;)
November 2, 2021
Afternoon Update:
Lauren Neergaard & Mike Stobbe of the AP: "An influential advisory panel [to the CDC] voted Tuesday that all children ages 5 to 11 should get Pfizer's pediatric COVID-19 shots, putting the U.S. on the brink of a major expansion of vaccinations -- and a final decision is expected within hours.... If the CDC's director, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, signs off, it will mark the first opportunity for Americans under 12 to get the powerful protection of any COVID-19 vaccine. Shots into little arms could begin this week, as Pfizer already is packing and shipping the first orders, millions of doses, to states and pharmacies to be ready."
The New York Times is live-updating developments today in state-wide races in New Jersey & Virginia as well as other local races. The Times is updating developments in New York City's mayoral & other key city races here.
Jonathan Weisman & Emily Cochrane of the New York Times: "Democrats reached a deal on Tuesday to add a measure to control prescription drug costs to President Biden's social safety net plan, agreeing to allow the government to negotiate prices for medications covered by Medicare, as the House moved closer to a vote on the sprawling bill. The prescription drug deal is limited. Starting in 2023, negotiations could begin on what Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon called the most expensive drugs -- treatments for cancer and rheumatoid arthritis, as well as anticoagulants. Most drugs would still be granted patent exclusivity for five years before negotiations could start, and more advanced drugs, called biologics, would be protected for 12 years. But for the first time, Medicare would be able to step in after those periods, even if drug companies secure patent extensions or otherwise game the patent system."
Elizabeth Harris, et al., of the New York Times: "The Biden administration on Tuesday sued to stop Penguin Random House, the largest publisher in the United States, from acquiring its rival Simon & Schuster, a major antitrust lawsuit and a sign of a different view of corporate consolidation than the one that has prevailed for decades in Washington.... Earlier this year, President Biden signed an executive order focused on spurring competition across the economy. He has appointed skeptics of corporate concentration to the Federal Trade Commission and his economic policy team. His nominee to lead the Justice Department's antitrust division, Jonathan Kanter, is a lawyer who represented critics of the tech giants. And the federal government has gone to court to block a series of corporate deals this year...."
I almost didn't link the following story because it's so sick. For those who are offended, I don't blame you. ~~~
Bob Brigham of the Raw Story: "QAnon supporters gathered in Dallas [at the site where President Kennedy was assassinated] on Tuesday in the hopes that John F. Kennedy, Jr. would make major revelations. 'QAnon supporters are gathering for an event in Texas on Tuesday at which they falsely believe JFK junior will reveal he is not dead and announce a 2024 presidential run with Donald Trump, the former president,; the Independent reports. The son of America's 35th president died in 1999. Journalist Steven Monacelli posted a video of members of the crowd chanting a euphemism for 'f*ck Joe Biden' while holding a Trump-Kennedy QAnon banner.... The banner is from 2020, showing yet another 'prophecy' that did not occur." ~~~
~~~ Of course, this is just as sick. ~~~
Can we be surprised that after years of being told that they are the problem, that their manhood is the problem, more and more men are withdrawing into the enclave of idleness and pornography and video games? While the left may celebrate this decline of men, I for one cannot join them. -- Josh Hawley, in a speech ~~~
~~~ Adam Gabbatt of the Guardian: "The effort to combat toxic masculinity in the US has led men to consume more pornography and play more video games, the Missouri senator Josh Hawley claimed in a speech to a group of Republicans. Speaking at the National Conservatism Conference in Orlando, Florida, Hawley addressed the issue of 'manhood', which he said was under attack, and called for men to return to traditional masculine roles.... [Hawley,] who notoriously raised a fist in support of a mob outside the US Capitol on 6 January appeared to echo talking points made by the likes of the Proud Boys, a far-right group that opposes feminism and believes men are under attack from liberal elites."
Kashmir Hill & Ryan Mac of the New York Times: "Facebook plans to shut down its decade-old facial recognition system this month, deleting the face scan data of more than one billion users and effectively eliminating a feature that has fueled privacy concerns, government investigations, a class-action lawsuit and regulatory woes.... Facial-recognition technology, which has advanced in accuracy and power in recent years, has increasingly been the focus of debate because of how it can be misused by governments, law enforcement and companies." The AP's report is here.
