REPUBLICANS V. DEMOCRATS: A MATTER OF CELEBRITY

 

Both major political parties are lining up candidates

for next year’s elections. Anyone who made a political contribution during 2020 has probably been inundated with fundraising letters, e-mails, and text messages from 2022 campaigns.  We see a defining difference between the kinds of candidates emerging for Republicans and Democrats. Republicans very often present celebrities.

Democrats more often offer independent-minded candidates with roots in social and community movements. We find the difference fascinating.

Many states have spring filing deadlines and potential candidates continue making decisions about whether they’ll seek office. But, fundraising and campaign infrastructure require time. The clock is ticking, especially for high profile statewide races.

The Tuberville Model

Tommy Tuberville enjoyed a successful career as a college football coach, including at Auburn. Now

thanks to the celebrity that went along with that, Alabama’s inherent red hue, and Tuberville’s allegiance to Donald Trump, he’s a United States Senator. Tuberville brought no political or governing experience to his 2020 race against Democratic incumbent Doug Jones.  He campaigned carefully and said little about any issue. Tuberville’s case rested on the fact he’s a Republican (and, therefore, not a Democrat), he enjoyed Trump’s support, and name recognition from coaching. We aren’t saying he wasn’t qualified, but he never said much about what his qualifications were.  He spoke in generalities,

espousing well-worn right wing talking points. His record to date reflects little except following directions from Trump and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.      

That strategy – sports-based celebrity, support of

and from Trump, and keeping quiet beyond platitudes – rests at the heart of legendary running back Herschel’s Walker’s bid for the U.S. Senate in Georgia. Walker hopes he can unseat Democrat

Raphael Warnock, the Baptist minister who won a runoff in January for the unexpired term of retired Republican Johnny Isakson.

Walker has two potential Republican primary opponents, but he’s a strong favorite to win the GOP nomination thanks to his celebrity and his relationship with Trump. Before his time in the National Football League, Walker played for the New Jersey Generals of the United States Football League, a team Trump owned. Relying on their USFL relationship, at the 2020 Republican convention Walker vigorously rejected the idea Trump is a racist.  

Like Tuberville, Walker presents no governing or political experience. He also carries quite a bit of baggage, including allegations of violence toward women, some of which he admitted in his memoir. That makes some Republicans nervous, but most political operatives believe the nomination is his to lose. Also like Tuberville,  he’s keeping a low

profile, dodging interview requests except from friendly outlets like Fox News. Assuming Walker wins the primary, smoking him out likely will become Warnock’s first task in an expensive, high stakes race.

 

Fame Via Media

People who’ve earned fame through media have become another source of Republican candidates. Take J.D. Vance, author of the  acclaimed Hillbilly

Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis. The book spent good parts of 2016 and 2017 on the New York Times best seller list. It made Vance, a former Marine turned Yale Law School graduate, wealthy and famous.  Now he’s seeking the U.S. Senate seat held by retiring Republican Rob Portman.

 

Vance caused a stir in 2016 by slamming Trump as “reprehensible” and saying his policy proposals, “such as they are range from immoral to absurd.” Now faced with the GOP primary electorate in Ohio, Vance has gotten religion. He says Trump was a good president and he regrets the nasty things he said about him.  Having repented, Vance’s celebrity helps make him the favorite in some quarters for the Republican senate nomination.  His political career now represents just another case of elevating expediency over principle.

Oh, and we can’t forget another recent candidate who made his name through the media.  Larry Elder got more votes than any of the other would-be replacements for California Governor Gavin Newsome in the failed September recall election. Elder spent over 25 years as a radio talk show host before seeking the California governor’s chair. His failure hasn’t dissuaded celebrity GOP candidates long on name identity and short on political experience as the Walker and Vance bids attest.

