thinks we've seen

... that the senators in the chamber who are willing to act with greater independence, serving their constituents, standing up to party bosses, standing up to extremist factions and special interest groups, they have the most influence in the chamber. They're more influential, I think, even than the party bosses. And I want that for Utah. 

I wonder what would happen if we had more unaffiliated members of Congress? 

For your Extra Credit, I spent time with the pundit panels in the MTP and This Week classrooms. Starting with MTP, Amy Walter said the Dems

have known that the crime issue was a challenge for them" from the beginning, and she said "they've been playing defense on this for quite some time.

Maria Teresa Kumar said that "one of the conversations we're not having is that this is an opportunity for the Democrats to own police enforcement... all of a sudden, these Republicans and Republican leadership flipped on it, and said it was an FBI sting job. That is not the party of law enforcement. And if anything, it's undermining a really basic institution." Pat McCrory said he was "shocked the Democrats aren't bringing up guns," but said on "everyday crime, the Democrats are on their heels. And they deserve to be on their heels."

On abortion, 

Daniels said it "was always going to happen" that the Rs would be all over the place on abortion, creating "kind of this hodgepodge of different ideas of what voters might want to hear at that time... People can just pick and choose whatever they want, even within the issue themselves." Walter said how important the issue is depends on where the voter is. "...if you're in a state with abortion restrictions -- you are much more motivated than if you're in a state that doesn't." So, in reliably blue states, it's not that big an issue.

And in George's This Week classroom, the gang talked January 6th and election deniers running for office. 

Donna Brazile said even if Trump shows up to answer his subpoena from the January 6th Committee, he won't say anything. But she wishes he would tell his story, he should be willing to - but he won't, because "he doesn't have the truth on his side." Julie Pace agreed when George said polls aren't showing a bump for Dems as a result of the hearings, and that the Ds aren't pressing this issue. Rather, "Democrats are scrambling to try to figure out how they can form an economic message." 

Maggie Haberman said the election deniers is "the story that is actually not getting a ton of attention" given the crush of information that's out there, and that secretaries of state elected this cycle will be the ones to impact 2024, as they'll be deciding whether to certify the results. 

Chris Christie and Brazile got into it a little bit on the Committee

Chris Christie said the January 6th Committee "was resigned to having a credibility problem because of the membership of the committee and the way that was done." He also said "there's nobody there to argue the other side," to which George said "But there's - there's no other side..." Brazile agreed. Christie said "I think you can question a lot of these witnesses who came up, and test their credibility." 

Brazile pushed back pretty hard, wondering if Christie wanted to test the credibility of Bill Barr, the people who were advising Trump in the Oval, or "of the cops who got their heads smashed in - is that who you're going to test?"

 In the end, they didn't come to blows. Christie said his point was some people are remembering things now that they had no recollection of earlier - which is likely true, but also not uncommon. I mean, just look t the Republican Party. Half of them don't remember what they said, even when they see themselves saying it on television...

So - there you have it: last week's posts, in a nutshell. We'll see how I do this week...

In Case You Missed it (v107)

Lots going on outside the pages of veritable pastiche last week; here's a recap of what happened in them.

Two posts made it out, both focused on NBC's exclusive interview with VP Kamala Harris. In your Sunday School, topics included changes to the filibuster, election deniers, Dems supporting MAGA Republicans, the 2025 election certification, and internal threats from extremists. 

Here's a bit of that part of the conversation, with What's-his-Name (WHN) in the host's chair on Meet the Press.

In response to his question, "what is a semi-fascist?" Harris spoke about it not being helpful when people deny elections or obstruct "the outcome of an election with the largest number of voters ever for a presidential candidate.

And when we look at where we are, I think that we have to admit that there are attacks from within, to your first question. And we need to take it seriously. And we need to stand up together, all of us, and think of this not through a partisan lens but as Americans.

WHN wondered if it was "hard to do both," calling out the obstruction and election denying and at the same time try to unite people, Harris pointed to Biden's long record of bipartisanship, and that he's been criticized for that during his career.

