Toronto's scandal-plagued mayor Rob Ford said Wednesday he is taking a leave of absence in order to enter rehab, after a new video emerged allegedly showing him smoking crack days ago. Ford, 44, has already admitted to binge drinking and smoking crack…
Now that President Biden has signed into law the debt-ceiling deal, what can we expect in the next 17 months leading up to the 2024 election?
1. House MAGA Republicans will be less of a force.
It was supposed to be their ace in the hole, their single biggest bargaining leverage. But in the end, House MAGA Republicans got surprisingly little out of their agreement to increase the debt ceiling.
Yes, they acted irresponsibly. They manufactured a debt crisis out of whole cloth. They played a reckless hostage-taking game. They could have wrecked the full faith and credit of the United States. They demanded spending cuts that would have hurt lots of vulnerable Americans.
Yet in the end, they got almost zilch. They’ve been shown to be paper tigers.
The final deal leaves Biden’s economic agenda mainly untouched (except for a limited rollback of some IRS funds and the ending of a pause on federal student loan payments expected to expire anyway).
And although it imposes new work requirements for the beneficiaries of some federal aid, including childless adults who receive food stamps, it increases spending in the program (and is expected to cover more people) while sparing Medicaid.
I very much doubt that Kevin McCarthy has suddenly discovered the virtues of compromise and bipartisanship. His speakership continues to depend on the support of MAGA crazies in the House like Marjorie Taylor Greene, Jim Jordan, Scott Perry, and Lauren Boebert.
I expect that in coming months the House MAGAs will do all sorts of outrageous things to demonstrate fealty to their Republican base: try to impeach Biden, drag Hunter Biden through muddy hearings, pass bills prioritizing freedom of religion above all other values, even flirt with a national abortion ban.
Their hearings will get lots of play on Fox News and Newsmax, but they’ll lead nowhere, and their bills will die in the Senate.
2. Biden’s quiet diplomacy is working, at least for now.
Biden didn’t try to rally the public behind him. He might have told the nation why the very existence of the debt ceiling was an affront to both the Constitution and the nation’s standing. He could have threatened to use the 14th Amendment and publicly invited the Supreme Court to rule on it.
But this was not Biden. In his 50 years of public service, he has never delivered a speech with the power to alter the public’s understanding of a major issue.
Over the next 17 months, Biden won’t take on MAGA Republicans openly and vociferously, no matter how outrageously they act. Instead, he’ll quietly work away at implementing his infrastructure, technology, and climate legislation.
3. The Trump factor wasn’t in play, but it will be.
As in Sherlock Holmes’s mystery “The Dog That Didn’t Bark,” silence was a big part of the story — in this case, that of Donald Trump during the critical final weeks of negotiation.
Had Trump weighed in loudly against it, House Republicans would not have gone along.
Biden’s behind-the-scenes strategy of compromise will work less well closer to the election, as America is subjected to full-bore Trump. And it’s certainly no match for a growing White Christian Nationalist movement that Trump has enabled, which threatens the very essence of American democracy.
Some commentators argue that the debt-ceiling deal begins to “reestablish a broad bipartisan political center.”
Rubbish. There can be no center to American politics as long as most Republican voters support Trump and most Republican lawmakers follow Trump’s lead. There’s no “center” between democracy and authoritarianism.
4. The debt will continue to soar, but that may not be a problem.
The debt agreement will cut expected increases in federal spending by $1.5 trillion over a decade, mainly by freezing some funding and limiting spending to 1 percent growth in 2025.
Yet the national debt as a percentage of the total economy will continue to grow.
This is largely due to the inevitable demographics of baby boomers — who will be retiring and collecting Social Security and Medicare.
Republicans will almost certainly take their debt savings as an invitation for more tax cuts on the wealthy and big corporations, just as they turned savings from their 2011 deal into the 2017 tax cut.
Democrats should resist this and continue to demand that the rich pay their fair share of taxes. Democrats must also advocate for more generous safety nets and public investments.
There’s no good reason the U.S. remains the only rich nation without paid family leave, paid vacations, universal health care, affordable college, child and elder care. These are all hugely popular with voters. Make them issues for 2024.
As to the debt itself, neither party really cares about it. Although it has doubled from $15 trillion in 2011 to $31.4 trillion now, it has not had any obvious negative effect on the economy.
5. The federal budget will become little more than Social Security, Medicare, and defense.
Perhaps the biggest single shift in Republican strategy as revealed in the debt deal is the GOP’s newfound willingness to protect Social Security and Medicare.
Think how far we’ve come from 2005 when George W. Bush tried to privatize Social Security. This time around, MAGA Republicans went out of their way to wall off these popular programs. (Trump warned MAGAs not to touch them.)
