Category: Political Gridlock

Links You Can Use

The Daily Escape:

Santa Rita prickly pear in bloom, AZ – May 2023 photo by Wilson Goodrich

Today Wrongo returns to his “Links you can use” format from several years ago.

First up, Bloomberg reports that Trump’s takeover of the GOP helped him to rewrite the rules on how primary delegates to the GOP presidential convention will be awarded. Since leaving office, Trump has gotten 10 more states to award delegates through winner-take-all primaries, even if the winner receives fewer than a majority of the votes. The number of winner-take-all states has grown from seven to 17.

Needless to say, if it’s crowded field and he gets the most votes, even if it’s only 30%, he’ll win.

Second, Republican governors have discovered that they’re getting significant political mileage out of championing people who have engaged in vigilante violence that dovetails with the GOP’s culture wars. Brian Klaas writes about the Right’s open embrace of political violence. In Texas, Governor Abbott has said that he was “looking forward” to pardoning Daniel Perry, who murdered a Black Lives Matter protester. Perry was sentenced to 25 years in prison. He had previously texted a friend that he “might have to kill” some people on his way to work.

Over the weekend, Florida Governor DeSantis tweeted his support for Daniel Penny (Perry and Penny?) after Penny killed the homeless Black man Jordan Neely, on NYC’s subway. DeSantis didn’t hold back:

Lots of dog whistles right there from the governor. NBC 4New York reported that the legal defense fund had raised more than $2 million after DeSantis tweeted the link to Penny’s donation page. This shows MAGAs have found another way to wealth and fame as Daniel Penny now joins Kyle Rittenhouse as a violent millionaire funded by the Republican Right.

Brian Klaas wrote about a study that shows “Who Supports Political Violence?”, conducted by Miles T. Armaly, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Mississippi and Adam M. Enders, an Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Louisville. Their findings show some key traits that predict support for political violence:

Perceived victimhood is highly correlated with support for political violence. This is different from actual victimhood. While previous research found that people who are actually being oppressed are more likely to turn to violence, this study shows that it doesn’t really matter whether someone is actually being oppressed; instead, the feeling of being oppressed is sufficient.

This was the strongest predictor of support for violence.

The next strongest correlate was a sense of “white identity.” And the two interact, as those who buy into the Right-wing narrative that white people are under attack in America (due to their loss of social dominance), are also likely to be the same individuals who feel perceived victimhood.

Also, past military service is correlated with a predisposition for vigilante violence. People who previously served in the American armed forces were more likely to express support for political violence than those who have not. None of this is good news for the US.

Third, the Debt Ceiling negotiations are resuming today in the White House after House, Senate and White House negotiators met for three hours Saturday, and then reconvened on Monday. Benjamin Studebaker worries that Biden may be about to repeat Obama’s errors in negotiations with Republicans in 2011:

“Back in 2011…Obama faced the same problem…Biden now faces. Congressional Republicans refused to raise the debt ceiling unless Obama agreed to budget cuts….Obama….Instead…cut a deal. He signed the Budget Control Act of 2011. It committed the federal government to…enormous cuts. Over the course of 2012, it became clear that these cuts would cause serious damage to the economy. So…Obama negotiated another deal that would save most of the cuts for 2013. Over the course of 2013, the same arguments were made again, but this time Obama was unable to secure another delay, and the cuts took effect.”

Sounds like what we’re going through right now. In 2013, we escaped the economic disaster, but at the price of the Fed adding several rounds of Quantitative Easing leading to our current economic situation. If Biden agrees to cut spending, the economy will again be damaged.

And the Federal Reserve will be pressured to limit the damage via lower rates or flooding the market with more dollars.

Republicans will, of course, oppose tax increases. That means the Biden administration won’t be able to raise taxes to help offset the growing deficit or pay for future expenses. Therefore it has to rely on the Federal Reserve’s monetary policies. The weaker economy created by rate hikes is an economy where the current tax rates will generate less tax revenue. That creates more political pressure to cut spending.

All of these stories look like rinse, lather, repeat. And not to the nation’s benefit.

Facebooklinkedinrss

Is Default Preferable To Compromise?

The Daily Escape:

Wild Ocotillo blooms with Agave buds, Anza-Borrego Desert SP, CA – May 2023 photo by Paulette Donnellon

Yesterday, Biden met with the leadership of the Congress to discuss the debt ceiling and the dangers of default. Wrongo is writing this before we know what if anything concrete, comes out of that meeting.

