US Politics: Infrastructure Week End

[DMC]

28 minutes ago, Freshwater Spartan said:

Not sure any reasonable person is going to buy the argument that these kinds of symbolic irresponsible votes were magically ok 2006 but not in 2020. It's really not hard to say they both were wrong is it?

Well, I wasn't really thinking in terms of how voters respond to the fight, if that's how we're describing "politically."  The GOP rather decisively lost "politically" in those terms when they tried to politicize in 2011 and 2013, and I'm sure they will again.  This is mostly an inside baseball matter - and more importantly, how a completely dumbass one sentence bill can impact policy outcomes - and in that regard, yes, the different contexts between the 2006 vote and today is paramount.

22 minutes ago, Freshwater Spartan said:

A. My only point that DMC  said it was only Republicans who play games like this and that's not strictly true.

It's not "strictly" true but let's be clear on who actually started to politicize this a decade ago and is doing so again today.  It's absolute bullshit to not put this entirely on McConnell and the GOP.

[Freshwater Spartan]

7 minutes ago, aceluby said:

Wait... so you're comparing the actual Jan 6th vote that ultimately lead an attempted coup with a debt ceiling vote that passed and lead to (checks notes...) some speeches given on the floor?  Even for enlightened centrists this is kind of a ridiculous "but both sides" take.

It's not about both sides its about right or wrong. Life is about choices. One should try to make the right choices whenever possible. I think the Democrats were wrong in 2006.

If it makes you feel better, I think the Republicans are more wrong.

BTW I object to the insinuation that I am centrist. In my mind I am more Left than most this board. I just have a different filter and priorities.

[Freshwater Spartan]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

Well, I wasn't really thinking in terms of how voters respond to the fight, if that's how we're describing "politically."  The GOP rather decisively lost "politically" in those terms when they tried to politicize in 2011 and 2013, and I'm sure they will again.  This is mostly an inside baseball matter - and more importantly, how a completely dumbass one sentence bill can impact policy outcomes - and in that regard, yes, the different contexts between the 2006 vote and today is paramount.

It's not "strictly" true but let's be clear on who actually started to politicize this a decade ago and is doing so again today.  It's absolute bullshit to not put this entirely on McConnell and the GOP.

A.(first paragraph) I think we have a difference in understanding politicize and politically.

B. (Second paragraph) Isn't it pretty to think so.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Freshwater Spartan said:

A.(first paragraph) I think we have a difference in understanding politicize and politically.

I was just thinking I/we should probably come up with a better term.  "Weaponize," I think, makes it more clear.

2 minutes ago, Freshwater Spartan said:

B. (Second paragraph) Isn't it pretty to think so.

I don't think so, I know so.  McConnell and the GOP are the ones who are wholly responsible for the debt ceiling being..weaponized.  That is verifiable fact.  Again, the 2006 example is irrelevant.

[Fez]

3 hours ago, DMC said:

I don't think so, I know so.  McConnell and the GOP are the ones who are wholly responsible for the debt ceiling being..weaponized.  That is verifiable fact.  Again, the 2006 example is irrelevant.

It's not exactly the same, since the Democrats weren't really playing hardball (although that's nothing new), but some Democrats made noises about opposing the debt ceiling increase back in 2002. They said it was only needed because of the Bush tax cuts (true) and should be tied to a partial repeal of them. Though most of the action was in the House, not the Senate. The bill only passed in a surprise night-time vote 215-214 when 5 members were missing.

[DMC]

15 minutes ago, Fez said:

It's not exactly the same, since the Democrats weren't really playing hardball (although that's nothing new), but some Democrats made noises about opposing the debt ceiling increase back in 2002. They said it was only needed because of the Bush tax cuts (true) and should be tied to a partial repeal of them. Though most of the action was in the House, not the Senate. The bill only passed in a surprise night-time vote 215-214 when 5 members were missing.