~~~~~~~~~~
The New York Times' live updates of developments at the COP26 climate meeting are here. The Washington Post's live updates are here.
Tik Root & Maxine Joselow of the Washington Post: "More than 100 world leaders representing over 85 percent of the world's forests pledged to halt deforestation over the next decade Tuesday at COP26, the United Nations climate summit underway in Glasgow, Scotland. The announcement included Brazil, which is home to the Amazon rainforest, as well as Canada, Russia, Norway, Colombia and Indonesia. The United States also signed onto the agreement, which was backed by $12 billion in public funds and $7.2 billion in private money. The destruction of forests is a major factor driving up global greenhouse gas emissions, according to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, with about 23 percent of total emissions stemming from agriculture, forestry and other land uses." The AP's report is here.
Seth Borenstein of the AP: "World leaders turned up the heat and resorted to end-of-the-world rhetoric Monday in an attempt to bring new urgency to sputtering international climate negotiations. The metaphors were dramatic and mixed at the start of the talks, known as COP26. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson described global warming as 'a doomsday device' strapped to humanity. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres told his colleagues that humans are 'digging our own graves.' And Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley, speaking for vulnerable island nations, added moral thunder, warning leaders not to 'allow the path of greed and selfishness to sow the seeds of our common destruction.'... Meanwhile, U.S. President Joe Biden and German Chancellor Angela Merkel avoided soaring rhetoric and delved into policy." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) The New York Times story is here.
Ellen Francis of the Washington Post: "Rising sea levels could sink buildings and flood much of the Marshall Islands, but the country's climate envoy refuses to accept the scenario experts describe as a looming reality: She wants world leaders to step up.... Like many of the countries hit hardest by climate change, the Marshall Islands needs help and money.... 'We're on the front lines,' the Marshall Islands envoy said. 'We are the most vulnerable and if you protect the most vulnerable you protect yourself.'"
Dino Grandoni & Steven Mufson of the Washington Post: "The Biden administration unveiled a sweeping set of policies Tuesday to cut emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, from oil and gas operations across the country. The proposals, announced at the U.N. climate summit known as COP26, represent one of the president's most consequential efforts so far to combat climate change. Proposed rules from the Environmental Protection Agency could establish standards for old wells, impose more frequent and stringent leak monitoring, and require the capture of natural gas found alongside oil that is often released into the atmosphere. They mark the first time the federal government has moved to comprehensively tackle the seepage of methane across U.S. oil and gas infrastructure. Meanwhile, the Transportation Department's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration will finalize a rule Tuesday extending federal pipeline safety standards to more than 400,000 miles of currently unregulated onshore gathering lines." An AP report is here.
Kelsey Ables of the Washington Post: The Washington Post's "former publisher, the late Katharine Graham, is being honored by the U.S. Postal Service with a new stamp. On Monday, the USPS announced several stamps it will debut in 2022 including a commemorative stamp for the 50th anniversary of the passage of Title IX as well as stamps featuring the sculptor Edmonia Lewis, folk musician Pete Seeger, marine biologist Eugenie Clark and Native American Modernist painter George Morrison. Graham, who took over as chairman and chief executive of The Washington Post Co. after her husband's death in 1963, is honored as a part of the 'Distinguished Americans; series. Graham led The Post through the 1971 publishing of the Pentagon Papers, which told the history of the Vietnam War through secret government documents, and coverage of the Watergate scandal. In 1998, she won a Pulitzer Prize for her memoir 'Personal History.'"