This is the third time in twelve years that a Republican House majority has tried to use the debt limit to extort a Democratic president into adopting policies that the GOP failed to enact through normal political means. This time around, like the past two times, Republicans say they want spending cuts, but as Nate Cohn wrote in the NYT:

“The 2022 midterm campaign didn’t show evidence of a resurgent conservative passion for spending cuts either. The debt-deficit issue had such a low profile in the national conversation that a question about it wasn’t even asked in exit polling.”

But absent real news, let’s take a look at the Republican position as outlined in the bill McCarthy and the GOP passed in the House. They’re pushing to pair $4.5 trillion in spending cuts over a decade with a one year, one time, $1.5 trillion increase in the debt limit. Their plan achieves most of its savings with spending caps for discretionary spending — the part of the yearly budget that isn’t automatic (like Social Security payments) — but it doesn’t say which discretionary programs should be cut and which should be spared.

Their plan caps government spending at last year’s levels. This would be a decrease of ~ 9%. A yearly increase is capped at 1% annually for the next 10 years. This action would save approximately $3.2 trillion. They haven’t offered any detail about where the cuts would come from, and there is no inflation adjustment to the spending cap.

But since the GOP has said it plans zero cuts in the defense budget and that there will be no cuts for veterans or for border security, cutting everywhere else will be very deep. The NYT estimates that if those programs remained untouched, the GOP plan would cut the balance of federal spending by an amount of a 51% cut across the board.

Seems unrealistic.

Social Security checks could still be issued because a 1996 law provides a means of circumventing the debt limit. It allows the Treasury Department to pay Social Security benefits, along with Medicare payments, even if there is a delay in raising the debt ceiling. It allows for the Social Security and Medicare trust funds to be drawn down to keep those benefits flowing until the debt limit is raised, and the trust fund replenished. It also prohibits those funds from being used to pay for any other government programs.

In the past, the usual political rhythm of fiscal crises is that the GOP House stumbles around for a while, and then, right before the deadline, Senate Republicans and Mitch McConnell come off the sideline. They cut a deal with the Democratic president and pass the deal in the Senate with a big bipartisan majority. They then leave town with the hot potato squarely in the Speaker’s lap.

It’s questionable if this will happen in May, 2023.

Biden should address the nation after the Tuesday talks. How about an oval office address that lays out the facts, along with a call to action: Call your representatives and tell them to pass a clean debt limit bill. He could detail for the American people the cuts the GOP are demanding in return for raising the limit. He could also say that he is willing to negotiate in good faith on the budget with House Republicans as long as the debt ceiling is a separate matter.

The compromise might be to have a temporary debt ceiling increase to allow both to move forward together. Sadly, for McCarthy and the House Republicans, default seems to be preferable to compromise.

This is zero-sum politics with the highest stakes. At the end of the day, all paths lead to the same place: The US will need to find a way to pay the bills it has incurred as they mature.

The question is how much damage will have happened along the way.

Facebooklinkedinrss

Sunday Cartoon Blogging – May 7, 2023

(The Monday Wake Up Call will be published on Tuesday this week.)

America has been waiting for more than a year for the Federal Reserve to get control over inflation. In that time, they’ve jacked up interest rates to over 5%. A year ago, raising rates that high seemed unthinkable, but here we are. Wages have also risen.

There was some damage: A few horribly managed banks collapsed. A couple of auto dealer-lender chains that specialized in selling overpriced used cars to subprime customers collapsed. And there were some fiascos in commercial real estate.

All of that has led the Fed to indicate that there could be a “soft landing” for our economy. But with the latest jobs growth numbers, maybe the Fed will have to keep circling the airport. In April, 253,000 jobs were created. There are now a record 155.7 million payroll jobs. Over the past 3 months on average, 222,000 jobs were created per month. So is a soft landing ahead?

Please raise your seat tables to the upright position and pass your trash to the attendant. On to cartoons.

Coronations aren’t just for the Brits:

(Wrongo watched the coronation of King Charles III yesterday. Seventy years ago, he also watched the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II  on a 9″ black & white Philco television. Yesterday’s was on a 55” Samsung.)

The reality about the GOP:

What to expect after the GOP talks with Biden about the Debt Ceiling:

Proud Boys found guilty, but who pulled the strings?

