19 votes

Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of July 6

This thread is posted weekly - please try to post all relevant US political content in here, such as news, updates, opinion articles, etc. Extremely significant events may warrant a separate topic, but almost all should be posted in here.

This is an inherently political thread; please try to avoid antagonistic arguments and bickering matches. Comment threads that devolve into unproductive arguments may be removed so that the overall topic is able to continue.

8 comments

  1. [8]
    Comment deleted by author
    Link
    1. [6]
      DefinitelyNotAFae
      Link Parent
      So mostly it's a cynical assumption that he's brain dead and being kept "alive" to avoid a special election. It's mostly memeing about how it would just track given his record of obstruction and...

      So mostly it's a cynical assumption that he's brain dead and being kept "alive" to avoid a special election. It's mostly memeing about how it would just track given his record of obstruction and treatment of RBG in particular. "It's how he'd want to go" has been a common joke. But also, I don't know, I wouldn't be surprised. The fake sounding "I had a 20 minute phone call..." was unconvincing especially since no one has seemed to actually hear from him. So personally, I wouldn't be shocked if he's in fact fully physically incapacitated as well as mentally.

      If he dies on or after August 3rd, the seat remains vacant until the November election. Thomas Massie is an anti-trump Republican and he would likely do very well in a special election due to name recognition and the GOP doesn't want him in office. So it's in the Maga interest for him not to be dead yet.

      There's no mechanism for "declaring" the seat vacant prior to his death. Which is sort of the issue really, in that the governor can't press the issue particularly.

      Did I answer everything?

      5 votes
      1. [6]
        Comment deleted by author
        Link Parent
        1. [4]
          DefinitelyNotAFae
          Link Parent
          Incapacitate but doesn't resign? The Constitution didn't actually provide for it. They could be removed by a 2/3 Senate vote (regardless of capacity) The specifics of replacement whether by death,...

          Incapacitate but doesn't resign? The Constitution didn't actually provide for it. They could be removed by a 2/3 Senate vote (regardless of capacity)
          The specifics of replacement whether by death, resignation or expulsion are state by state for the Senate- some the governor appoints a replacement, some have a special election, some let both happen and 100% by election for the House (because that's in the constitution)

          Filling vacancies in the U.S. Senate - Ballotpedia

          Filling vacancies in the U.S. House of Representatives - Ballotpedia

          I don't think they did think about people in long term comas, while I suspect they would have resigned via family or something, things also moved slower (especially travel) and it wouldn't have been as uncommon to be out of touch for longer times back in the late 1700s. So maybe they also thought it would work itself out (or they could be expelled if needed ). But idk if this was touched on by the FF at all in historical documents.

          And please, dunk away ( I know you're not). It's a big fucking mess and the system is no longer functioning well - though it's grinding to a halt the way that I think they would have intended rather than collapsing entirely. Idk we were supposed to update this stupid constitution more often than we did and here we are.

          3 votes
          1. [4]
            Comment deleted by author
            Link Parent
            1. nukeman
              Link Parent
              The U.S. constitution is pretty early as far as written constitutions and democracy go. The founders didn’t have a 100% idea of where things would go. One thing they did believe was that Congress...

              The U.S. constitution is pretty early as far as written constitutions and democracy go. The founders didn’t have a 100% idea of where things would go. One thing they did believe was that Congress would be far more insular and combative toward the president. They didn’t anticipate the widespread rise of political parties and factionalization of Congress such that they and the president could be in alignment.

              4 votes
            2. DefinitelyNotAFae
              Link Parent
              Other folks have answered but it's just also worth noting that Senators were not originally elected by the people but selected by the state legislature, so there was I think also the intent that...

              Other folks have answered but it's just also worth noting that Senators were not originally elected by the people but selected by the state legislature, so there was I think also the intent that the states wouldn't allow such a thing and that the Senate, being the "grown ups" who had to appease their state, and who weren't elected by the common folk, wouldn't allow the current state of affairs to occur.

              And maybe they were right, but we changed that over the years so here we are.

              3 votes
            3. stu2b50
              Link Parent
              It's actually pretty uncommon for the current situation, where both parties really cap out at ~52-53% of congressional control, and swap places every other cycle, to occur in US politics. As...

              It's actually pretty uncommon for the current situation, where both parties really cap out at ~52-53% of congressional control, and swap places every other cycle, to occur in US politics.

              As Samuel Lubell stated, the US traditionally has a sun party and a moon party - it was very common for one political party to dominate decades at a time.

              Democrats, for example, held power from 1955 all the way to 1981. The Republicans did not have control of the senate that ENTIRE time. 26 years of a Democrat majority in senate, half of which was a supermajority.

              Seriously, take a look at Congressional control by year.