A Different Way for Democrats

The likely contenders for Democratic nominations for U.S. Senate in states like Pennsylvania and

Ohio are men and women with political experience. In Pennsylvania, Lt. Governor John Fetterman and Congressman Conor Lamb lead the way. In Ohio, Congressman and former presidential

candidate Tim Ryan and one-time  Consumer Protection Bureau adviser Morgan Harper probably have the inside track, though others might emerge.

Beyond that, intriguing Democratic newcomers elsewhere spring from social movements aimed at

promoting change. One of the most impactful freshman members of Congress has been Missouri Representative Cori Bush. A registered nurse and minister, she’s led the fight against COVID-related evictions, even sleeping on the U.S. Capitol steps to make her

point. Georgia Representative Lucy McBath ran for Congress so she could

work on gun safety following the shooting death of her son by a man angry about loud music. Transportation Secretary

Pete Buttigeg ran for president because he wanted to be president, but also so he could show that an openly gay man could seek the nation’s highest office.

The motivations and styles of figures like Bush, McBath, and Buttigeg seem much different than the celebrity-based campaigns of the Walkers and Elders of the world. These more independent minded candidates have bucked their own party, not just followed it. Their approach seems more likely to discourage the rush toward autocracy Trump and Republicans now seem hell bent on promoting. 

                                            

THE JANUARY 6 INSURRECTION INVESTIGATION: WHERE WE STAND

Investigations into the January 6 insurrection plod

along with three unmistakable  characteristics. In some ways, these characteristics typify and symbolize the state of our politics. They show the strengths and weaknesses of American democracy in 2021.

·     Democrats and a few brave Republicans in Congress keep moving methodically toward uncovering the truth, using tried and true tools and processes that fit the circumstances.

·     The courts are handling January 6 prosecutions as we’d expect – on a case-by-case basis, balancing the societal interest in holding those responsible accountable with individual rights afforded every criminal defendant, despite claims those  defendants are political prisoners.

·     Republican politicians stand in the way. The fact that’s happening –as odd as it is – represents a good starting place for an evaluation of where the investigation stands, nearly nine months after the deadly attack on the capitol.

 

The GOP Strategy: You Didn’t Really See 

WhatYou Thought You Saw

One remarkable thing stands out about the January 6 insurrection – we saw it on television.Republicans, however, continue their effort at convincing Americans it wasn’t what it looked like. In addition to outlandish statements from Republican members ofCongress about capitol rioters resembling tourists, the overall GOP strategy rests on the notion that if Republicans keep saying there’s nothing worth seeing, Americans will agree and lose interest.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy probably had that in mind when he threatened telecomcompanies asked to preserve phone records. Those records might show that Republican members of Congress helped facilitate the attack. McCarthy said those companies shouldn’t comply with document requests made by the bipartisan House Select Committee that’s conducting a probe into January 6. He claimed complying would violate federal law andRepublicans would remember that, presumably with dire consequences, if and when the GOP retakes the House of Representatives. McCarthy no doubt wants to minimize the importance of the investigation and make complying not normal. After all, what people thought they saw wasn’t big a deal. Wasn’t much to see, right?

Then there’s the matter of prematurely exonerating former President Donald Trump. Select CommitteeChairman Bennie Thompson and Vice Chair Liz Cheney, early in September, dismissed as “baseless” McCarthy’s claim that various federal agencies, including the Justice Department, had concluded Trump didn’t incite or provoke the January 6 violence. Many reasons exist for believing he did. It appears McCarthy thought he could give the public another reason for seeing the investigation as overblown and unnecessary. There’s just not much there, right?

 

Democrats (and two Republicans) Keep Doing

the Right Thing

While the Republican side show and misinformation campaign continue, the Select

Committee keeps moving the investigation forward methodically.  Federal agencies and private companies have now responded to the committee’s first round of requests for documents. Thompson indicated the panel needs more information from social media companies. Documents the committee wants could show the involvement of Trump, White House aides, Trump family members, and GOP legislators in the planning and execution of the insurrection.

