Daily Dems Doing the Work, Making Noise and Fighting Back Day 70
Our fighters are getting more fight. And the best way for that to go even further is to encourage them and support them and amplify them.
So here are some of today’s
Repping the Rep: Chris Pappas (NH-01)
Is leading 89 other reps in calling on the HHS to protect the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program. This is one of those things that if it doesn’t affect you, you probably don’t know about it so I’m really glad it’s at least put on record that it matters and getting rid of it will hurt millions of people.
The department is small, but their elimination will be felt nationwide:
Though the staff of 25 employees account for only a small fraction of the announced layoffs, they are responsible for administering billions of dollars each year to support millions of families across the nation in heating and cooling their homes. Each year, all 50 states, the District of Columbia, five U.S. territories, and about 150 tribes apply for funds through the HHS division that you have eliminated.
Many of these letters do lead to things being reinstated. I sincerely hope this is one of them.
Rep Chris Deluzio (PA-17)
And Oversight Dems (Deluzio gets the credit cause he posted it on all his socials) are using the “I did ___ so you don’t have to” trend to discuss a new EM interview.
I think they could go even further. This post isn’t educational as much as it’s a simple and clear reminder of what DT is doing. It could be even better as a video with several examples of what EM said vs the truth. Or, multiple slides of engaging text could work too.
I’m including this because I like to encourage our electeds to try things, and when they’re on the right track, it’s important to let them know that too. This might not be my favorite post ever, but it certainly has the potential to become one of my favorite series if it’s done right.
Rep Angie Craig (MN-02)
Announced that this month she will be hosting empty chair town halls in all four Minnesota Republican congressional districts.
She’s not someone that instantly comes to mind when thinking of those who will step up like this. She’s a little more under the radar, not as progressive as most of the names we’ve heard doing this, and yet, here we are.
Democrats, across the board, are stepping up, and that is HUGE and must be acknowledged.
She wrote an op ed in the Star Tribune announcing the events.
Rep Sean Casten (IL-06)
Posted a thread on Blue Sky about his thoughts on the Supreme Court not being an elected office, and how that gives the implication that they are infallible, which, of course, we know they aren’t.
In 18 parts, he breaks down exactly why he thinks this is the wrong choice if they are a co-equal branch with entirely elected branches.
It’s kinda long, but I really implore you to read the whole thing.
We’ll talk more on the other side.
Last week, some constituents were in town and we hooked them up with a White House tour, a Supreme Court tour and then I gave them a tour of the US Capitol. They joked that they did all three branches in one day.
In the course of walking around, we got to talking about the architecture of the three buildings, and how they distort our understanding of democracy. The White House is designed to be open to the people (at least the 1st floor). It's a house, designed for welcoming guests, entertaining, etc.
The Congress is also notably open. Anyone can come in the rotunda. The House and Senate chambers at opposite ends have galleries open to the public. Paintings and murals to various firsts (first woman, first African American etc.) remind us that politicians don't always get it right.
The Supreme Court on the other hand - as the guides will tell you - is modelled on a Greek temples. You walk in, down a long hallway to an inner sanctum. The architecture is meant to remind you that here, politics doesn't happen. It is a "temple to the law", as the tour guides say.
The Supreme Court on the other hand - as the guides will tell you - is modelled on a Greek temples. You walk in, down a long hallway to an inner sanctum. The architecture is meant to remind you that here, politics doesn't happen. It is a "temple to the law", as the tour guides say.
Did Samuel Alito or Ketanji Brown-Jackson become infallible the day they were sworn in? Or is their infallibility somehow baked in to their collective work as 9 jurists and their collective wisdom? In which case, were the Warren and Roberts court both equally infallible "temples of law"?
Moreover, the court - on it's own metrics - gets it wrong ALL THE TIME. You don't rule in favor of Dobbs unless you think the Roe court got it wrong. And don't even get me started on Dred Scott.
It is one thing to say that we should endeavor to keep politics out of the court room. But it is something else entirely to assume that a bunch of people who are no more or less imperfect than anyone else on this planet, who got their job through political processes is somehow above politics.
