Showing posts with label rush limbaugh. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rush limbaugh. Show all posts

Monday, April 13, 2020

THE STRANGE CASE OF DONALD TRUMP AND THE DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT: A WAR TIME PRESIDENT WHO WON’T PULL OUT ALL THE STOPS TO WIN THE WAR


President Trump’s dance with the Defense Production Act of 1950 (DPA) makes us
wonder why he hasn’t embraced the DPA in getting
ventilators and other protective equipment in the hands of those battling the coronavirus. In a March 18 Executive Order, Trump declared ventilators and protective equipment
“essential to the national defense” against the
spread of the virus, the standard required by the DPA for production and distribution of critically needed equipment. The range of explanations spans a continuum from benign to cynical.  The
shortage of medical equipment compels a closer look at what’s happened.

The DPA gives a president broad powers that potentially could alleviate shortages. Trump doesn’t lack awareness of the law. He’s spoken, however, of “hopefully” not needing it against the virus and using it only in a “worst-case scenario.” The fact the nation now has more coronavirus cases than any other country sounds like a “worst-case scenario.”  





                     
Some History
The DPA’s roots rest in the Second World War. Congress gave President Franklin
Roosevelt broad authority for ordering that industry convert facilities and produce war material. When the Korean War started, President Harry Truman needed
Image Courtesy Wikimedia Commons
similar power. Congress enacted the DPA, a law that has been reauthorized over 50 times and has been regularly invoked since. Trump claimed the coronavirus pandemic makes him a “wartime president,” though, mysteriously, he’s not using all available resources for winning the war. 

The DPA gives presidents three kinds of power: (1) authority requiring that businesses accept and prioritize government contracts deemed necessary for national defense; (2) power for establishing regulations that allocate materials, services, and facilities for national defense; and (3) authority for managing the civilian economy assuring access to scarce materials for defense needs. Trump seemingly thinks the federal
government has only a limited role in the war since he declared the federal government isn’t a “shipping clerk.” Trump has acted as if each state is an independent nation, left to fend for itself. 
 
Trump, the Virus, and the DPA
essential supplies. None have shown enthusiasm at the prospect. Each, if ordered to produce essential supplies, could do so and, of course, would want a large share of the $2.2 trillion CARES bailout Congress passed and the president signed March 27.


The most visible company in the discussion, General Motors, could shift factories from building automobile engines to building ventilators. Trump’s order didn’t immediately require that GM convert to ventilator production.  GM, in fact, said it was going ahead with plans for manufacturing ventilators, but reportedly wanted $1 billion for doing so, millions of it upfront. A dispute over costs erupted between GM and the administration and discussions broke off. A bit later Trump said he’d use the DPA in requiring that General Motors accept and prioritize contracts for ventilators, the number being determined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services

Trump came under fire from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for his reluctance to use the
DPA. He finally, on April 2, said he was invoking the law and requiring that three companies – 3M, General Electric, and Medtronic – produce masks. Even GOP Senator Ted Cruz of Texas urged that Trump “exercise these delegated powers to the full extent necessary.  Trump, however, hasn’t ordered that General Motors,
or any of the other companies, begin production of other needed materials and has even gone so far as saying invoking the DPA would effectively “nationalize” firms. We find Trump’s reluctance about invoking the DPA baffling and he hasn’t explained his reasons.  Still, we have some ideas.


A Range of Possibilities
We start with the most benign potential reason. Imagining any president hesitating about injecting the government into the business of private companies isn’t difficult. Democrats and Republicans say they believe
in limited government. Staying out of a firm’s decisions about what it will produce, when, and at what price comports with that philosophy. Republican orthodoxy mandates that the government avoid intrusion into the operational life of private business as much as possible (tax cuts notwithstanding). We see this explanation near one end of a benign-to-cynical continuum.


Nearer the middle of that continuum, we
might suggest a political rationale. Perhaps, Trump fears antagonizing his political base if he strongly and enthusiastically uses the DPA. Many are true believers in Republican orthodoxy, despite their willingness to feed from the $2.2 trillion CARES trough. These supporters would likely regard any deviation from the party’s antigovernment norm as heresy, punishable in right wing media (and maybe at the ballot box). When Trump strayed a little from the line and sought a compromise with Democrats on his border wall, howls from Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham forced his hand and he backed off the compromise idea.

On the far end of the continuum, Trump might just be appeasing friends in the industry. If he goes all-in with using the DPA in forcing production of large amounts of different materials, imagining that he will ruffle the feathers of friends in the manufacturing world follows. Could the president simply want protection for his captains-of-industry colleagues from costs associated with converting their operations to producing medical equipment? Is Trump putting the interests of his friends above what is best for the country right now?

It’s possible Trump’s reluctance springs from a combination of the factors we’ve identified and others. His real reasons could cover our
entire continuum. The mounting death toll and the need for addressing the health needs of millions of Americans, however, suggests using every tool in the box, including the DPA. 