                                    

It’s known, for example, that Trump talkedon January 6 with several Republican members of Congress while the insurrection remained in progress.  If it takes a little longer to get the documents that may lead to confirmation of the substance of those communications, so be it. Tracking down such facts requires painstaking investigation and analysis. The committee is doing that, as it should, using tools common to this kind of work. If the president of the United States committed treason against the American government, we want to know the details of that, right?

 

The Courts and Their Balancing Act

Some Americans no doubt would prefer the criminal cases against the January 6 insurrectionists move faster. More than 600 defendants have been charged with various crimes in connection with the attack. Most of them are not being held in jail while they await trial.  Some, however, have had their release conditions revoked because judges have concluded, in individual cases, that those defendants pose a threat. One, a former police officer, bought 37 guns after his arrest. That individual disrupted a court hearing and accosted a probation officer. A magistrate judge decided he should remain in jail.

That situation demonstrates how courts have balanced individual rights and concerns about

January 6 defendants who continue creating havoc. That’s the nature of the criminal justice system and things are likely to continue moving along that way for a long time to come. Meantime, Trump supporters and far rights groups spent a weekend demonstrating in Washington and elsewhere claiming the insurrectionists were just protesters exercising their constitutional rights and are being held wrongfully. Oh, really?

                                      

As much as everyone might hope the process of investigating January 6 and holding those responsible accountable might proceed differently or move faster, the current state of affairs seems like what we’ll have for a while. Republican

politicians have shown no interest in unearthing what happened. McCarthy once said the GOP would conduct its own investigation and seek “real answers.” No evidence exists that’s happening now or that it will happen. McCarthy and other Republicans

will likely continue doing  what they’re doing now – getting in the way, making disingenuous or outright false statements, and claiming nothing important happened.

Meantime, the Select Committee, which includes

only two Republicans, and the courts will keep

doing what they’re doing -- their jobs.

JOE MANCHIN: POWER BROKER OR JUST A PAIN?

Pundits increasingly describe West

Virginia Senator Joe Manchin as the second most powerful Democrat in the country or as a royal pain. Maybe he’s both. That’s what makes taking a hard look at the 73 - year old third term senator and former governor of the Mountain state worthwhile. Manchin now plays a huge role in every political calculation in Washington and he’s apparently enjoying it.

With Democratic control of the

senate hanging by a thread, Manchin’s made his mark. He blocked President Joe Biden’s nomination of Neera Tanden as budget director and kept the $15.00 minimum

wage out of stimulus legislation. He opposes D.C. statehood, objects to universal background checks on gun purchases, and apparently won’t back eliminating the senate filibuster.

Manchin isn’t on board with the size of Biden’s $2 trillion infrastructure bill. He says he wants a bipartisan infrastructure deal that doesn’t “abandon” Republicans.

So, we ask: what’s up with Manchin. We look at the same facts, but see different things:

                  

Woodson: A Democrat in 

Republican Appearance? 

Understanding Manchin requires understanding West Virginia. The state is 92 percent white, four percent black, 0.997 percent Hispanic, and 0.737 percent Asian. It’s wracked by poverty, addiction, and low household incomes. Richard Ojeda, a West Virginia politician says the choices for high school graduates are, “dig coal, sell dope, or join the Army.”

Until 2005, the West Virginia Senate was 21-13 Democrat. Its House was 72-28 Democrat.  In 2014 West Virginia’s House turned Republican for the first time in 83 years. The state elected its first GOP U.S. Senator in 60 years and sent a totally Republican House to Washington for the first time in 60 years. Donald Trump trounced Hillary Clinton by 42 points in 2016 and Biden by 39 in 2020.

Manchin, nonetheless, has maintained his senate seat since 2012. Until Biden’s election, Manchin was relatively insignificant. Now holding a decisive vote, he has become significant. Conservative votes increase his re-election prospects. He is not beholden to Democrats. They need him more than he needs them. He might be the only Democrat capable of holding that seat.