Kremlin complains:

Justice Thomas needs to be taller to take the ride:

Time to buy more cards:

Facebooklinkedinrss

Sunday Cartoon Blogging – March 12, 2023

Let’s talk about Silicon Valley Bank (SVB). The tech industry’s go-to lender just became the second-largest bank failure in US history. The bank’s customers withdrew $42 billion from their accounts on Thursday. That’s $4.2 billion an hour, or more than $1 million per second for ten hours straight.

We ancient, moss-covered former bankers call this a bank run. That occurs when a large number of customers of a bank withdraw their deposits simultaneously over concerns about the bank’s solvency.

Nearly half of all venture-backed US companies were SVB customers. We’re unsure why the run started, but on Thursday, several Venture Capital firms started telling their client companies that pulling cash from SVB was prudent, and the run began.

While bank deposits are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) up to $250,000, few of SVB’s deposits, by value, were FDIC insured, since its customers were overwhelmingly corporations with much more than $250,000 in the bank. By Friday, there was no cash left in SVB’s coffers. In fact, the cash on hand was negative, to the tune of $958 million.

Do you remember when Trump and Republicans rolled back some of the regulations Dodd-Frank placed on regional banks?:

“Some banking experts on Friday pointed out that a bank as large as Silicon Valley Bank might have managed its interest rate risks better had parts of the Dodd-Frank financial-regulatory package, put in place after the 2008 crisis, not been rolled back under President Trump.”

Trump signed the bill despite a report from Democrats on Congress’s joint economic committee warning that under the new law, SVB and other banks of its size:

“…would no longer be subject to nearly any enhanced regulations”.

This also affects ordinary people. Wrongo has a California friend who banks with SVB. Here’s a quote from her:

“While I’ve been waiting to sign the purchase contract on a condo, I woke to the news that my lender Silicon Valley Bank has been closed and taken over by regulators. That concludes literally 8 months of working on this….and the end of my effort to buy a home.”

So don’t listen to the pleas for another bank bailout. Wrongo would be okay with bailouts if they were accompanied by personal accountability by management. Like, we’ll rescue your institution, but none of the bank senior management can ever work in finance again. On to cartoons.

Tucker’s mendacity:

It takes two teams to play:

Walmart’s OK with pills for boners, but not for pregnancy:

GOP wants to regulate Trans not Trains:

GOP loves doormats:

Most appropriately named movie of this or any year:

Facebooklinkedinrss

Monday Wake Up Call – February 6, 2023

The Daily Escape:

Sea smoke, South Portland, ME looking towards Portland Head light – February 2023 photo by Benjamin Williamson Photography

On Saturday, Wrongo and Ms. Right went to a dinner party with friends and two generations of family. The after dinner talk turned to how quite a few of the kids and grandkids weren’t planning on having children.

We tossed around ideas about why they were unlikely to procreate, and somethings stood out. First, they see climate change as an existential threat that society is unwilling to solve, even though the technology already exists. Why bring a kid into that?

Second, society seems broken. Our group meant that we face simultaneous crises, layered on top of each other.  This situation involving simultaneous global challenges, for which we have few solutions, is called Polycrisis.

And a crisis in one global system can spill over into other global systems. They interact with each another so that each new crisis worsens the overall harm. The Polycrisis environment weakens every individual’s sense of security and their place in the world.

One impact that seems related to the simultaneous climate, health, economic and geopolitical challenges are the effects on children. The needs for special education and special services for the very young has never been greater in America. It’s forcing big changes in public school budgets across the country.

No one is really sure why this is happening.

Wrongo isn’t proposing a solution, just suggesting we need to think more about how the problems of declining birth rates, coupled with the growing issues our young children are facing, might be interrelated.

Noah Smith an economist, has an interesting newsletter about how we define community:

“In the past, our communities were primarily horizontal — they were simply the people we lived close to….Increasingly, though, new technology has enabled us to construct communities that I’ve decided to call vertical — groups of people united by identities, interests, and values rather than by physical proximity.”

Smith says that in the past few decades, Americans became disengaged from their local communities, hunkering down in their houses, and failing to interact with the people around them. That led to a well-documented decline in Americans’ participation in civic organizations, local clubs, etc. Our neighbors can also be stifling and/or repressive because they impose uncomfortable community norms on us.

We’ve always had Smith’s vertical communities: “the Jewish community”, “the LGBT community”, and many others. But in the past, an identity grouping wasn’t a true community. We all have identities that connect us with faraway people — other Irishmen, other Taylor Swift fans.

