Brady Walkinshaw to take on Jim McDermott in next year’s WA House race: State Rep Brady Walkinshaw confirmed yesterday that he will be running for McDermott’s seat. Walkinshaw stressed he has “incredible respect and admiration” for McDermott, but said it’s time for a change. “I believe this region is ready for its next progressive leader,” he said. The “welfare state” is a terrible name for an essential system: “‘Welfare’ has two main meanings: general well-being, and, in some circles, government handouts. Welfare, though, is not designed with either of those meanings in mind—it’s a system of programs, including Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment insurance, that automatically props up consumer spending during recessions by making sure workers are getting by. Yes, an individual who receives money when unexpected, uncontrollable events stop him or her from working is getting help from the government. But it also helps on the level of the economy, as it makes sure that aggregate demand stays high during labor-market slumps. In this sense, the welfare state stabilizes capitalism.” New York Daily News cover: Perfection. An early look at tomorrow’s front page… GOD ISN’T FIXING THIS: https://t.co/eKUg5f03ec pic.twitter.com/j4gEFg9YtJ — New York Daily News (@NYDailyNews) December 3, 2015
If you haven’t heard yet, Marco Rubio has come up with a strategy to address the high costs of college. And like always, his answer is to marketize public goods . Specifically, Rubio’s college-cost proposal is backing “ indentured servitude .” Paula Dwyer at Bloomberg delves into the details : The new method, called income sharing, typically involves a “loan” (I’ll explain the quotation marks later) from investors to students. Instead of paying the money back with interest, students contract to pay their investors a set percentage of income for a fixed number of years after graduation. This concept owes its origin to Milton Friedman (who else?), and as Dwyer points out, many critics of this idea find “the concept of investing in human assets creepy.” You don’t say. I appreciate that Rubio is trying to solve the massive issue of high college costs – a topic which evades the attention of many Republican candidates. But trusting the market to on every single issue, from subsidizing low wages to ensuring paid family leave is intellectually dishonest. Moreover, it leads our nation in a dangerous direction. As Professor Michael Sandel has warned us : If you look at it, we have drifted over the last three decades from having a market economy, to becoming a market society. A market economy is a valuable and effective tool for organising productive activity. But a market society is a place where everything is up for sale. It’s a way of life, where market values reach into every sphere of life. That can be everything from family life in personal relations, to health, education, civic life, and civic duties. This has happened with relatively little debate. Part of the appeal of market faith is that it seems to spare us the need, as citizens, to deliberate, reason together, or argue together, about how to value goods. Markets seem to be a neural way of sorting it out. But it’s a mistake to see markets that
+ Read More
Most Americans think attacks on abortion clinics are “domestic terrorism.” That’s good to hear. A majority of Republicans (54 percent) even believe that such attacks should be labelled as terrorism. Which is a good place to start I guess. The wealthiest 20 people now own more wealth than half the American population. That’s neither fair nor good for our economy. Donald Trump is a bigot and a racist: Dana Milbank doesn’t mince his words here. He goes after the Donald and his supporters noting, “though all Trump supporters surely aren’t racists or bigots, even a cursory examination of social media reveals that many are.” Five assumptions about this Republican election cycle: Here’s an interesting breakdown of the 2016 GOP race by Brian Beutler. To the extent that conventional wisdom is possible in a campaign this erratic, a consensus is emerging among political analysts that looks something like this: 1. Despite his large, and enduring polling lead, Donald Trump still can’t win the nomination; something, at some point, will happen to derail his campaign. 2. Cruz will be the main beneficiary of Trump’s demise. 3. The establishment will coalesce behind Rubio as a more palatable alternative to Cruz. 4. The race will consolidate into a bloody slugfest between Cruz and Rubio, with Rubio enjoying overwhelming support from party actors and Cruz from conservative activists. Rubio will have a difficult time convincing ideological voters that he’s more authentically conservative than Cruz, who will gladly cite his rival’s official endorsements as evidence that he’s been compromised by the establishment. 5. As suggested by Rubio’s attacks on Cruz’s vote to end the NSA’s bulk , warrantless collection of electronic metadata, foreign policy will be the one arena in which Cruz will prove vulnerable on the right.
Hillary Clinton’s infrastructure plan, explained: In case you haven’t heard, Hillary Clinton put forward a bold infrastructure plan “that would generate $500 billion in additional infrastructure spending over the next five years.” She rightly called such an investment a “down payment” on our future. Matthew Yglesias notes: Infrastructure spending is in a sense a win-win for the economy, which both directly creates jobs and indirectly lays the foundation for further growth. But to maximize the growth-generating potential of infrastructure might require undermining some of its job-creating punch. David Brooks talks to himself: It seems that each column Brooks wades deeper and deeper into…I honestly don’t know. This time, he has a conversation with a dead man about the Paris climate talks; namely, Alexander Hamilton. Brooks moans that any climate agreement will result in cheating which in turn “will create a cycle of resentment that will dissolve any sense of common purpose.” His attitude on climate change might as well be, “We’re all fucked – let’s pack it up, boys.” The two American economies: Peter Temin argues that the US has become a “dual economy.” By this he means “the disparity between the top thirty percent and the remainder has increased to the point” where both sets should be thought of independently. According to Temin, “the upper sector of the dual economy is the FTE sector, named for its main components: finance, technology and electronics. The lower sector of the American dual economy is the low-wage sector, and education is the way for people to go from the low-wage to the FTE sector.” Two-thirds of Americans want U.S. to join climate change pact : But hey, since when did the US government care what the people thought?