West Virginian Christopher Reagan, Jr. recently wrote in the Atlantic that “Manchin does not have an overarching ideology.”  True? Perhaps Manchin votes conservatively with political calculation. He voted to confirm more than 100 of Trump’s nominees. None required his vote. He voted for Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination after it became clear Republicans had enough votes for confirmation.

Manchin voted to save Obama Care,saying Medicaid expansion was good for West Virginia. While he made sure top income earners were excluded from Biden’s stimulus package, he voted ‘yes.’  He agrees that if Republicans won’t support an infrastructure package Biden will have to proceed without them.

Will Manchin become a Republican? He’s not fond of GOP leader Mitch McConnell who vowed he’d “crush Manchin like a grape” in the 2018 midterms. After his three-point victory, Manchin delivered a jar of hand crushed grape jelly to McConnell’s office.

Manchin said of Biden in The Hill, “I

think he’s a good human being, just a good heart and a good soul, and he’s the right person at the right time for America.”

Manchin may not be an ideologue. But, he’s a Democrat in a state where Democrats are an endangered species.  

           

Henry: Mixed Motives?

It seems Manchin has different values

and goals than his fellow Democratic senators. Other Democrats may share some of his ideas, but they don’t act on them with the force and determination he exhibits. Whether his behavior represents political expediency, principle, or the enjoyment of personal political power, he walks a tightrope.   

The turn in his West Virginia constituency away from its Democratic roots likely explains some of his actions. Manchin can win in his state, but he’s not so popular he can deviate far from the views of white West Virginians. If he seeks another term in 2024, he’ll find

himself on the ballot with a strong Republican candidate atop the ticket. His political position offers little margin for error, so the last thing he needs is being on record in support of things the West Virginia electorate would find objectionable.

But home state political considerations

may not totally explain Manchin. Perhaps he believes in what he espouses, even if he’s not an ideologue. Beyond that, Manchin occupies a unique position in the American government. He has some control over the nation’s agenda. That he can use that control in service of his own political survival could mix with principle and the hubris all political figures experience when other people must come to them for things they want. Maybe all of that is going on with Joe Manchin.            

 

Rob: All About West Virginia

As much as any state, West Virginia symbolizes the changing appeals of America’s two parties. West Virginia

was solidly Democratic when the party’s fundamental appeal was economic populism aimed at white, working class voters. West Virginia has many more coal miners, factory employees, and construction workers than tech types, suburban professionals, and financial industry workers, now the backbone of the Democratic coalition in blue states. Add that to the dearth of voters of color and it’s no wonder West Virginia votes as it does in presidential elections. So, Manchin must represent this constituency while being part of a national party that wants a more progressive nation.  

Culture plays a huge role in this. When the Democratic Party became the party of protecting reproductive freedom, promoting LGBQT rights, and supporting gun safety measures, West Virginia’s white voters fled. Those issues drive the margins Republicans rolled up in recent presidential elections. Manchin knows where the voters are in his state and he’s not risking getting on the wrong side of them, economically or culturally.

PAYING FOR INFRASTRUCTURE: THE COMING TAX FIGHT – WHO PAYS?

President Biden’s infrastructure plan comes with a hefty price tag -- about $2 trillion over

eight years. Biden calls it a “once in a lifetime investment in America.” The plan requires new tax revenue. When he rolled it out, the 27-page fact sheet the White House presented listed not just rebuilding roads, bridges, schools, upgrading housing, installing electric charging stations, developing mass transit, and providing redress for usually non-white neighborhoods divided by highways, it also included detailed tax proposals. Biden suggests paying primarily with higher corporate taxes.  

Battle lines formed quickly. Most Congressional Republicans voiced opposition, offering the usual argument that increasing taxes kills jobs. Some Democrats, like West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin, support smaller tax increases than Biden

wants. So, where does that put the president?