But there are moments in time when we have to also agree, all good people who care about our country, that there are those who right now are vividly not defending our democracy. And I think we want that our Commander-in-Chief, that the president of the United States will speak up and raise the alarm about what this means to our strength and our future, much less our integrity.

I don't think she wanted to talk about the specific language President Biden used to describe the extreme MAGA Republicans, and honestly I think that's the case with most of her answers.

In your Extra Credit, the Harris interview topics included the Supreme Court, abortion, 2024, and immigration. Here, too, Harris seemed to have trouble answering the question.

And moving on, "since we're here in Texas," WHN asked if Harris would call the border "secure."  

The border is secure, but we also have a broken immigration system, in particular over the last four years before we came in, and it needs to be fixed.

WHN asked again if she's "confident the border's secure," given we'll see two million crossing this year. 

We have a secure border in that that is a priority for any nation, including ours and our administration. But there are still a lot of problems that we are trying to fix given the deterioration that happened over the last four years. We also have to put into place a law and a plan for a pathway for citizenship for the millions of people who are here and are prepared to do what is legally required to gain citizenship. We don't have that in place because people are playing politics in a state like this and in Congress. By the way, you want to talk about bipartisanship on an issue that at one time was a bipartisan issue both in terms of Republican senators and even presidents.

Next question? Inflation is being made worse by us not having enough low-wage workers, so a "solution on immigration reform that increased particularly lower wage job labor – lower wage labor could actually have an impact on lowering inflation. How is that not the motivating force to get something done here?"

Um, because there is literally zero motivating factor to giving Biden another win? Why do anything before the midterm election, since the Rs have visions of taking over the House and Senate, ensuring nothing gets done for another two years...  But that's my answer. 

You'll have to check the post to find out what Harris said. 

I'm going to spend some time (again, I'm telling you this) working on clearing out my drafts folder. With any luck, that'll mean posts will be posted. 

Stay tuned. 

Sunday School 9/11/22: Extra Credit

Let's continue with What's-his-Name and Vice President Kamala Harris in the Meet the Press classroom. 

I recapped the first part of the interview in yesterday's Sunday School post; this segment begins with questions about the Supreme Court, and her confidence in it.

Harris said the thinks the SCOTUS is an "activist court," which means 

we had an established right for almost a half a century, which is the right of women to make decisions about their own body as an extension of what we have decided to be the privacy rights to which all people are entitled. And this court took that constitutional right away. And we are suffering as a nation because of it.

She also said she was inspired by Thurgood Marshall, and by the Warren Court, with decisions like Brown vs. Board of Education. Now, though, "it's a very different court" than the one that had justices like Marshall, Warren, and Sandra Day O'Connor.

With no follow-up on that, WHN moved to abortion, asking Harris about a bill being moved forward by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-OH) and Susan Collins (R-ME), which they say would basically codify the protections under Roe for abortion up to 24 weeks. and wondering if she'd "be OK with" that. She said she'd have to read the bill, noting "the details obviously matter."

He noted that this bill is not getting the same support from "some abortion rights groups" as other options, and he asked if it was "more important" to find Republican support for this. She said "Ideally, yes, it would be bipartisan."  

And, should the government "put any limit on abortion?" Harris believes government should not be

telling women what to do with their bodies... telling women how to plan their families... criminalizing health care providers... saying "no exception for rape or incest."

And moving on, "since we're here in Texas," WHN asked if Harris would call the border "secure."  

The border is secure, but we also have a broken immigration system, in particular over the last four years before we came in, and it needs to be fixed.

WHN asked again if she's "confident the border's secure," given we'll see two million crossing this year. 

We have a secure border in that that is a priority for any nation, including ours and our administration. But there are still a lot of problems that we are trying to fix given the deterioration that happened over the last four years. We also have to put into place a law and a plan for a pathway for citizenship for the millions of people who are here and are prepared to do what is legally required to gain citizenship. We don't have that in place because people are playing politics in a state like this and in Congress. By the way, you want to talk about bipartisanship on an issue that at one time was a bipartisan issue both in terms of Republican senators and even presidents.