At SCOTUS, this framing of the courts as above politics is a recipe for hubris. "I'm just ruling based on the clear text of the Constitution" is no more honest than someone who says "If you want to know what I think, just read the Bible". There is a reason they call their decisions "opinions".
But it also affects all the lower courts where we ask judges to run for office on the idea that they are just interpreting the law and must pretend to be devoid of opinions about things we've been arguing about since our founding, or to have no desire to change the world for the better.
Do you take a broad or strict view of the Constitution? (Jefferson and Madison disagreed with this point, and we've been arguing ever since.)
Did the Constitution create rights or simply acknowledge an incomplete list of ones that already existed under natural law? (I happen to think the latter, because otherwise the 9th amendment makes no sense. But those who say there is no innate right to privacy assume the former.)
Should ethics enter the court room, even if those ethics are not formalized in the law? Lots of hard criminal justice issues hang on this question, just as do those on the religious right who insist that their religious codes supercede the law.
There is no right answer to those questions that exists, fully formed inside the "temple of law". They are opinions held by judges. They are innately political questions. And there is nothing wrong with that.
To the contrary, we'd have a more informed conversation about the courts if we saw them as they are. Before I vote for a judge, I'd like to know how they think about those issues! And I'd like them to defend their *opinions* as such, not preach at me about The One True Law.
To be sure, there is a separate conversation about avoiding the *politicization* of the courts. The tragedy in WI is the money that was spent to try and manipulate justice. But we should be able to criticize politicization without attacking politics per se.
Bottom line: our democracy depends on the idea that groups of flawed people, held accountable through elections and checks and balances will get it right more often than we get it wrong. The opposite of democracy is a handful of high, infallible priests to whom we must defer.
Insisting that one of our 3 branches is filled with high priests, dictating from on high in the temple of law is anti-democratic. Even when it's done in the name of being "non-political". Rant over... for now.
There’s a level of transparency to this we don’t often get, but, I think, need to get more.
Very often, our elected officials do and say things we don’t necessarily understand, cause they don’t tell us why. And I think part of the reason so many scream DO SOMETHING is because of that lack of transparency. They don’t know how much is being done, and they certainly don’t know the importance of the things that are being done, cause no one is explaining it.
Is this the most important thing right now? No, we don’t have the power to change it, but it does show who Sean Casten is and what he believes in regard to elected offices, and I think that’s invaluable.
Rep Seth Magaziner (RI-02)
Went on WPRI’s Newsmakers, which, from the little bit I watched feels right-leading, last week. The first topic was SignalGate. Magaziner posted a clip of the SignalGate segment today on his Threads and IG, which I think is important because it’s a reminder that our Democrats are not letting this one go.
Sen Amy Klobuchar (MN)
Stopped by Broken Clock Brewing Co-op to hear from founder, Jeremy Mathison, about how DT’s massive tax increase on American families will affect their business. Turns out, as you might expect, it will affect them a lot.
I think it’s so important for our electeds to amplify these kinds of stories about how different people will be affected. Every story will not matter to every person, but if enough of these stories are amplified, every story will reach someone.
Sen Adam Schiff (CA)
Is well aware that many California farmers didn’t vote for him, but he doesn’t care, he’s gonna do everything he can to protect them from tariff retaliation. He was interviewed by The Fresno Bee, a publication they are more likely to read than something like the SF Gate, for instance. He clearly chose which publication to do this interview with carefully.
I really appreciate the fact that he’s making sure that everyone in California is represented. Also incredibly horrified that he’s the first Senator in 30 years to be on the Agriculture Committee. CA might be thought of as a blue state, but we are one of the largest producers of produce, and it’s imperative to be on the committee that handles that.
And finally…
Rep Becca Balint (VT)
Posted on IG about how big a deal yesterday was and how much hope it gave people who might not have had any. Before you find reasons to criticize what happened yesterday, just look at the power it had.
So, those are just some of our fighters today.
Every day, there will be more and every day, it’s important to amplify as many of them as possible, never forget that
If you made it this far, comment 🚜 (a tractor) because I’m still not over Schiff being the first to California senator in 30 years on the Agriculture Committee
Our voices are superpower, but only when we use them!
Thank you. I like to read your messages before bed, so I’m thinking of something good as I fall asleep.🚜
Thank you for posting these every day. They give me hope.