It is who gets the blame for the disruption and waste of a government shutdown.
Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley wrote me saying I should be "furious" that some Senate Democrats went along with minority leader Chuck Schumer to avoid a government shutdown. Progressive Democrats characterize this as caving to Trump.
Chuck Schumer wrote a New York Times op-ed explaining his view. It was widely read as enabling Trump. Critics said this political moment requires that Democrats dig in and show resistance. Democrats should fight with every tool. Schumer is yet another college classmate, so it is consistent with this blog to publish it. This is a free article, without a NYT paywall:
News stories emphasize the split in the Democratic Party. New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) is described as "lashing out" at Schumer while she contemplates a primary bid. Some of the divide is political, measurable on a progressive to moderate, or progressive to establishment axis. The divide is generational, too. Younger members of both chambers want a fight. Schumer represents the old guard establishment Democratic Party. Schumer gets flack from two directions, both from people who see him, along with former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, as an ageist regicide who forced out Joe Biden, but also someone who himself, at age 74 and a senator since 1999, and before that in the House since 1981, part of the Democratic gerontocracy.
Schumer's position was that Republicans are sending a loud message of chaotic destruction of government. They have staked their ground as the chainsaw party. Democrats cannot stop the destruction, but they can stake their own ground as the party that opposes arbitrary and mass layoffs. He argues that Democrats should avoid muddling the clear divide between the two parties, which they would do if they triggered an even greater mass layoff event. Since Republicans are digging a hole for themselves, avoid jumping into it with them. Keep the sides clear.
This is a case where the messenger is intrinsically part of the message. Schumer's very being and presence shouts the message of old, tired establishment status quo. He carries in his aura the legacy of a party that chose to cocoon and protect an old and badly-diminished Biden while ignoring a failed immigration policy and unpopular positions on cultural issues.
Had Democrats of a younger generation, ones representing a new, optimistic, prosperous future, argued the case that Schumer made, that this was the smart and strategic way to stick it to Republicans and make them stew in their own toxic juices, this might have been a unifying position. Framed that way, as a fighting stance, by someone who looks and sounds like a crafty leader with a long future, this might have looked aggressive, not like caving. But Schumer waving his arms and chanting "We will win! We will win!" has quality to it, one that even I, in his age cohort, perceived as sad and pathetic. Wrong person, wrong message. Leave campus protest chants to 20-year-olds.
Things are not hopeless for Democrats. The solution is for the next generation to step up. Old men in power rarely give it up gracefully. It is wrenched out of their unwilling hands by people with the courage to take it from them.
[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email go to: https://petersage.substack.com Subscribe. Don't pay. The blog is free and always will be.]
8 comments:
It's a mistake...only an idiot would blame Democrats for a shutdown in the face of a recalcitrant GOP. It might wake up a few.
"Fixing the deficit" without raising taxes on the 1% should be a clue.
Political town hall meetings across the country have seen a surge in participation, with citizens eager to voice their concerns about the current climate influenced by the Trump administration and notable figures like Elon Musk and his DOGE committee. This momentum highlights a growing desire for constructive dialogue and solutions. While there is a palpable sense of urgency among constituents, the minority Democratic Party has an opportunity to coalesce around a unified vision and engage the public in meaningful ways. It is essential that someone or a collective emerges to guide us through these challenges, fostering a democratic process that strengthens our republic and addresses citizens' grievances...but not Chuck Schumer.
Senator Merkley said it best: “You don’t stop a bully by giving him your lunch money, and you don’t stop tyrant Trump by giving him more power. The Republican spending bill is a blank check for Trump, giving him enormous flexibility to spend your tax dollars only on the programs he likes, and only in the states he wants to."
We need more people in Congress like Merkley.
Chuck Schumer did a really good thing here; he took a hit for the team. Letting the government shut down would have been much worse for the country and for everything the Democrats care about. The Trump administration could have just let the government stay shut down, and only operated the parts of it they like.
Schumer recognized that his strategic considerations were more important than some Democrats’ emotional need for “resistance“.
This brave act may cost Schumer politically. Frustrated Democrats may remove him as leader and replace him with someone less thoughtful and more emotionally reactive. AOC might primary him.
But Schumer put the country first. Strategic won out over emotional. Good.
The Trump administration is already taking a chainsaw to the government and shutting down the parts he doesn't like.
Schumer's point was that it would have been worse if the government was shut down. Schumer was clearly correct in that; he had a detailed description of the additional damage a shutdown would enable.
It's important for the Democratic Party and its individual leaders to level with the public. Playing up the issue of who is to blame for shutting down the government does not accomplish this; it just contributes to more cynicism and public distrust of politicians and elected leaders. The town hall represented people who want a fight, sure. But Democrats have been arguing that Trump and Musk are ruining people's lives with mass firings, that the Trump administration is putting us at risk for health crises and catastrophic fires with no firefighters, etc. For Democrats in Congress to now vote to shut down the government, after arguing that Trump is bad for trying to ruin it, would either confuse the public or else it would just demonstrate hypocrisy. Democrats cannot play Trump's game and expect to win; Trump's game is rigged. In other words, the message must be that government is worth saving and our public servants aren't a "deep state" (whatever "deep state" is supposed to mean). I'm disappointed that Senator Merkley doesn't grasp this, and that he instead eggs on the people who are kidding themselves into thinking that Trump and Musk lose if the government shuts down.
ourse the
That was his speculation. Merkley's was more persuasive.
Post a Comment