Emily Cochrane, et al., of the New York Times: "Senator Joe Manchin III of West Virginia raised new doubts on Monday about an emerging compromise on a $1.85 trillion climate change and social safety net bill, warning that he had serious reservations about the plan and criticizing liberals in his party for what he called an 'all or nothing' stance on it. Mr. Manchin's broadside, delivered during an appearance in the Capitol, threatened to upend the Democratic Party's ambitions to vote this week on President Biden's top two legislative priorities, even as lawmakers were gathering for what was supposed to be a momentous week for the president's ambitious domestic agenda.... White House officials and leading Democrats rushed to downplay Mr. Manchin's remarks, insisting that the package was still on track. They worked quickly to refute his fiscal concerns, issuing statements that described how the legislation was written to be fully financed and would help create jobs. They cited a letter from 17 Nobel Prize-winning economists who predicted that the plan would ease inflationary pressures in the long term." CNN's report is here. Thanks to Ken W. for the link. ~~~
~~~ Marie: Shocking as it seems, it is apparent that Manchin has chosen not to believe 17 Nobel Prize-winning economists or even me, Marie Burns. He's either a dimwit or a con artist. Oh, and Joe's timing makes it appear he wants Terry McAuliffe (D) to lose the Virginia gubernatorial race. ~~~
~~~ MEANWHILE. Rachel Roubein, et al., of the Washington Post: "Congressional Democrats are scrambling to work out a drug-price compromise that would cap seniors' out-of-pocket costs for medicine and lower the price of insulin, with negotiators working through the weekend and Monday to convince key holdouts like Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.). The compromise, which would allow Medicare to negotiate some prescription drug prices but significantly scale back Democrats' earlier ambitions, comes after the White House abandoned a drug-pricing initiative in its social-spending package after acknowledging it lacked the votes. That decision last week prompted a barrage of complaints from patient advocates and liberal Democrats, who argued the party was ditching a key promise to voters and setting itself up for disaster in next year's midterm elections." A Politico story is here.
Adam Liptak of the New York Times: "After almost three hours of lively arguments, a majority of the justices seemed inclined to allow abortion providers -- but perhaps not the Biden administration -- to pursue a challenge to a Texas law that has sharply curtailed abortions in the state. That would represent an important shift from a 5-to-4 ruling in September that allowed the law to go into effect. Justices Brett M. Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, who were in the majority in that ruling, asked questions suggesting that they thought the novel structure of the Texas law justified allowing the providers to challenge it." The AP's report, also linked yesterday afternoon, is here. ~~~
~~~ Ian Millhiser of Vox: "All four of the dissenters from the September order appear likely to rule against Texas.... It also appears likely that Justices Brett Kavanaugh or Amy Coney Barrett will switch sides and provide the fifth (and maybe a sixth) vote against Texas.... Kavanaugh pointed to a brief filed by the Firearms Policy Coalition, which argued that, if SB 8 is allowed to stand, 'it will undoubtedly serve as a model for deterring and suppressing the exercise of numerous constitutional rights' -- including the Second Amendment. Kavanaugh appeared to view such an outcome as untenable, and that's bad news for SB 8. That said, even if the Court does rule against Texas in Whole Woman's Health, there's no guarantee that such a decision will do much to help abortion providers in Texas. The narrow question currently before the Supreme Court in Whole Woman's Health -- and in United States v. Texas, a similar challenge to SB 8 brought by the Justice Department that is also before the justices -- is ... whether anyone is allowed to sue to block the law. The reason there's any uncertainty about how to answer this question is that SB 8 was drafted for the very purpose of evading judicial review." (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Also, too, Chief Justice John Roberts "seemed to grow increasingly annoyed with Texas Solicitor General Judd Stone." MB: I guess nobody told Judd it's a bad idea to smart off to the CJ during arguments. If this were a novel, and not real life, a character named Judd Stone would be decidedly dense & rough around the edges.
Robert Barnes & Spencer Hsu of the Washington Post: "The Supreme Court on Monday declined to decide whether the public has at least a limited right to review the decisions of a largely secret federal surveillance court whose influence has been growing. The justices turned down a request from the American Civil Liberties Union and others to review a ruling that denied access to decisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). That court said it lacked authority even to consider a public claim under the First Amendment to its secret decision-making. Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Sonia Sotomayor said the case should have been reviewed.... Privacy advocates have criticized the court as a rubber stamp, because judges hear only the government's request. Most subjects never know they are targets or what the government told the judge. In 2019, for instance, judges approved 952 applications in whole or with modifications, while denying 58 in whole or in part."