Friday, February 21, 2020

BEFORE NEVADA AND SOUTH CAROLINA: BILLIONS, BAGGAGE, CHROMOSOMES, AND GENES


The week since the New Hampshire primary has made clear the peril for the Democratic Party in the 2020 campaign. Despite facing a just-impeached president with historically low approval ratings and an endless list of bad acts proving his unfitness for office, many justifiably fear seeing him re-elected. The complex and simple reasons behind this implicate some of America’s most enduring biases.

Coming out of the botched Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire
primary, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders became the narrow front runner.  In Iowa, he tied former South Bend, Indiana  Mayor Pete Buttigieg. Sanders won New Hampshire by two points over Buttigieg and a few more over surging Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar

Sanders leads in polls heading into the February 22 Nevada caucuses. He has the money and infrastructure for sustaining that advantage. In South Carolina, which votes February 29, he’s moved into second behind teetering former Vice President Joe Biden. If Sanders wins Nevada, then finishes a strong second in South Carolina (or wins), he could have put himself into position for taking the nomination.

Or would he? Sanders didn’t break 30% percent in Iowa or New Hampshire. It’s not clear he can in Nevada or South Carolina, even with victories. Given the nature of his appeal and national polling, which shows his support at around 25%, it isn’t likely Sanders will crack 30% many places unless the field winnows. That brings us to…

Billions
Former New York Mayor and multi-billionaire Michael Bloomberg has risen
to double digits in national polls and gotten on the debate stage by spending almost $400 million on advertising and staff, much of it in Super Tuesday states that vote March 3 (he’s not
on the ballot in Nevada or South Carolina).
He’s come under increasing scrutiny as he’s
risen. Bloomberg’s record offers targets like his racist stop-and-frisk policy in New York and sexist comments like
suggesting women spend
time in libraries instead of shopping if they want professional respect.

Whether Bloomberg’s billions immunize
him against negative impact from his past policies and statements became the subject of intense commentary as he rose in the polls. In the age of Trump who, of course, has made worse statements and promoted policies more damaging to women and people of color, some Democrats simply ignore
Bloomberg’s impolitic record. They recognize he’s with them on issues like climate change and guns and love the campaign infrastructure his money can buy for the general election. Which brings us to…
 
Baggage
The 2020 campaign has made clear almost all the contenders, including Bloomberg, bring arguably disqualifying baggage. That’s apparent for candidates who remain and some who’ve dropped out. 
California Senator Kamala Harris, who is African-American, never caught on with
Kamala Harris
black voters, partly because of suspicions about her
prosecutorial record. Former Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick,
Deval Patrick
aside from starting too late, got tainted by his association with Wall Street. New Jersey Senator Corey Booker suffered from the same problem. Alleged connections with Russia dogged Hawaii Representative Tulsi Gabbard
Cory Booker
(she’s suing Hillary Clinton over a charge that she was a “Russian asset”).

Of the remaining viable candidates, Bloomberg’s mayoral record could undo him. Klobuchar now must answer for prosecutorial decisions she made in Minnesota. Opposition research fuels politics now and no perfect candidate exists.
Caption - NY Times 2/11/2020
Which brings us to…

Chromosomes
With the turmoil in the race – Biden
falling apart,  the weakness of Sanders as a front runner, Bloomberg’s baggage – it might seem Klobuchar or Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren would have emerged as a consensus candidate. It’s true both have individual challenges. Warren stumbled over-explaining the cost of Medicare for all and Klobuchar lacks money and name recognition in some places.
The New York Times endorsed both. Each has a stellar record, though they offer different strengths and experiences. Both brim with intelligence and decency. Neither appears to have been touched by scandal.

Warren finished third in Iowa and, even worse,  fourth in her neighboring New
Hampshire. Klobuchar was fifth in Iowa, her neighboring state, and third in New Hampshire. What’s the problem?
They’re women! The specter of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 defeat looms over both. With many Democratic voters worried more about “electability” than policies and ideology, we fear both Warren and Klobuchar have been disadvantaged by the concern – rational or not – that a
woman can’t beat President Donald Trump. We aren’t endorsing that idea. But we suspect it’s out there, even though Clinton won nearly three million more votes than Trump. Which brings us to…

Genes
Most Americans now believe homosexuality isn’t a choice. They
believe people are born gay or lesbian as others are born straight. The notion people decide they’ll become gay has been out of favor for a while. If being gay is one of those immutable characteristics of life like race – something none of us can change about ourselves – no justification exists for denying gay and lesbian people rights and opportunities. We wouldn’t see one even if being gay were a choice. 

Buttigieg is the first serious openly gay presidential candidate. Many reasons exist for not supporting him – his tone-
Buttigieg & spouse Chasten
deaf handling of racial issues in his city, his inexperience, maybe even his campaign fundraising tactics. His sexual orientation isn’t a reason for opposing him.

We sense, however, that’s happening. We see the same dynamic as with the female candidates. Democratic voters otherwise attracted to Buttigieg shy away out of fear America won’t elect a gay president. Recent signals from right-wing commentator Rush Limbaugh suggesting Buttigieg’s sexual orientation is fair game heighten that concern.

So that’s the state of the Democratic race as Nevada and South Carolina vote. It’s not a pretty picture for Democrats, which means it’s not a pretty picture for an America desperately in need of ridding itself of Trump and the autocratic state he’s creating.