Like any political philosophy, liberalism has its blind-spots—specifically with regards to how it treats individuals and, by proxy, families. “Liberalism, particularly in its American incarnations, has largely conceived of citizens as able, autonomous adults,” says Professor Maxine Eichner in her book, The Supportive State. Liberalism’s fixation on the individual ignores how humans are, in fact, highly dependent on other individuals throughout their lives. As Eichner states, “no adult is an island.” However, this basic human reality has been discarded by American politics, largely because it does not fit within the liberal prism. The idea that individuals are dependent on one another (or the government) seems at first to be antithetical to liberalism and our nation’s founding values. As Rick Santorum once said , “My view is the less the government can do and the more freedom and opportunity you give people, that trusting people and free people and free enterprise – that America has built the greatest country in the history of the world.” It is easy to see liberalism’s parameters at work here. By drawing such a stark line between the people and the government, conservatives like Santorum have failed to see “the ways in which families function are always deeply and inextricably intertwined with government policy.” They can only imagine individuals as autonomous agents, who are conceived of singularly, without connection to their families, and believe the individual and the state are both better off if they keep away from one another. As a result, America is having a really tough time dealing with family issues. Much more so than other democratic nations which were founded upon similar liberal ideals. In fact, right now America is “ one of only three countries to not provide paid sick days for a worker missing 5 days of work to the flu .” What about vacation time? Or paid parental leave? Ha. Good one. I haven’t even mentioned yet how “the United States has implemented very few policies to
+ Read More
You are more than 7 times as likely to be killed by a right-wing extremist than by Muslim terrorists: Our Supreme Troublemaker, Nick Hanauer, shared this fascinating article on Twitter and I thought it deserved a place in today’s clips. While we are still not sure of the motivations behind the Colorado Springs shooting, the shooter’s “actions…appear to be an act of politically motivated terrorism directed against an institution widely reviled by conservatives.” 60% of Ted Cruz’s tax cuts go to the 1%: How to solve income inequality? Create more of it! Of course! Speaking of Ted Cruz, could his bromance with Donald Trump be coming to a close? The tweet below suggests as much: Ted Cruz on Donald Trump: "I don’t believe Donald Trump is going to be our nominee and I don’t believe he is going to be our president." — Jessica Hopper (@jesshop23) November 30, 2015 Up until now, Cruz has been extremely congenial towards Trump and his easily offended supporters. However, it looks like the gloves may be coming off. With the Iowa caucuses approaching rapidly, Cruz must start snatching some of Trump’s base if he hopes to win. And winning Iowa (or coming a close second) is a must for the Cruz campaign. Why the economic fates of America’s cities diverged: “Despite all the attention focused these days on the fortunes of the ‘1 percent,’ debates over inequality still tend to ignore one of its most politically destabilizing and economically destructive forms. This is the growing, and historically unprecedented, economic divide that has emerged in recent decades among the different regions of the United States.” Here’s a fascinating read on the geographical convergence (and divergence) of wages in America. Fear wins, Obama loses: Paul Waldman notes, “manipulating the public’s emotions has never been Obama’s strong suit.” He’s not wrong. Yet, we know that “Campaign Obama” was quite effective at creating a powerful sense of hope in the public’s emotions. So why doesn’t he carry on that sort of rhetoric as president – especially when it comes to foreign policy? Waldman
+ Read More
Only 7 percent of Maryland Democrats support Martin O’Malley for president: Poor Martin O’Malley. The former Governor of Maryland hasn’t been able to gain any traction in this race – even in his own state. Time to pack it up, methinks. US consumer spending slowing, but business investment poised to rise: According to Reuters, “consumer spending edged up 0.1 percent after a similar increase in September. That suggests consumer spending, which accounts for more than two-thirds of U.S. economic activity, has slowed from the third quarter’s brisk 3.0 percent annual pace.” Nearly 140 lawmakers ask Obama to shut loophole that allows gun sales without background checks: They wrote the president, saying, “Under current law, only licensed gun dealers are required to perform background checks for all gun sales, and only those individuals deemed to be ‘engaged in the business’ of dealing in guns are required to obtain a license from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF),” the House letter states . “However, the regulatory definition of ‘engaged in the business, is exceptionally vague. As a result, individuals are able to sell guns at a high volume at gun shows, over the internet, or elsewhere without ever having becoming licensed and, in turn, without being compelled to conduct a simple background check before completing a sale. Your administration could take an immediate step that would have an important impact on limiting gun violence,” the letter also said. “Despite tragedy after tragedy, the Republican Congress has not been willing to pass any meaningful legislation to strengthen laws to help keep guns out of the hands of individuals who pose an increased risk to public safety.”