Robert Barnes of the Washington Post: "The Supreme Court turned down the chance to consider whether a Catholic hospital can be sued over refusing a transgender patient treatment the hospital says would violate its core religious beliefs. A California court said Evan Minton could pursue his lawsuit after a hospital canceled a scheduled hysterectomy after learning days before that he was transgender. The operation was part of his treatment for gender dysphoria, a condition in which an individual's gender identity does not conform to the sex they were assigned at birth. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Neil M. Gorsuch said they would have accepted the case. (Also linked yesterday.)
Contributor Patrick says a letter, also linked yesterday, from WashPo Executive Editor Sally Buzbee reminded him of the final scene of "Deadline-USA." Say, Patrick, is that Buzbee giving the high sign to the Bogart character? (Or is it legendary publisher Katharine Graham?) See Patrick's commentary in today's thread. We are all shocked, shocked (oh, Bogie, you are everywhere!), of course, that Patrick would seem to compare Trump to a gangster/murderer. ~~~
Mark Thompson of CNN: "The American chief executive of Barclays (BCS), Jes Staley, is stepping down with immediate effect following an investigation by British regulators into his relationship with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, the bank said on Monday. The investigation by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Bank of England's Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) was disclosed by Barclays in early 2020 and focused on how Staley had characterized the relationship to his employer. Barclays and Staley were made aware on Friday evening by the FCA and the PRA of the preliminary conclusions of their investigation.... Staley had been running Barclays since late 2015. Prior to that he worked for more than 30 years at JPMorgan (JPM), where he served as head of its investment banking division. His relationship with Epstein dated back to 2000, when he became head of JPMorgan's private bank.... Staley had told the Barclays board that he had no contact with Epstein since becoming Barclays CEO in December 2015." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
The Pandemic, Ctd.
The New York Times' live updates of Covid-19 developments Tuesday are here. The Washington Post's live Covid-19 updates for Tuesday are here.: "Advisers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are meeting Tuesday to discuss giving the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine to children ages 5 to 11 and are expected to recommend moving forward. The Food and Drug Administration has already authorized the two-shot regimen, in which each vaccine dose is one-third of that used for adolescents and adults. CDC Director Rochelle Walensky is expected to sign off later Tuesday on the recommendation from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, allowing clinicians, pharmacies and other health-care providers to start giving the shots as early as Wednesday."
Daniel Slotnik of the New York Times: "The coronavirus is responsible for more than five million confirmed deaths around the world as of Monday, according to data from the Center for Systems Science and Engineering at Johns Hopkins University.... Experts say that five million is an undercount. Many countries are unable to accurately record the number of people who have died from Covid-19, like India and African nations; experts have questioned the veracity of data from other countries, like Russia."
Paul Krugman of the New York Times: "... the U.S. right is, in effect, trying to keep the pandemic going.... Fox News serves up anti-vaccine messages almost every day. Republican governors have tried to ban vaccine mandates not just by local governments and school districts but by private businesses. Multiple Republican attorneys general have filed suit to stop federal vaccine mandates.... A successful vaccination campaign could mean a successful Biden administration, and the right is determined to prevent that, no matter how many avoidable deaths result from vaccine sabotage.... Incidentally, the fact that breakthrough infections happen ... actually strengthens the case for mandates, because it means that even those who've gotten their shots face some danger from those who refuse to follow suit. And the harm done to others by rejecting vaccines goes beyond an increased risk of disease. The unvaccinated are far more likely than the vaccinated to require hospitalization, which means that they place stress on the health care system. They also impose financial costs on the general public, because given the prevalence of insurance both public and private, their hospital bills end up being largely covered by the rest of us."
