Impeachment.
The sausage isn't pretty, and Democrats are the party of government solutions.
 |
| Government at work |
We are seeing a confluence of bad government and wishful thinking.
First, the impeachment trial:
It is slow, boring, and repetitious. We see Capitol Pages hand cards to people who hand cards to people who hand cards to the Chief Justice. We wait. He reads it, then hands a card to someone, who hands it to someone, who hands it to a person who writes something then hands it to someone.
It is an image of tradition and pageantry. It is also an image of delay and waste. It is important stuff, but bad TV and flagrant inefficiency.
Worse, the subject matter of what we are watching is corruption and misrule, covered up by hypocrisy, involving all three branches of government. For Republicans, this was a witch hunt, an expensive and divisive waste, distracting the executive. For Democrats, this was executive branch corruption, combined with dereliction of duty by a Republican Senate. Both sides said that some element of Article Three adjudication would take far too long to be used.
What is the takeaway for a viewer of the impeachment trial? Government is slow, wasteful, corrupt, run by hypocrites, and it doesn't care and won't change.
Next, the DMV:
 |
| Click: Willamette Week |
Oregon failed to update its systems for verifying identity, so Oregon drivers licenses are non compliant with federal rules for getting onto airplanes. Oregon has a temporary waiver but it ends on October 1, 2020. Oregon has known about this for years. However, Oregon will not start issuing FAA compliant Oregon drivers licenses until July 6, 2020. Why? They are still working on their computers. Can't get to it. Sorry.
The Oregon Secretary of State sent a warning:
"There could be epically long lines at the DMV come July. We really want people not to experience that."
The DMV warns that to "fulfill the demand of nearly one million Oregonians who will want the Real ID option, DMV would have to issue 32 licenses a minute every business day from July to October." That, of course, is impossible.
Oops. Go get a US Passport, they suggest, if you want to get on an airplane. You better plan ahead. We didn't.
There is a big message here. Government is incompetent.
Next, the Democrats in Iowa:
One theme of the surviving candidates is government corruption, primarily through capture by the special interests. Officeholders are beholden to donors, not people, most say, with Sanders, Warren, and Steyer saying it as central themes of their campaigns. The result, all the candidates say, is unaffordable, expensive health care, student debt, too big to fail banks, and wealth concentrating at the top, at the expense of the 90% or 99%. Wealth is not reaching working people.
Joe Biden, the most moderate of the Democratic field, is now positioned to the left of Obama. What was barely thinkable in 2010 is standard Democratic policy now. The solution is greater government involvement, either directly or through regulations, especially on health care. The Democratic Party is not yet the party of Bernie Sanders, but his message has resonated. Sanders leads in Iowa. Sanders calls for Democratic Socialism.
Combining the three observations:
If the problem is government failure, people may be skeptical of government solutions.
Michael Pence, in Iowa, said, "The truth is the Democratic Party today has been taken over by radical leftists. They want higher taxes, open borders, late-term abortions and socialist policies that will literally crush this economy."
Government is not symbolized by Hoover Dam anymore. Government's reputation has changed. Traditional Republicans call it a menace, Libertarians want to drown it in a bathtub. Democrats who see it as a solution call it thoroughly corrupted by big money. Yet it is the go-to solution for Democrats.
The flawed rollout of the ACA is a conspicuous problem for Democrats. Oregon had its own disastrous rollout of the ACA. The experience of most people with Social Security and Medicare is very positive, but they are not the cliche vision of "government bureaucracy." The cliche is the state Department of Motor Vehicles, with long slow lines, the image, even if not the actual experience. In Oregon, it will be the actual experience.
Bad experiences with government make Democratic Socialism harder to sell. It makes more potent the Trump warning that Democrats want to take away health care and give it to government, who will surely screw it up.
7 comments:
It's not government per se...it's the dragging influence of Regressives.
There is an economy of scale issue...many small countries serve their citizens quite well and are a model we can learn from. However, the Regressives/Conservatives since Reagan have made government the "enemy of the people", a narrative that has made billions for their supporters and has now reached a pinnacle with the current administration.