51% say government should ensure health care: It looks like our nation is a bunch of socialists again. For the first time since 2008, the majority of the nation believes that the government is responsible for providing health care to its people. In 2014, that number was at 45%. This change in public attitude most certainly helps the Democratic party and should remind all serious candidates (locally and federally) that they should not run away from Obamacare. Rather, they should defend its advancement of health care, but point out there is still much that can be improved. Rubio is the dark money candidate: Marco Rubio is the scariest candidate I’ve seen from the Republican party in over eight years. He’s young, he’s passionate, and he has a quintessential “American Dream” upbringing. (Check out Rubio’s ad which highlights his father’s working-class credentials.) Anyways, I digress. A recent piece at Vox highlights that, “Rubio has benefited from anonymous, undisclosed cash to a degree that’s unprecedented for a modern presidential primary contender. Indeed, the vast majority of ads aired to promote Rubio so far this year have been funded by a single group — one that won’t reveal its funders.” In short, he’s a bought candidate. Will that juxtapose well against Donald Trump? Time will tell. One thing we can know for certain: Rubio is the dark money candidate of this election cycle. (Sorry David Brooks, it looks like he’s not “ uncorrupted ” after all.) 5 Black Lives Matter protestors shot in Minneapolis: Three white men are considered suspects for this horrific shooting. Thankfully, none of the protestors suffered life-threatening injuries. America has some serious race issues. Quiet desperation and American fascism: Alec MacGillis of ProPublica, writing in The New York Times Sunday Review, observes that for the most part, the poor aren’t defecting to Republicans— they are not voting at all . His exhibit A is eastern Kentucky, one of America’s poorest and most government-dependent regions. But the poor are so marginalized and disaffected that they are disconnected from civic life entirely. Looking
+ Read More
I can still remember the first time I read the Republican National Committee’s incredible autopsy on the 2012 loss. Mere months after Barack Obama secured a second term, here was a document, penned by our rivals, which was impressive in its self-awareness and criticism. It seemed as if GOP strategists had learned all the right lessons from Mitt Romney’s defeat. “Our message was weak; our ground game was insufficient; we weren’t inclusive,” Priebus noted quite accurately. Within the first few pages of the 100-page report, the RNC made clear: We need to campaign among Hispanic, black, Asian, and gay Americans and demonstrate we care about them, too. We must recruit more candidates who come from minority communities. The report continued: “Asked to describe Republicans, [focus groups] said that the Party is ‘scary,’ ‘narrow minded,’ and ‘out of touch’ and that we were a Party of ‘stuffy old men.’ This is consistent with the findings of other post-election surveys.” Back in 2013, I read this and thought, “Oh, no. They’re not going to make the same mistakes again.” In 2015, I can only look back at that thought and laugh. Instead of developing a more welcoming and “compassionate conservatism,” the Republican party has chosen to become the anti-diversity and anti-inclusion party. They have decided to double down on “the perception that the GOP does not care about people.” They have (cravenly) determined to double down on xenophobic comments towards Hispanics, even though the report warned them “if Hispanics think we do not want them here, they will close their ears to our policies.” Throughout this primary process, they have made a concerted effort to double down on just about every fault they displayed in the 2012 contest. I suppose that’s good news for Democrats, but my god, is it bad news for our national politics.
Cartoon of the day: It appears that another war in the Middle East is on the horizon. Let’s face it, folks, we are a people that love operating in a world of black and white. Every ten years or so, we identify an “evil” (be that terrorism or communism) and then begin to whip up raw, fearful emotions in our people. After the Iraq War debacle, perhaps America feels an overwhelmingly sense of contrition and wants to right this terrible wrong. If that is the case, John Adams presciently noted our national psyche: “Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war.” Hillary’s pledge to not raise middle-class taxes is bad news for progressive politics: This lurch to the right has come as no surprise to many progressives. Yglesias points out that disavowing middle-class tax increases has become like “a formal Grover Norquist–style pledge” in the Democratic party. He warns that this pledge is “destructive of the long-term possibilities of progressive governance.” I couldn’t agree more. Clearly, the wealthy have to pay the most taxes – both by relative and absolute terms. However, in order to fund bold programs, every single American must share some of the burden. To say otherwise is to live in a political fantasy world. It’s disingenuous and it comes across as pandering. Furthermore, Clinton and Obama’s refusal to increase the taxes of the middle class “speaks to a profound problem in the larger liberal project.” Pledging “that the 1 percent will pay for everything reflects a fairly shallow solution.” More than that, it represents a misdiagnosis of how to deal with income inequality. It’s beginning to feel like 2002 all over again: So says Paul Waldman, who laments the parallels between the Paris attacks and 9/11. To be clear, I’m not arguing that heightened fears of ISIS will sweep the Republicans into the White House next year; there’s lots of time between now and then, and other issues will grab the electorate’s attention. The American public and its political elite
+ Read More