The Washington Post's live updates of Covid-19 developments Monday are here. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Florida. Greg Sargent of the Washington Post: "Last spring, Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida took the reprehensible step of signing the state's new voter suppression law on Fox News.... Now this story has taken another ugly turn: The University of Florida has barred three professors from serving as expert witnesses in a lawsuit against the voter suppression measure.... The lawsuit argues that the voting law's provisions, such as the ones restricting drop boxes and making it harder to get absentee ballots in various ways, will impose disproportionate burdens on nonwhite voters. The professors -- Daniel A. Smith, Michael McDonald and Sharon Wright Austin -- were hired by the plaintiffs to testify to this and other matters.... DeSantis, it turns out, has top allies at the university.... It's not clear whether those allies -- or DeSantis himself -- are behind this decision.... Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) tells me she is circulating a letter among the Florida congressional delegation condemning the decision and asking for an accounting of how it was arrived at.... With conservatives regularly railing against allegedly rampant liberal censoriousness on college campuses, how Republicans and their media allies approach this should prove instructive." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
New York. From Monday's New York Times live updates of Covid-19 developments, also linked yesterday: "New York City started to enforce its Covid vaccine mandate for municipal workers on Monday, and about 9,000 workers who refused to get vaccinated were placed on unpaid leave.... The vaccine mandate has been especially contentious within the tight-knit Fire Department. More than 2,000 New York City firefighters -- out of a total uniformed force of about 11,000 -- have taken sick days over the past week in what city officials describe as a large-scale protest against the mandate. 'Irresponsible bogus sick leave by some of our members is creating a danger for New Yorkers and their fellow firefighters,' the fire commissioner, Daniel A. Nigro, said in a statement. He attributed the uptick in sick leave to 'anger at the vaccine mandate.'... 'Hundreds of guys are feeling flulike symptoms, because that's what the shot does to people,' [Andrew] Ansbro[, president of the Uniformed Firefights Association,] said." MB: Uh-huh: It's believable that a few firefighters would feel sick from the vaccine, but two thousand? I don't think so. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ~~~
~~~ Gina Bellafante of the New York Times: "The mandates are partly about protecting the municipal workers and largely about protecting the collective good. The problem, of course, is a widespread disinclination to serve that good, whether it is fueled by selfishness and ignorance or the sense that one's contributions to the commonweal have not felt adequately reciprocal. In this case, refusal becomes primarily an assertion of power, a self-interested counterpunch -- the only means available to people who believe that their government has ignored them.... Among [NYC firefighters & police officers] there was still, after two decades, a lingering sense of betrayal around the safety conditions at the World Trade Center in the wake of Sept. 11, something that has played out as a blanket mistrust of public health edicts." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.)
Beyond the Beltway
New Jersey Elections. Matt Friedman of Politico: "New Jersey's state-level elections, held in the year after the presidential election and long rooted in local issues, have become increasingly nationalized as politicians in Washington look to New Jersey and Virginia -- the only two states with off-year gubernatorial races -- as bellwethers for the upcoming midterms. That's accelerated in New Jersey as ... Donald Trump's embrace of culture war politics and racial division have turned the state's once-reliably Republican suburbs Democratic.... For Democrats, the hope is that last year's suburban swing against Trump extends to the gubernatorial race. Republicans, meanwhile, are hoping Biden's sinking approval numbers will depress Democratic turnout in deep blue New Jersey and lure some voters back to the GOP. Those dynamics will help determine if [Gov. Phil] Murphy becomes the first New Jersey Democrat to win reelection to the governorship in four decades."
New York. Charles Bagli of the New York Times: "... decades after [Kathie Durst's] disappearance -- and just weeks after [Robert] Durst >was convicted of murder in another woman's death in Los Angeles -- prosecutors in Westchester, N.Y., say they can finally prove what many have long suspected. Mr. Durst, a one-time heir to a real estate empire whose towers are strung across Manhattan, was indicted in White Plains on Monday on a single count of second-degree murder that accuses him of killing Kathie Durst when she was 29 and months away from fulfilling her dream of becoming a doctor."
Pennsylvania Senate Race. AP: "The estranged wife of Sean Parnell, the Republican endorsed by ... Donald Trump for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania, testified under oath Monday that she endured years of rage and abuse from him, including being choked until she had to bite him, a newspaper reported. Laurie Parnell's testimony came during divorce and custody proceedings in Butler County court over the custody of their three school-age children, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported. She testified that, once after a Thanksgiving trip, he forced her out of their vehicle and left her alongside the highway during an argument when he told her to 'go get an abortion.' Laurie Parnell also testified that Sean once slapped one of their children hard enough to leave welts through the back of the child's shirt. One time, he called her a 'whore' and other obscenities while pinning her down. 'It just got worse and worse' she testified.... Sean Parnell, a decorated former Army Ranger who led a platoon in Afghanistan, was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, she testified. Parnell has been open about that diagnosis...." The Inquirer story is firewalled.