Prior to the internet, we couldn’t have much contact with them. These loose vertical communities weren’t efficient ways to exchange ideas. Before email, text and streaming video, getting the word out was very slow, and our horizontal communities would decide whether what we wanted to share was worthwhile.

Now, we’re no longer isolated. The internet brought us a world of human interaction: social media feeds, chat apps, and so on. Suddenly we’re surrounded by people through their words, their pictures, and their videos.

Now we organize much of our human interaction around virtual vertical communities. Former occasional connections became Facebook groups, subreddits and personal networks on Twitter. And like our small towns back in the day, vertical communities use social ostracism to punish those who deviate from consensus norms.

But vertical communities can’t provide things like public education, national defense, courts of law, property rights, product standards, and infrastructure that we all depend on.

These require a government to administer them. And governments are organized horizontally; mostly defined by lines on maps. But what if we socialize, cooperate, and fall in love with the people from our vertical community? What if we grow apart from the people next door and the relationship is irreparable?

We see this every day in America when citizens go to a PTA meeting and discover a bunch of strangers saying things that they despise.

Wrongo isn’t saying that vertical communities are another enemy. But they can and do exacerbate the polycrisis by making truth harder to see. And by making effective action more difficult.

If you doubt this, remember how powerful the anti-vaxx vertical was at the height of the Covid pandemic. Today’s vertical communities are strong enough to keep our government from getting much of anything done. How can we work together with neighbors when we share few common bonds?

America today is a predatory society. We predate on politics, ideas, values, and culture. Biden’s trying to change this, but can he succeed? How many of us are trying to help? Changing a society that’s this broken, one that’s moving deeper into vertical communities will be a very heavy lift.

Time to wake up America! What can we do to maintain what Lincoln in his first inaugural address said:

“We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection.”

To help you wake up, listen and watch the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band’s 2022 cover of Bob Dylan’s “I Shall Be Released” with Larkin Poe (Rebecca Lovell and Megan Lovell) on vocals and a fabulous slide guitar solo:

Sample of Lyrics:

Standing next to me in this lonely crowd
Is a man who swears he’s not to blame
All day long I hear him shout so loud
Just crying out that he was framed

Facebooklinkedinrss

Keep Your Politics Off Of My Economy

The Daily Escape:

Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge, Kennebunk, ME – January 2023 photo by Eric Storm Photo

From the WaPo:

“The economy posted another consecutive quarter of steady expansion between October and December, with economic activity increasing at a 2.9% annual rate. Consumer spending contributed to the strong fourth-quarter showing, especially given the slumps in large parts of the economy, including housing and manufacturing.”

The latest GDP figures show we have a resilient but slowing economy. Some of the slowdown is intentional, brought on by the Federal Reserve’s aggressive increases in interest rates as a way to control our high inflation. The Fed raised interest rates seven times last year, expecting that higher borrowing costs would lead businesses and households to cut back enough to slow the economy and curb price increases.

That’s happened in the real estate market, and to a lesser degree, in manufacturing. WaPo quotes Joseph LaVorgna, chief economist at SMBC Nikko Securities America:

“You may see [growth] and think the economy is out of the woods, but that would be entirely the wrong read….There are a lot of variables that are all pointing in the same direction: There’s a housing recession. Manufacturing looks like it’s approaching recession. We’re seeing weakness in temp hiring. And it’s doubtful we’ve felt the full effects of all of the Fed’s rate hikes.”

So Biden can take credit for an excellent recovery so far, but many major banks are still forecasting an economic downturn this year. As Diane Swonk, chief economist at KPMG says: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“Momentum has already begun to slow in response to rate hikes, but the bulk of the slowdown is yet to come….The Fed’s goal is to let growth stall out in 2023.”

So are we in for a bad downturn that will persist through the 2024 elections? It’s a possibility if we keep playing politics with the economy.

We need to let people know that inflation has been easing month after month while the unemployment rate has held steady at about 3.5%. The year-over-year change in the consumer price index peaked at just over 9% in June, and since then it’s fallen to just under 6.5%. Other inflation indicators like the producer price index (PPI) have trended lower from prior highs as well.

And the world’s biggest inflation scold, economist Larry Summers who has been saying for 2+ years that we need a deep recession to drive out high inflation is sounding less hawkish: (brackets by Wrongo)

“I still think it’s going to be hard…[but]…You have to recognize that the figures are better than somebody like me would have expected three months ago. It’s still a very difficult job for the Fed, but the situation does look a bit better.”