They ran the economy into the ditch with Iraq and lax financial regulation, but people still haven't learned so we will likely have to endure another crash for Progressive values to finally take hold. While the Trump era is horrific, it at least has moved the Democratic Party away from collaborating, thanks to Sen. Sander's persistent warnings.
Financing and administrating government for 350 million people is a daunting task not suited to those with 19th century values.
Actually, I found the impeachment trial to be illuminating, hard to look away from, like a car crash.
Well said, Rick. Peter's take omits the practice since Reagan of "blaming the victim" or "starving the beast." Perfect example: under fund schools and outcomes are poor, therefore privatization must be the answer. We can apply the formula to any aspect of the commons where the greedy vultures have eyes to privatize. It always comes down to individual well-being v. the well being of the greater community. We've lost the ability to balance the two and, without a corrective shift to the left, we will reap the whirlwind.
Andy Seles
“If it is a real, non-spam post, it will get published”.
While you’ve published most of my posts, you’ve censored others which were no more “spam” than the ones which passed muster. If directly addressing your own remarks or those of other regulars with something other than agreement or deference equals “spam” for you, just say so. Absolutely this is your forum and your prerogative—I’d just like to know what the ground rules truly are if I’m to continue participating.
Very prompt, thank you! Meanwhile, my response from this afternoon specifically quoting Rick’s comment here?
Don’t get me wrong—I’m happy to stay or to leave. I’m just looking for the true rules of the road to be laid out.
I do not post comments I think are snarky or which attribute stupid ideas to others, e.g. “you must want. . . .” I would not publish a comment that included comments like “Lindsay Graham must want children to ss it in cages” or “Trump supporters must hate the Constitution to. . . .”
I am likely to delete messages that mention commenters by name, especially if they are derogatory.
Some comments I would leave up, because they reference serious issues, but the author ruins them with additions like saying somewhere in the post, “Peter Sage is. . ..”. Those personalize this blog comment section.
I delete ones that suggest I am a communist or idiot. I am amused that one local writer is endlessly interested in my genitalia, and would have been flattered some years ago, but am a little old for that now.
I like smart and amusing comments. I am suspicious of snarky ones. One ore more commenters posts comments using the names of other commenters, including, frequently, whoever “inkbarrow” is. If a comment attributed to “inkbarrow” speculates about my having erectile disfunction I consider it a giveaway that it is in fact written by someone else, the person or person who thinks a lot about my genitalia. When a comment seems weird, but not obscene, but uses the name of a frequent commenter, I tend to delete them thinking it might be a case of a local troll, trying to slip a fake comment in by Falsely attributing it to a frequent commenter
I always delete comments sent here which are copy and paste re-publications of articles lifted from Breitbart or Daily Caller. Those are sometimes attributed to frequent commenters, to celebrities or to family members. I always delete those. Copyright issues.
I am more suspicious of comments from people whose identity is unknown. I get about a dozen submissions a day, mostly spam, fakes, trolls, people with mysterious links, false attributions, and obscene ones. When in doubt, I delete. If I did not, soon there would be three or four comments a day, all supposedly from “inkbarrow.” Maybe six.
There is nothing wrong with preferring an ideologically cohesive blog. Spare us the apparent tapdance that you’ve received comments from one “inkbarrow”, versus stylistically and ideologically consistent offerings from me, Inkberrow. Various commenters refer to others by name. It appears you just don’t wan’t certain friends and certain views held to account,, as otherwise occurs here. Again, if so, just be honest. Don’t erect putative process or manner ‘n mode fig leafs in an attempt to disguise what are actually substantive objections. I’ll move on if you prefer. I can be open in terms of ethical and intellectual integrity. Please reciprocate.
I love the just go get a passport idea. This is probably where we don't find ourselves on common ground. They can't afford a passport, they can't even afford to leave the state or take a day off. You can, I can.. I have a passport it has lots of stamps and visas in it. I just got back from Nicaragua. Give me one UN Resolution and 250 marines and I'll put Daniel on a plane to Russia without firing a single round. Nevertheless that's the problem, same one it has always been... money.
Post a Comment