Virginia Election Day. Teo Armus of the Washington Post: "Glenn Youngkin (R) and Terry McAuliffe (D) crisscrossed Virginia on Monday in a final appeal to voters, seeking to energize their bases as the neck-and-neck race for governor draws to a close. Virginians will go to the polls Tuesday to choose the commonwealth's chief executive in a race that is drawing national attention for what it might reveal about party politics when ... Donald Trump is not on the ballot and in the first year of a Joe Biden presidency.... Recent polls suggest that the [gubernatorial] contest is a toss-up." ~~~
~~~ David Corn of Mother Jones: "This is how it's going to be forever: Republicans and conservatives will claim that any election they lose is fraudulent. Donald Trump established this as the playbook for his party-cum-cult. And the full embrace of this authoritarian and dangerous tactic has been evident in the much-watched and tight-as-a-tick governor's race in Virginia between Republican Glenn Youngkin and Democrat Terry McAuliffe." Corn reports quite a few particulars. Here's another. ~~~
~~~ Media Matters: Newt Gingrich tells Sean Hannity on Hannity's Fox "News" show: "First of all if it's really tight they'll steal it, so you can't afford to have a really tight election. You have to win by a big enough margin that they can't steal it."
Share Article
Reader Comments (14)
Working the VA election as an election chief today. Have really tried to distance myself from all the noise but now I’ll be in the thick of it. Luckily my precinct is very blue so I don’t expect too much nonsense but I have heard stories about overly aggressive R poll watchers. We’ll see. I have no problem putting them in their place if they overstep.
Fingers crossed.
@Rockygirl: On a serious note, thank you for the work you're doing. Stay safe. On a less serious note: as the chief, you should be in a position to steal the election for McAuliffe & down-ballot candidates in your precinct, just as Newt Gingrich, et al. say you will. We're counting on you!
As if Manchin and Sinema were not enough to spoil my oatmeal, wrote this comment to Krugman last night, but see it's not yet posted this AM.
It summarized my feelings about all those on my payroll who are too stupid and selfish to get vaccinated. As is often the case these days, it's a sentiment I first (and repeatedly?) aired here.
"If little else have found a source of wry humor in the public servants (on the public payroll anyway), police, fire department personnel, members of the military, hospital workers, etc, who are losing their jobs or positions because they prefer their "freedom."
Their freedom is, of course, purchased at others' cost, and because they don't notice or acknowledge that fundamental fact about living and working in a community, let alone working for one, I'm frankly pleased to see them go.
Who wants a public servant who doesn't give a damn about the public?
We've just lived through four years of that kind of presidency."
I've often wondered who the heck WAS this parliamentarian–--was she like Marion, the librarian? Ryan Grimm answers my questions and it ain't pretty:
"The Senate parliamentarian has one last “ruling” to make -- it’s not actually a ruling but senators pretend it is, which then gives it the force of a ruling -- on whether the new approach to immigration reform Democrats have worked to include in their budget reconciliation package can pass Byrd rule muster.
The details are beside the point: There are parliamentary experts who can make arguments about the provision’s compliance on both sides. So it’s a judgment call. That makes the background and politics of the person making the judgment call of central importance.
The vocation of the parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, before she worked in the parliamentarian’s office, is rather relevant to the question of that judgment: It turns out she worked for Immigration and Naturalization Services (INS) doing immigrant detention and deportation-related work. That’s been sort of known in the Senate, but is the subject of a new story in the online outlet Latino Rebels.
At a commencement address in 2018, she talked about her work vaguely.
Her prior work has gone largely unnoticed, but the Refugee and Immigrant Center’s Texas chapter previously called MacDonough out for it, saying that her role is supposed to be that of an unbiased referee. “The Parliamentarian is supposed to be the nonpartisan referee of the Senate’s rules, but MacDonough is not an impartial voice on the issue of immigration. Before becoming the Senate Parliamentarian, MacDonough worked as a trial attorney handling immigration cases for the U.S. Department of Justice. As someone who has worked to deport people, she cannot be trusted to rule objectively on immigration issues.”