From prior experience, Larry knows how to prepare, cook, and eat crow.

Can the Democrats and Republicans get out of the way of our currently good economic growth? From Heather Cox Richardson:

“On Monday the Wall Street Journal reported that median weekly earnings rose 7.4% last year, slightly faster than inflation. For Black Americans employed full time, the median rise was 11.3% over 2021. A median Hispanic or Latino worker’s income saw a 4.8% raise, to $837 a week. Young workers, between 16 and 24, saw their weekly income rise more than 10%. Also seeing close to a 10% weekly rise were those in the bottom tenth of wage earners, those making about $570 a week.”

Overall, the economy seems to be on solid ground at least for now. But the average American probably doesn’t view it that way.

And who will the voter reward or blame in 2024? We’ve seen that the House Republicans want to hamstring Biden and the national economy by holding the debt limit increase hostage to budget cuts, possibly in Social Security and Medicare.

So the Dems countered by asking new Speaker McCarthy for a plan on what would be axed from the social services budget. Now, Roll Call is reporting that the GOP seems to be changing their strategy on the fly:

“House Republicans are mulling an attempt to buy time for further negotiations on federal spending and deficits by passing one or more short-term suspensions of the statutory debt ceiling this summer, including potentially lining up the deadline with the end of the fiscal year Sept. 30.”

They’re trying to time the engineering of a debt default crisis to coincide with the government’s new fiscal year, thinking this creates a “mega crisis” of default/government shutdown that will bring Biden to agree to the egregious spending cuts the MAGAs want.

But this should help Democrats. First, Democrats will be able to point to the MAGA cuts as being far outside the American mainstream. Second, the GOP reckless attempt at hostage-taking will be on display just as the election season ramps up.

Are the wheels of the Republican clown car already coming off?

Facebooklinkedinrss

Monday Wake Up Call – January 23, 2023

The Daily Escape:

Near Government Camp, OR – January 2023 photo by Mitch Schreiber Photography

Everyone is talking about the national debt and/or about increasing the nation’s debt limit. Congress should increase the debt limit because it’s the right thing to do. But there are many in the “very serious” media who are concerned that the Fed can’t continue to hike interest rates to 5.0% or higher because the government can’t afford to pay such high interest rates on our gargantuan debt.

Some pundits are pushing the idea that the Fed must cut interest rates or else. Or else what? The US government won’t go broke, regardless of how high interest rates rise.

While it’s true that the government’s cost of borrowing rises when interest rates rise, what these pundits are missing is that US tax receipts (which are used to pay that interest expense) have also spiked. They’re also missing the fact that interest expense as a percent of tax receipts was at a historic low in Q1 2022. And while it has moved up, it remains quite close to historic lows. Interest expense as a percent of tax receipts is one primary measure of whether the government can afford the interest expense or not. Wolf Richter of Wolf Street provides us with a chart:

As you can see, while the percentage of interest/tax receipts has “spiked” in 2022, it was at a historic low in 2021. And compare that to when the ratio hovered around 50% in the 1980s and early 1990s. In Q3 2022, it was 22.9%, still very near a historical low.

One reason for this was that inflation helped to increase tax receipts thereby lowering the government’s burden for paying interest on our existing debt.

Between the Trump and Biden administrations, the government’s debt spiked by 34%, or by $8 trillion, in the past three years. That additional debt quickly added a lot of interest expense for the government, as we see with the spike above on the chart in 2022.

As older Treasury securities mature, and assuming the national debt doesn’t go down, they are replaced by new Treasury securities with today’s higher interest rates, and the higher interest costs of those new securities are starting to show up in the government’s interest expense. Richter says that total interest expense in Q3 2022 spiked by 24% from a year ago and by 43% from two years ago. This spike in interest expense looks like this:

And this scary chart is what the GOP will be presenting as their reason to cut the debt. When you omit the spike in tax receipts and the historically low level of interest expense as a percent of tax receipts, as we saw in the first chart, you’re not presenting the whole picture.

Another way to look at the situation is Government interest payments as percent of nominal GDP. This is a classic measure of the cost of government debt compared to the overall economy. Richter offers us another chart:

As you can see, by this measure, interest on our national debt remains lower than it was at any time between 1977 and 2003. And it has remained in a narrow band from 2004 to today.