              The fact that a supermajority is unthinkable is really only something that happened after ~2010 or so. So pretty recent. Obama had a supermajority trifecta on his first election victory!

              2 votes
        2. Lyrl
          Link Parent
          There was a Representative a few years ago whose family put into a memory care home. No announcement, but after a few months a reporter tracked her down. She kept pulling her paycheck while...

          There was a Representative a few years ago whose family put into a memory care home. No announcement, but after a few months a reporter tracked her down. She kept pulling her paycheck while missing all the remaining votes in her term.

          I think the most common outcome of disability is they don't run for reelection, so all their votes are just missed for however much is left of their term. But if they have an established staff and the party considers the seat important, even clearly mentally toast reps or senators will have basically shadow campaigns run for them, keep winning elections purely off name recognition, and staff coach them how to vote whatever is the party line. From the Wikipedia article on Strom Thurmand (senator 1954-2003) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strom_Thurmond#Health :

          Retrospectively, a Senate aide stated that "for his last ten years, Thurmond didn't know if he was on foot or on horseback", while a 2020 New Yorker article stated that he was "widely known" by the end of his career to be non compos mentis.

          3 votes
    2. hobbes64
      Link Parent
      Probably because it's an outrage that we don't expect more from our representatives, who really represent powerful lobbyists and donors instead of the people who elect them. Here's a humor post...

      Probably because it's an outrage that we don't expect more from our representatives, who really represent powerful lobbyists and donors instead of the people who elect them.

      Here's a humor post from The Atlantic that points out the situation:

      If Other Jobs Were Like a U.S. Senator’s - The Atlantic

      It’s time for your scheduled open-heart surgery. Unfortunately, no one has seen or heard from the surgeon in weeks, since the Incident. The nurse says that she spoke with him at length on a wide variety of important subjects and that he had never been more eloquent. “Will he be along shortly?” you ask. “I hired him to perform a specific job, and I would like him to do that.” The nurse is appalled by this disrespect for the doctor’s privacy. You lie there for several weeks, your chest flaps held open by clamps.

      You visit the zoo. THE RHINO IS IN, a large sign informs you. But you don’t see any rhinoceroses, just some zookeepers crawling around in a rhino suit. “We’ve worked with the rhinoceros for years,” the zookeepers explain, when confronted. “We know exactly what he’d do in this situation.”

      “Do we need to get another rhino, though?” you ask. “Is there a rhino in this zoo, currently?” No one answers. You don’t deserve an answer.

      Your child’s babysitter has not been heard from in weeks. First Lady Edith Wilson is answering all correspondence on her behalf. “That’s fine,” you say. “There’s precedent for this.”

      You are watching the Olympics. The gymnasts simply don’t show up! An ESPN commentator assures you that he called one of them and spoke for 20 minutes about the situation in Iran. “Did you get any response?” you ask. “Or did you just talk to them?” Everyone says this question is rude and ill-timed.

      You are at the dentist’s office. No one has seen or heard from the dentist in months, but he’s been making stock trades. “That’s something,” you and the receptionist agree. “Should I wait?” you ask.

      “He’ll tell you what’s going on in due time,” the receptionist says stiffly. You wait. Your tooth aches.

      “I’ve finished all the Far Side compilations,” you tell the receptionist. “Should I keep waiting?” She shrugs.

      You have called the fire department. “Don’t worry,” the 911 dispatcher tells you. “The firefighters are thriving!”

      “That’s great!” you say. “And they’ll be here soon, to put out the fire?” There is a long pause on the other end of the line. “Because if they won’t,” you say, “I’d really like to know.”

      You call your senator to complain about all these goings-on. “Hi,” you say. “I just think there’s a certain standard of, well, presence to which you should be able to hold people in important positions!”

      “The senator agrees,” the staffer answers. “He was just saying so at length this afternoon. Unfortunately, I couldn’t get any video footage of it.” You sigh. Seems about right.

      5 votes
  2. DefinitelyNotAFae
    Link
    New York Times reporters are subpoenaed after Air Force One stories, raising press freedom concerns

    New York Times reporters are subpoenaed after Air Force One stories, raising press freedom concerns

    The Department of Justice has subpoenaed New York Times journalists after they reported on security concerns involving the new, Qatari-gifted Air Force One, marking a dramatic escalation of President Donald Trump ’s campaign against the media that has drawn condemnation for eroding a fundamental freedom of American democracy.

    The new jet, a present from the U.S. ally that the administration spent $400 million on to retrofit and upgrade, entered service last week. But Trump used an older model Air Force One jet to leave a NATO summit in Turkey and later referenced threats against him made by Iran.

    The subpoenas seek to force the reporters to testify before a federal grand jury in Manhattan next week, the Times said, adding that federal agents delivered some subpoenas to the reporters at their homes.

    4 votes