If the parliamentarian offers an opinion that the provision is kosher, then it can go into the bill. If she says no, then it sets off a big fight, because the president of the senate, Kamala Harris, is fully within her right to ignore MacDonough’s advice and include it anyway. People angry at that decision would need 60 votes to take it out. But they could also threaten to simply take the entire bill down. But would Manchin do that? Who knows. Manchin might take the whole thing down anyway.
The news that MacDonough served as a deportation prosecutor gives Harris that much more reason to ignore her opinion. From an immigrant perspective, it must be wild to learn that the fate of the legislation is in the hands of somebody who used to do deportations. But from a bias perspective, there’s genuine reason to believe that her experience working in the field of immigratrion has distorted her sense of perspective on the question.
After she nixed the minimum wage from reconciliation, she issued a one line advisory opinion. No explanation, no analysis, nothing but a no. That was absurd, she was told by Democratic leaders. She’s a staffer; if she’s asked for an opinion, they dont want a yes or no, they want a real analysis. The White House office of legal counsel, if they’re asked to weigh in on a legal question, prepare a memo for principals to review. They don’t just say, yes, you can drone strike weddings, or no, you can’t.
So when she rejected the first immigration provision, MacDonough laid out her reasoning. And buried in it is evidence of clear bias but not necessarily in the way you’d think. She writes:
"The reasons that people risk their lives to come to this country – to escape religious and political persecution, famine, war, unspeakable violence and lack of opportunity in their home countries –cannot be measured in federal dollars. The same is true of the value of having the security of [lawful permanent resident] status in this country.”
In other words, the policy is so profoundly important, that it can’t be counted in terms of dollars, and therefore, even though it has a massive budget impact, it can't be thought of as something that can go through reconciliation. But MacDonough’s experience with immigration is distorting her view of it. She’s worked in it, so she understands how important it is. But lots of things are super important. A climate activist would rightly say that creating a sustainable climate for future generations can’t be measured in federal dollars. A health care activist would say that saving lives by expanding health insurance coverage can’t be measured in federal dollars. An environmentalist would say that drilling in ANWR creates immeasurable and irreversible destruction to the habitat, to the planet’s beauty, etc. And MacDonough has greenlit all those things for reconciliation. Yet in her opinion, she treated immigration reform differently, as if benefits to immigrants are beyond the scope of reconciliation -- but somehow rescuing the planet from climate disaster is not? "
I also want to extend my thanks to Rocky––-good luck!
Have to say however the Virginia governor's election turns out, from this great distance it seems to me that McAuliff might be having trouble generating enthusiasm for a third term for three reasons.
He is running for a third term; he's a Clinton Democrat (and we know how that turned out for Hillary); and the Pretender no longer occupies the White House, tho' I sense he is still lurking as a shadow on most ballots across the country.
All that said, fingers crossed for him over here, far away from Virginia.
Ryan Grim seems to think that someone who has great experience with a particular field should not be allowed to adjudicate major questions in or of that field.
In my professional days we used to call that "appealing to the highest level of ignorance." Interested parties would often try to escalate issues above those who were professionally equipped to deal with a subject (and hired and sworn to do so), and have a decision made by "leadership", political appointees. (And doing a lot of this sure clogs up senior political appointees' in-boxes.)
This is different from "Answer Shopping", where the interested parties put the issue to as many venues as they can find, hoping some mullet will bite. Answer Shopping is a shotgun approach to get the answer you want; ATHLOI is targeted leapfrogging.
I don't know how objective the Senate Parliamentarian is, but I'd bet that if Grim has info of a corrupt track record, he would have printed it.
BTW, almost all Members of Congress are both Answer Shoppers and Ignorance Seekers. At least their staffs are.
I heard an unvaccinated NYC sanitation (I think) worker complaining about being sidelined. “We want to work, it’s as simple as that,” said he. And yet the interviewer didn’t reply “Get vaccinated, it’s as simple as that.”
What are these people waiting for? Proof that the vaccine won’t make them sprout a third ear on their foreheads? Check.
@NiskyGuy; You just cannot get through to these anti-vaxxers with
facts and the truth.
We have been not so politely asked to shut up about getting vaccinated.
This is the Baptist side of the family. One statement was that it is the
mark of the beast. Jesus would not be for vaccinations. If you ask
how they know this---it's in the bible somewhere, out minister told us.