Without question, we should reduce our national debt. But unless and until interest expense on our debt returns to the level of 50% of tax receipts as it was in the 1980s, we shouldn’t expect much to change in Washington. If it starts to get near those highs, maybe we’ll see action by Congress to increase revenues and reduce spending. And despite all the GOP’s screaming, the Federal Reserve is doing the right thing: Hiking interest rates to stem inflation.

Time to wake up, Congress! The Fed is trying to gently nudge you into thinking that the country needs to raise revenues while also cutting expense. You need to consider the revenue side of the equation more seriously, if for no other reason than what will happen to our currently high tax receipts whenever the coming recession strikes.

To help you wake up, listen to the late David Crosby’s song “Laughing” from his first solo album, 1971’s “If Only I Could Remember My Name. Crosby wrote it for the former Beatle George Harrison, who never used it, so Crosby used it instead:

Several legendary musicians appeared on this recording, including Graham Nash and Joni Mitchell on background vocals; Jerry Garcia on pedal steel guitar, and Bill Kreutzmann on drums. Garcia is magical.

Facebooklinkedinrss

Reform the Supreme Court, Part II

The Daily Escape:

Winter at Bryce Canyon NP, UT – January 2023 photo by Michael Andrew Just

The Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has a legitimacy crisis. Put simply, many people no longer think the Supreme Court can be trusted to uphold Constitutional rights or follow judicial norms. This is the result of the Conservative supermajority, driven by its partisan agenda that is increasingly hostile to precedent and separation of powers.

The Conservative supermajority threatens that it will not observe Constitutional guardrails. As an example, our democracy depends on citizens having a meaningful right to vote. Right now, that’s in jeopardy because the Court has upheld voter suppression laws and has provided for partisan gerrymandering to continue.

Also, the Conservative supermajority has taken away a woman’s control over her body. It has also taken direct aim at the tradition of separation of church and state.

SCOTUS ignores its own internal check of stare decisis by writing sweeping decisions seemingly intended to foreshadow future decisions that could further endanger American liberty as we know it.

So, it’s time to reform the Court by building better checks and balances. The power to make these changes sits primarily with Congress. So if reform is to happen, reformers are going to have to control both Houses of Congress.

Let’s talk about some of the options for reform.

I. Expanding the Court

This means increasing the number of justices. The number of justices isn’t set by the Constitution, so Congress can change it at any time, and has done so seven times. The first Supreme Court had only six justices.

Given that Congress can and has altered the size of the Court, it could do that again. One idea is to add two justices in every presidential term. Alicia Bannon of the Brennan Center for Justice wrote an analysis looking at this idea. Basically, it would mean every president gets to appoint two justices, regardless of how many justices wind up serving on the court.

One potential issue is that SCOTUS could regularly have an even number of justices, which isn’t unprecedented, but it makes the possibility of split decisions more likely. There’s also the possibility that it could make presidential elections even more of a proxy vote for Supreme Court justices.

The challenges are that this change would require 60 votes in the Senate to overcome a filibuster. And since Republicans control the House, it’s unlikely to happen soon.

II. Ending life tenure

The big upside to this proposal is that it is much less dependent on justices either retiring or dying. It could also help slow the increasing push to nominate younger justices who could serve on the court for longer.

Prior to 1970, Supreme Court Justices served an average term of 14.9 years. Post 1970, they’ve served an average term of 26.1 years. But the five most recently appointed Supreme Court Justices to leave the court served an average of 27.5 years.

Today, most countries in the world have limited judicial tenure, either through mandatory retirement ages or fixed terms. In the US, only one state supreme court (RI) allows for life tenure.

Properly implemented, term limits could give each president the opportunity to appoint the same number of Supreme Court justices each term. Thus, reducing partisan gamesmanship around individual confirmations while making the Court more representative.

One suggestion from the American Academy of Arts and Sciences calls for an 18-year term with regular appointments made every two years to replace outgoing justices. This would not only limit life tenure, but it would also guarantee every president a stable number of two appointments, assuring a reliable translation of voters’ political will into the federal judiciary.

III. Limiting the Court’s jurisdiction

Congress can limit the kinds of cases that can be appealed to the Supreme Court. Along with the ability to define the jurisdictions of lower courts, this “jurisdiction stripping” can be used to curtail the power of the Court overall. This also might force certain aspects of the law back to the political branches of government.

This happened recently under the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which tried to strip Guantanamo Bay detainees of the ability to appeal cases in federal courts. This could only become law if passed by both Houses of Congress and signed by the president.