Next question? Inflation is being made worse by us not having enough low-wage workers, so a "solution on immigration reform that increased particularly lower wage job labor – lower wage labor could actually have an impact on lowering inflation. How is that not the motivating force to get something done here?"

Um, because there is literally zero motivating factor to giving Biden another win? Why do anything before the midterm election, since the Rs have visions of taking over the House and Senate, ensuring nothing gets done for another two years...  But that's my answer. 

Here's what Harris said.

I do believe that, for all reasonable people, all reasonable people are motivated and desirous that we would get something done. I think a big part of the problem though is that there's been political gamesmanship with this issue suggesting that it's a zero-sum game. If you want to deal with the issue, there are practical solutions, which include creating a pathway to citizenship, fixing a broken immigration system, dealing with the root causes of why people are fleeing their home when most people don't want to leave home. And if they do, it's usually because they're fleeing some harm, or they simply can't take care of their basic needs if they stay. There are solutions. And sadly, this has become such a partisan issue, instead of something where we work on it together, agreeing that what we're doing is not working as a nation. It's not working.

That agreement alone will be hard to get, regardless of the outcome of the midterm election. 

WHN then delved into 2024, wondering if there'll be an announcement after the midterms about the Biden/Harris team's plans. Harris said

Listen, the president has been very clear that he intends to run again. And if he does, I will be running with him proudly.

He thought she said 'probably,' which prompted some chuckles. She reiterated that a couple of times, saying "I'm very proud to be his vice president." The talked about Harris now having broken John Adams' record of tie-breaking votes in the Senate, which made her proud.

Who would have thought that this kid born in Oakland, California just broke a record with John Adams... Kind of, you’ve got to appreciate that.

WHN asked her about preparing for "the worst-case scenario that your job may hand you."  She said that she prays it doesn't happen; the rest of her answer seemed designed to show that she's preparing for it by doing the work that a VP does, even if, as WHN noted, there's no job description.

And listen, I think that there is no question that the role and the responsibility of vice president is a very important one. And Joe Biden knows that more than anybody. He and I talk about it. And it is the job of working with the president, doing what I can to be a great partner, to take on and help take on some of the biggest issues that impact our country, both domestically and in terms of foreign policy. And so that's the work that I do. So that has been the work of meeting with over a hundred heads of state around various issues, be it Ukraine or what we need to do around our space program. So that is the work of vice president, and it is important and it is something that I take very seriously.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this interview: were you satisfied with her answers? Do you have a better sense of her now than before? If Biden decides not to run next year, is she the best Dem to replace her? Chime in!

See you around campus. 

Sunday School 9/4/22: Extra Credit

For your Extra Credit, we're turning to CNN's State of the Union classroom, where Dana Bash talked with FEMA Director Deanne Criswell, who was on to talk about the muddy waters in Jackson, MS. She had just returned from a trip to Jackson with Mitch Landrieu, the White House infrastructure director.

She said that FEMA was focused on supporting the state's Emergency Management Agency

...with bringing in safe drinking water, bottled water, supporting their operations, but, more importantly, bringing in our federal partners that can really understand what it's going to take to bring this plant back to full operational capacity.

Bash wondered when they'll have clean drinking water, and Criswell said it was "still too early to tell." EPA was there, and the Army Corps of Engineers; there'll be assessments done and what not, and work is "going to happen in phases." In the near term, in addition to getting bottled water out to folks, 

we're providing temporary measures to help increase the water pressure, so people can at least flush their toilets and use the faucets. The longer term and the midterm about how long it's going to take to actually make it safe to drink, I think that we have a lot more to learn about what it's going to take to get that plant up and running.

Bash said what I've been thinking all along.

It's just I'm listening to you, and I'm sure our viewers are listening and thinking, this is 2022. This is a state capital in the United States of America...a city of more than 150,000 people, without running water for nearly a week. And now, as you're saying, not only are they without safe drinking water, you don't have a timeline for when they're going to have that restored. Americans are lining up for hours in the heat just to get the bottles of water you're talking about. Who's to blame for this?