It's also a global agenda to depopulate the world according to them.
The vaccine was patented years ago and has many toxic ingredients
meant to harm you (like HIV, also manmade). Each shot makes you
more dependent on big pharma, and you won't be able to think for
yourself (the chip).
And on and on with no evidence for any of their beliefs, other than
Jesus.
@FM: How silly of me. And I always thought that loving my neighbors included not giving them a lethal respiratory disease. But then again, right wingers have a narrow understanding of both “love” and “neighbors.”
I wondered why Florida CFO was trying to lure a California Hamburger chain to relocate, putting it down to business. But I see now that the chain, In-N-Out is closing dining rooms to avoid compliance with California C-19 requirements. Why, that fits right in with our little Trumpist governors programs.
@Forrest Morris & @NiskyGuy: NiskyGuy's remark about "a narrow understanding of neighbor" & Forrest's mention of his Baptist anti-vax relatives brings to mind the New Testament story of the good Samaritan. The story got its name centuries after Luke's gospel was in circulation, and that name has led to a misunderstanding of the probable intended meaning of the parable.
The central character is not the Samaritan, but the Jewish man who was left to die on the side of the road. There are at least three reasons we know this: (1) the Jewish listeners would have identified with the injured man, not with the Samaritan, who belonged to a tribe the Jews hated; (2) the Samaritan doesn't show up till late in the story, so he can't be the main guy; and (3) the "frame" around the parable.
On the frame: Jesus has a Talmudic dialog with a lawyer (that is, an expert on Talmudic law). The lawyer asks Jesus what he can do to obtain eternal life. Jesus asks him what is written in the law, and the lawyer cites the central core of (Christianity &) Judaism: Love god above all else & love your neighbor as yourself. Jesus says that's the secret. Then the lawyer asks, "But who is my neighbor?" That is the key question the parable addresses. In the story, two Jewish religious notables pass by the injured man without helping, while the hated Samaritan stops to tend to him. Then we're back to the end of the frame: Jesus asks, "Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?” The lawyer replied, “The one who had mercy on him.” Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”
So the star of the parable -- and the lawyer -- come to understand that "neighbor" has a broad meaning and can apply to anyone in the world, even perceived enemies. When Jesus says, "go & do likewise," "likewise" is understood to mean "treat everyone as your neighbor." Too bad Forrest's Baptist friends don't heed the most popular parable in their Holy Bibles. Maybe Forrest can explain it to them.
Texas will be so jealous:
" ... (China has a) newly amended criminal code that punishes the slander of China’s martyrs and heroes. Since it went into effect in March, the statute has been enforced with a revolutionary zeal, part of an intensified campaign under China’s leader, Xi Jinping, to sanctify the Communist Party’s version of history — and his vision for the country’s future.
The Cyberspace Administration of China, which polices the country’s internet, has created telephone and online hotlines to encourage citizens to report violations. It has even published a list of 10 “rumors” that are forbidden to discuss."
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/02/world/asia/china-slander-law.html?action=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage§ion=World%20News
This morning we voted at one of the elementary schools. Had a nice chat with two people who sign you in–--making sure you are who you say you are. They tell us, after we asked, about a number of folks who refused to wear a mask but were told they needed to wear them if they intended to vote–-they put them on. We were given ballots and penciled them in. We then proceeded to slide them in the machine but mine kept coming out–– the man in charge took a look and said sorry, but your ballot is invalid–-you voted twice for the same position. Sure enough, since I vote a straight democratic ticket but vote for a republican mayor, I penciled in the democratic candidate for mayor that was in that same democratic line. I had to bring my ballot over to the ballot lady who marked it invalid and put it in the invalid box. With a new ballot I commenced with the procedure, this time correctly. As I was walking out the ballot lady called out–-"I'm watching you!" and laughed–-I gave her a happy dance move and said "thanks."
I'm mentioning all this because there is no way in hell one could cheat or screw up re: a ballot––the machine does the job of refusing invalid ballots––and if one does screw up that screw up ballot is also saved and put in a separate box. This is such a simple procedure if carried out properly. However–-this is a small New England town, what the procedures are elsewhere may be more complicated but if so, why?