IV. Create a binding code of ethics

The Supreme Court is the least accountable part of our government; it does not even have a binding code of ethics. We should institute a binding code of ethics, including rules to prevent conflicts of interest. We should adopt transparency measures, including live-streaming of oral arguments and decisions.

Of the above, term limits should be enacted, and a code of ethics should be established. Those are realistic goals. When the Constitution was adopted, the average life expectancy was 36 years, not today’s 80 years.

We need to forge a new consensus about SCOTUS. That requires us to do the political work of negotiating and renegotiating what the Court should look like, and how it should operate.

Facebooklinkedinrss

Monday Wake Up Call – December 12, 2022

The Daily Escape:

Oak Creek in snow, Sedona, AZ – November 2022 photo by Ray Redstone Photography

What is it with our national politicians? There are only a few days left for the House and Senate to increase the country’s debt limit, but both Parties have been screwing around, and now it looks like they may punt the problem to the incoming Congress.

From the NYT:

“Congressional leaders have all but abandoned the idea of acting to raise the debt ceiling this month before Democrats lose control of the House, punting the issue to a new Congress when Republicans have vowed to fight the move, and setting up a clash next year that could bring the American economy to the brink of crisis.”

The plan had been for Democrats to act during the lame-duck post-election session to increase the legal borrowing limit. That would take advantage of the Dems’ final month of control of both Houses of Congress. It would head off a pissing contest with Republicans when they take over the House in January. Republicans have threatened to block the increase once they are in charge of the House. They plan to hold it hostage until the Democrats agree to substantial cuts to domestic spending and Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

There are several problems here. The debt ceiling which the US will reach sometime next year; the expiration of the last stopgap funding bill that expires on Dec. 16; and passing an overall budget for the current fiscal year.

The Dems had planned to attach a series of other priorities to the big funding package, including the reform of the Electoral Count Act (ECA), a critical reform that helps prevent election denier shenanigans in 2024. On December 3, Wrongo warned that this was a high risk gambit: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“…the Democrats need Mitch McConnell and other GOP Senate leaders to agree to attach ECA reform to a spending bill and enlist the 10 GOP Senators to support it. That means the GOP controls whether this bill is enacted.”

Now we’re hearing that the leadership of both Parties can’t get to an agreement on the big package. More from the NYT:

“Republicans and Democrats remain at odds over how to split funding between military and social programs. Talks are set to continue through the weekend ahead of the Dec. 16 deadline, though aides said lawmakers could pass a one-week stopgap bill to give negotiations additional time.”

So America’s Christmas present from Congress will be no Electoral Count Act reform and no new budget, and no debt ceiling increase. Instead, we’ll get another Continuing Resolution that will fund the government until early in 2023 when the Republicans will try once again to toss the US credit rating off a high cliff with their far Right ideological theories on US government debt.

Under the last debt limit increase passed late in 2021, the federal government can borrow $31.381 trillion. Total national debt has been slightly above that level, but since a small portion of the debt is exempt from the debt ceiling, we’ve stayed in compliance. As of last week, total debt subject to the debt limit got as close as $31.345 trillion.

The consequences of failing to extend the debt limit are immediate and bring great risk. For example, it could force the government to choose between paying Social Security checks or paying the interest due on the country’s debt. That happened in 2011, when Congressional Republicans pressured President Obama to accept similar spending cuts in exchange for raising the debt limit.

That standoff led to downgrading the credit rating of the US. It rattled American investors and the US economy. This time, it could have global economic implications, given that the world is facing a global recession.

Before you say: Well, these birds learned this lesson back then, so they surely will make a deal this time. Consider that Goldman Sachs reports that less than a quarter of Republicans and less than a third of Democrats who will serve in the House in 2023 served there in 2011.

Time to wake up, Congress! Sure, some of you are very old, and want to go home for the holidays. But we pay you to fix things, not to make them worse. Schumer and Pelosi should make them all stay in DC until they vote on what the country needs.

To help them wake up, watch, and listen to a live version of the Allman Brothers’ “Midnight Rider” with Vince Gill, Gregg Allman and Zac Brown from a 2014 performance at the Fox Theater in Atlanta. One of the wonders of live music is what happens when artists collaborate in a live setting:

We’re also seeing Chuck Leavell on keyboards and Kenny Aronoff on drums.