Once again, these instances are not even notable in comparison.  It was not one party holding up the other and demanding policy concessions, which is what the GOP did a decade ago and what they're doing now.

[Martell Spy]

Judge signs order temporarily blocking arrest of quorum-busting Texas Democrats

https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/09/politics/texas-democrats/index.html

Quote

 

(CNN)Texas Democrats who left the state last month in an attempt to stop the passage of restrictive voting bills can now return home to continue their protest without fear of being arrested, after a judge on Monday issued a temporary restraining order.

The order, signed by Travis County State District Judge Brad Urrutia, keeps Republican Gov. Greg Abbott and Texas House Speaker Dade Phelan from "issuing any warrant or other instrument" and "detaining, confining, or otherwise restricting a Texas House Democrat's movement without his or her consent." It also prevents them from "commanding the Texas House sergeant-at-arms, officers appointed by the Texas house sergeant-at-arms, Department of Public Safety, Texas Rangers, Texas highway patrol Officer, Capitol Police Officers, or other law enforcement officials to detain, confine, or otherwise restrict a Texas House Representative's movement" without their consent.

The order came at the request of 19 Texas House Democrats, members of a group of Democrats who left the state to prevent their Republican counterparts from having the quorum needed to carry on legislative business during a special session called by Abbott. Their aim was to prevent their Republican counterparts from passing new restrictive voting laws. Their move killed the legislation during the initial special session, but the governor called another session that began this past weekend.

The 19 Democrats argued in a petition that "a fundamental principle of our constitutional system of government is that the State's power to arrest and incarcerate cannot be used for political purposes."

 

 

[Fez]

3 hours ago, DMC said:

Once again, these instances are not even notable in comparison.  It was not one party holding up the other and demanding policy concessions, which is what the GOP did a decade ago and what they're doing now.

It was though, that's the point. Republicans delayed that vote for months in 2002 because they didn't have the votes and didn't want to change anything about the tax cuts. Now they did have the majority of course, so the issue was that they also didn't have their own ducks in a row. But Democrats in the House were refusing to provide the votes to pass the bill. It was a much more minor squabble than what happened in 2010, but it was there.

[Fez]

In other news, some lawyers are citing the 3rd amendment as a way to try to overturn the eviction moratorium. It's some real galaxy brain stuff...

 

[DMC]

47 minutes ago, Fez said:

It was though, that's the point.

.....you just proceeded to explain why it wasn't after writing this.

[Larry of the Lawn]

8 hours ago, Fez said:

In other news, some lawyers are citing the 3rd amendment as a way to try to overturn the eviction moratorium. It's some real galaxy brain stuff...

 

I mean I get that the third amendment association probably doesn't get much opportunity to cut their teeth, but damn.  

[Fez]

9 hours ago, DMC said:

.....you just proceeded to explain why it wasn't after writing this.

You have an extraordinarily narrow view of what constitutes "playing politics"

[Mindwalker]

Time’s Up leader resigns after criticism about Cuomo ties

The leader of Time’s Up, the #MeToo-era organization founded by Hollywood women to fight sexual harassment, resigned under fire Monday for advising Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s administration behind the scenes in its effort to discredit one of Cuomo’s accusers. (...)

Kaplan, a women’s rights advocate who has a law practice of her own, counseled the administration last winter when Cuomo was hit with the first of the harassment allegations, leveled by a former economic development adviser, Lindsey Boylan.

Both Kaplan and Alphonso David, leader of the Human Rights Campaign, were consulted over a letter the Cuomo administration had drafted attacking Boylan’s credibility. Kaplan and David agreed to review the letter.

According to the attorney general’s report, Kaplan told the administration that with some adjustments, the letter would be fine to send out. David, a former counsel to Cuomo, declined to sign the letter but agreed to contact other people to see if they would. Other advisers, though, said it was a bad idea, and the letter was never widely disseminated.