How does this happen, in America? 

Bash didn't mention, and Criswell didn't talk about all the longstanding water problems - and, if you ask residents, the racism that exacerbates them - in Jackson, which are getting national attention as a result of the current crisis. Here are a few articles touching on those.

From NPR: 

The rituals of boiling water, and the luxury of a bath 

Lifelong resident Halima Olufemi, 45, remembers her great-grandmother and grandmother boiling water. "So much so that we would buy extra jugs and they would always pour the water in," she says. "It was a way of life." 

She's now an activist with the People's Advocacy Institute and has been helping distribute water in this emergency.

So has Danyelle Holmes, with the Mississippi Poor People's Campaign. Thirty years ago, she moved here from Greenwood in the Mississippi Delta to go to college and was told not to drink the water. 

"I've never drank tap water since I've been here in the city of Jackson," Holmes says. "Never."

The city's aging water lines can leak, leading to low pressure and contamination. There have also been broken water and sewage lines. And in 2016 the state's health department warned that it had found lead in the water supply.

And there's this, from the international organization Human Rights Watch:

Some reporting has focused on how extreme flooding, exacerbated by the climate crisis, has overwhelmed Jackson’s water system. While climate emergencies will certainly intensify in years to come, Jackson’s  crisis is a human rights failure decades in the making. State officials warned last week: “The consistent delays in timely maintenance have hampered [the water facility’s] ability to properly respond to the demands placed upon it.” But resource constraints have plagued the city and its water and wastewater system, which had a weeks-long service disruption in 2021 and multiple US Environmental Protection Agency citations for dumping millions of gallons of raw sewage into source water. The water and wastewater system requires more money to repair and operate than the city can fund. 

One organizer told Human Rights Watch: “The conservative white power structure in Mississippi has deliberately disinvested in the capitol city of Jackson.” It’s understandable that they would feel that way. Mississippi state has not only failed to fund infrastructure assistance to Jackson, but recently enacted a $524 million income-tax break that has constrained the state budget, including for infrastructure funds. Mississippi is already dependent on federal funds for many government functions and is likely to require much more. Jackson Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba estimates the cost to repair the systems is nearly $2 billion, while new federal infrastructure dollars to the state total $75 million.

 From the Washington Post: 

Robert Luckett, a Jackson State university history professor, noted that the contrast was stark this past week in places like County Line Road, which separates Jackson from neighboring Ridgeland. One side of the street had water while on the other, homes, hotels and other businesses made do without, setting up portable bathrooms outside. 

“It’s crazy how you can go one block and you go from a town that has none of the issues we have to a town with no water,” Luckett said. 

“This is all rooted in a politics that is based around racial attitudes and a racist history that continues to impact the city and a White leadership of the state who benefits from their suffering,” he said. “They didn’t think it was fair for the city of Jackson to get these resources when their own constituents didn’t have access to the same pot of money.” 

Roger Wicker, one of the state's two Republican US Senators, has been in office since 2007. A search of his press releases shows he's long been a supporter, and often a leader, in getting funding for rural and small community water systems, as well as for bills dealing with fisheries and commercial fishing, Mississippi River dredging and water management, flood control, and trade and commerce-related water infrastructure. I didn't find anything specific to issues with Jackson's sewage spills or lead in the water.

Wicker discussed the current situation in Jackson in a September 1st interview with another CNN anchor, Jim Sciutto. Here's a statement from his press release, 

“This is an emergency. And the American people are seeing this, they’re being very responsive, and we’re going to need additional federal help to salvage the lives, homes, and futures of our major city,” Wicker said. “I have six grandchildren that live inside the city limits in Jackson. This is personal to me, and it’s my capital city.” 

It's personal to everyone, it seems; hopefully, personal enough for something to be done to address all the issues that have plagued Jackson for decades. And if it isn't personal enough,, there's a multi-billion-dollar federal lawsuit over the lead issue to up the interest. 

See you around campus.