Sample Lyric:

And I don’t own the clothes I’m wearing
And the road goes on forever
And I’ve got one more silver dollar
But I’m not gonna let ’em catch me, no
Not gonna let ’em catch the midnight rider

Facebooklinkedinrss

Saturday Soother – December 3, 2022

The Daily Escape:

Pondicherry Park, Bridgeton, ME – November 2022 photo by Eric Storm Photo

Are the Democrats prioritizing the need to pass the Electoral Count Reform Act? Some are worried that amending the Electoral Count Act of 1887 (ECA) might not get done in what remains of Congress’ lame-duck session. If it isn’t done by January 1, it’s unlikely to be passed at all once Republicans take control of the House.

From the WaPo’s Greg Sargent:

“Versions of ECA reform have advanced in the Senate and the House, but it’s hard to see either passing as a stand-alone bill with only a few weeks left in the lame-duck session. That would chew up valuable floor time with much else left to do, including funding the entire government.

So, the most likely option at this point, a congressional aide tells me, is for ECA reform to get attached to that end-of-year spending bill.”

It’s worth worrying that this might not happen. Roll Call reports that Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin and Amy Klobuchar have said that it should be made a part of the must-pass spending omnibus bill.

The pending ECA Reform bill is the most substantial legislative action trying to deal with the Jan. 6, 2021 attempted coup. Citing ambiguities in the ECA, Trump’s supporters argued that Vice President Mike Pence could set aside some states’ results. You know what followed that.

The pending legislation would clarify that the vice president’s role in counting electoral votes is purely ceremonial, and that s/he does not have the discretion to set aside any state’s properly certified votes. It would also raise the threshold to hear objections to a state’s electors from just one member in each chamber to 20% of both Houses.

ECA reform would also require governors to certify the correct slate of electors.  It creates new ways for legal challenges when governors violate that duty, and requires Congress to count the court-sanctioned slate of electors even if a bad-acting state legislature appointed a sham slate.

This is important since right now, we’re seeing Arizona’s Cochise County’s election board simply refusing to certify the results of their midterm election. This shows that election denialism is alive and well in the states and demonstrates the need for ECA reform. Arizona’s GOP is showing us exactly what they plan to do in 2024. We should believe them.

In a future presidential election, a GOP-controlled state legislature could seize on exactly this kind of thing — a local refusal to certify results — as its excuse to appoint a different slate of electors for the losing presidential candidate. If that state’s GOP-controlled House counted those electors, under current law it could lead to a stolen election or major crisis. That must be fixed.

The Democrats are pushing on a string trying to get the bill passed. Attaching the ECA reform to a spending bill is complicated. Right now, 10 GOP Senators support the Senate version of reform, the exact number required to overcome a filibuster. But will those same Senators support the spending bill Sen. Schumer wants to pass in the Senate?

And if not, will the ECA reform bill get a stand-alone vote? More than a few GOP Senators could seek to derail it with poison-pill amendments. What’s more, a stand-alone vote could subject it to attacks from Trump and other Republicans. That might weaken the support of some of the 10 GOP Senators who are for it.

And the Democrats need Mitch McConnell and other GOP Senate leaders to agree to attach ECA reform to a spending bill, and enlist the 10 GOP Senators to support it. That means the GOP controls whether this bill is enacted.

The threat of election subversion won’t disappear in our lifetimes. As Greg Sargent says, Jan. 6 has caused unusual bipartisan urgency for Electoral Count Act reform. It would be the height of folly to let that slip away.

And now it’s time for our Saturday Soother, where we try to forget about power, politics, and economics for a few minutes, and calm ourselves before we rush headlong into the holiday season.

We’ve gotten through Thanksgiving and are heading towards Christmas. Here at the Mansion of Wrong, the faux Christmas tree is up, the Christmas plates are going into the cabinets, and the caviar and good single malts have been stocked. The first overseas Christmas cards have arrived.

Let’s put on our wireless headphones and watch and listen to Saint-SaĂ«ns’s “Introduction and Rondo Capriccioso, Op.28” for violin and piano, played in 2017 by Bomsori Kim on violin, and Jeongwon Kim on piano. The piece was written by Saint-SaĂ«ns in 1867 as the finale of his first violin concerto, but its success as a solo composition at its first performance led Saint-SaĂ«ns to publish it separately. Her violin is a Guarnieri from 1725:

Bomsori Kim is new to Wrongo and is outstanding.

Facebooklinkedinrss