Kaplan’s role in advising the Cuomo administration stunned sexual assault victims and others. Several past backers of Time’s Up sent an open letter Monday demanding an investigation, charging that the organization’s leaders “align themselves with abusers at the expense of survivors.”

“TIME’S UP should be ashamed,” the letter said.

Activist Alison Turkos, who organized the letter, said sexual assault victims feel they have been abandoned by purported advocates who were secretly working for the other side.

(...)

In her resignation letter, Kaplan said she had “reluctantly come to the conclusion that an active law practice is no longer compatible” with serving on the Time’s Up board.

(...)

In addition to advising the Cuomo administration, Kaplan had more recently done legal work representing Melissa DeRosa, a top aide to Cuomo who resigned Sunday after the attorney general’s report portrayed her as playing a central role in the effort to retaliate against Boylan.

Meanwhile, the Human Rights Campaign said it is launching an investigation of the “appropriateness” of David’s actions.

(...)

https://apnews.com/article/roberta-kaplan-times-up-resigns-f549dee46459e588797e1199376d632b

[Fez]

I haven't kept up on the whip count, but there's a bunch of Republicans who've made statements today announcing that they're opposing the final infrastructure bill. Sure would be embarrassing/pathetic if it fell apart at the end like this.

ETA: Actually I think we're already at final passage, so it doesn't really matter. I guess some of these Republicans are doing that clever game of being a procedural yes and a final no; like Cornyn did.

[Fez]

Final vote was 69-30 (nice!). So the bill actually picked up some support along the way. The 19 Republican ayes were:

Blunt Burr Capito Cassidy Collins Cramer Crapo Fischer Graham Grassley Hoeven McConnell Murkowski Portman Risch Romney Sullivan Tillis Wicker

Risch is the only name I'm surprised to see in there; and Toomey is the biggest name I'm surprised is missing. Though he started out in the Club for Growth, so even though he's more moderate on some issues, I guess he's still bad on good old fashioned government spending.

ETA: Also, I don't know the details, but apparently the bill has some extremely broad regulatory language on crypto-currencies in it. There was an attempt to reign it back yesterday, but no amendment got UC so it stays in unless the House changes the bill. Hopefully they don't though, I saw opinion pieces about how it's a bad thing that this bill might regulate crypto into the ground. But I'd call that a resounding success if the bill wiped out crypto.

[Mindwalker]

Cuomo resigns, effective in 14 days. He did it all out of love, he says. For NY, that is. But he basically sacrifices himself for the good of the state. Sooo... next job at CNN? New book?

[Fez]

5 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

Cuomo resigns, effective in 14 days. He did it all out of love, he says. For NY, that is. But he basically sacrifices himself for the good of the state. Sooo... next job at CNN? New book?

Wow. I truly thought he'd make the legislature impeach him, and try to bully/bribe his way out of it. I guess they made clear they weren't budging.

This now makes two elected governors in a row for a New York who resigned because of sex scandals (Paterson, who replaced Sptizer, never won election on his own).

The new governor in 14 days, the 56th in state history, Kathy Hochul, is the first female governor of the state.

I assume the 14 day waiting period, rather than resigning immediately, is to try to cover up as many other skeletons as possible.

[Morpheus]

How did “I touch everyone I meet inappropriately” and a slideshow of awkward embraces fail as defense?

[Fez]

Looking back through the list of New York governors, who was the last one to leave office on his own terms and not hated by most of the state?

Maybe Hugh Carey back in 1982? Though I don't know whether he voluntarily didn't seek a 3rd term or thought he'd be defeated at the polls.

That office is cursed/brings out the worst in people.

[Gorn]

I don't think Spitzer deserves to be mentioned together with Cuomo, since what Cuomo did was far, far worse. Personally, I don't even consider what Spitzer did (hiring sex workers in his own time and with his personal money) to be ethically wrong - his wife might disagree, but we don't know if they had an open marriage.