Bumping Up Corporate Taxes

So far, Biden has proposed only corporate tax changes, something to which most Americans

don’t object. Many didn’t get much benefit from the 2017 Trump tax cuts which favored corporations and the wealthy. Rolling them back seems popular. One survey showed support for the infrastructure plan increased when pollsters told respondents increasing corporate taxes was part of the plan.  

Trump’s cuts reduced the corporate tax rate from

35% to 21%. Few corporations, especially those with international operations, pay 21%.  Loopholes and incentive provisions allow many companies to whittle

what they actually pay to about eight

per cent. According to the White House, a “recent independent study found that 91 Fortune 500 companies paid $0 in federal corporate taxes in 2018.”  Biden would change that by, among other things:

*Setting the corporate rate at 28%;

*strengthening the Global Minimum Tax for U.S. Multinational Corporations, stopping American companies from claiming tax haven countries as their residence, though they have management and operations in the U.S., a process called “inversion;”

*eliminating intellectual property loopholes that

encourage U.S. companies to locate jobs abroad, a problem the Trump tax bill made worse by giving tax breaks for shifting assets offshore; and

*enacting a minimum tax on “book income,” profits large companies report to shareholders, while avoiding reporting those profits for tax purposes.

The Poor and the Middle Class

Biden apparently does not plan on taxing middle class and poor taxpayers. The poor

have been saddled with a federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour since 2009, a major factor in America’s income inequality. Since the 1980s the gap between the rich and everyone else has expanded significantly. As Thomas Piketty reported in Capital and

Ideology, between 1960 and 1980, the bottom 50% of earners claimed 20% of national income. Between 1980 and 2015, however, the bottom 50% dropped from 20% to 12%.  Meantime, the top 10% went from a little more than 10% of income earned to more than 20%. The public intuitively understands this, so Biden’s choice not to tax lower income groups to pay for infrastructure should remain popular.    

Public opinion, however, hasn’t translated into GOP support in Congress. Biden keeps talking with Republicans in the hope of peeling off a few of their votes. He still thinks the country needs a bipartisan approach to problems like infrastructure and the funding needed for paying for it. He says he would welcome input from Republicans on specific proposals. If one of them has a better idea, he’d like to hear it.

The GOP response has included tepid support

for a much smaller program. Republicans object to making climate change measures and such things as home care part of the package, saying that’s not really infrastructure. They’d focus only on roads, bridges, and other “traditional” infrastructure items. They contend paring the proposal down, maybe to $600-900 billion, would reduce or eliminate the need for most, if not all, the tax increases. That’s a dubious proposition but, so far, it’s all they’re suggesting.

Republicans likely will accuse Biden of fighting 

a class war on tax issues. We think he should argue it’s past time someone fought for poor and middle class taxpayers (those in the lower 50%) and that corporate America should pay its fair share. Many Americans believe they elected a president who would champion the poor and the middle class. The infrastructure plan offers Biden a good opportunity for proving he’s that president. 

2009 All Over?

To date, Biden’s team has resisted the Republican track, apparently having learned a lesson from the Obama-Biden experience in

2009. That new administration kept making concessions on the size of the recession rescue package, hoping that would garner Republican support.  Cut this or don’t do that, they said, and we might support you. ‘Might’ was the key word. No concessions satisfied Republicans and the plan passed with only Democratic votes.  Some warned the package was too small and

wouldn’t extricate the economy from the ditch it found itself in. Many economists blame the slow growth that followed on the failure of the administration to “Go Big.”  Biden’s people say they won’t make that mistake this time.

Americans, of course, generally don’t like tax increases. Will the current polling showing support for the infrastructure plan and the tax increases hold, especially after the fear campaign the GOP will likely run  when the

real debate begins? Who knows?  We hope Biden, while continuing his dedication to bipartisanship as a governing principle, will remember the lessons of 2009.  This country faces important issues at a perilous moment. Timidity does not seem in order.