In a few years, if present trends continue, the federal budget will essentially be Social Security, Medicare, and national defense — with a few odds and ends tacked on. Non-defense discretionary spending has been falling as a share of the economy for several years, and it will now fall even farther.
***
I don’t want to minimize the significance of what just occurred. America has dodged a lethal bullet. Biden played it about as well as it could have been played, given who he is and who they are. Had the debt ceiling not been lifted, we’d be facing economic Armageddon within days.
But in terms of the factors contributing to that lethal bullet, little has changed. The MAGA Republicans have been stymied for now, but they’re still dangerous as hell.
“If you get rid of this man, get rid of him on facts,” Clarke said, referring to Nottoway Registrar Rodney Reynolds, whose appointment as the rural county’s top election official isn’t being automatically renewed by the newly Republican controlled Nottoway Electoral Board.
Another speaker, Sue Yeatts, said she was concerned about errors with voter registration cards recently sent out to Nottoway residents and “rudeness” she said she’s seen from Reynolds. The ability to do the job well, she said, should be all that matters.
“I’m tired of the race card,” Yeatts said. “I’m done with it. I don’t want to hear it anymore.”
The Nottoway Electoral Board announced at a meeting Thursday night it would soon be interviewing five candidates for the job at an “undisclosed location,” but much of its discussion of the registrar job occurred during an hourlong closed session. After the meeting, held in a former elementary school building with noticeably broken air conditioning, board members wouldn’t specify if Reynolds would be one of the interviewees. But there was no vote or announcement indicating an official decision had been made to remove him from consideration entirely.
Nottoway, a rural Southside county of roughly 15,500 people about 60 miles southwest of Richmond, is the latest Virginia locality having a heated debate about who should run its elections. The recent turmoil in Buckingham County — where the entire election staff quit and a Republican-allied registrar hired to keep things running was fired after less than a month in the job — has been a cautionary tale for other electoral boards considering similar staff overhauls. Nevertheless, comparisons to Buckingham didn’t deter the Lynchburg Electoral Board from hiring a new registrar last week, according to reporting by Cardinal News, after what a former Democratic board member called a “coordinated attack” against the former registrar who had held the job since 2018.
[Read more: Buckingham Electoral Board fires Republican registrar after less than a month in the job]
The increase in battles over local election administration is driven by several factors. After years in the minority, Republicans recently became entitled to majority control of all 133 of Virginia’s local electoral boards, a legally required result of Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s victory in 2021. That’s happening just as registrars’ four-year terms are expiring this summer, an opportunity for the reshaped boards to decide to keep their existing registrar or bring in someone new. Many of the local Republican activists who play a role in nominating people to serve on electoral boards have also grown increasingly distrustful of and antagonistic toward election administrators, a trend partly fueled by former President Donald Trump’s false claims that rampant voter fraud cost him the 2020 election.
Though Republicans feel they are simply exercising the power state law grants them to oversee local election offices, some in the elections community are concerned departures of experienced registrars could bring more chaos to election offices that are supposed to function more like bland bureaucracies than partisan battlegrounds.
Republican electoral board members thinking of initiating a change in their local registrar’s office recently got legal guidance on how they can and can’t achieve that goal. In a May 15 advisory opinion, Attorney General Jason Miyares said electoral boards have no legal obligation to reappoint incumbent registrars, but they cannot refuse to reappoint a registrar for political reasons alone. However, the line between the political and nonpolitical is often blurry, and Miyares noted the legality of registrar changes ultimately comes down to the facts of each case.
It remains to be seen whether Nottoway will also oust its registrar, but the issue is already stirring up the same type of division seen elsewhere.
Near the end of Thursday’s Nottoway Electoral Board meeting, board Chairman Tom Reynolds, a Republican, pointed to an anonymous quote from a county resident published in a local newspaper warning there was “going to be trouble” if Rodney Reynolds didn’t keep his job as registrar.
“I took that as a threat. And I will not be intimidated,” said Tom Reynolds, who is not related to Rodney Reynolds.
Board member Sarah Allen, now the panel’s lone Democrat, chimed in with her own anecdote about seemingly threatening behavior.
“No more white pickup trucks coming down my driveway please,” she said.
Rodney Reynolds stayed out of the public debate over whether he was worth keeping, entering the meeting room only temporarily to give the board a few updates on election-related business. After the meeting, he said he wasn’t sure whether he would be one of the five people interviewing for his job, which he would like to keep.
“I know this job,” he said.
Though the trend of registrars fighting for their jobs is largely being driven by a partisan shift this year from Democratic to Republican control of local electoral boards, the facts of each situation differ. In Nottoway, the Electoral Board is not looking to replace a longtime registrar. Reynolds was hired in 2021 when the Democratic-led Electoral Board chose to replace former registrar Angela Stewart, who had held the job for almost three decades. That vote was bipartisan, but local Republicans contend the Nottoway situation is about rectifying a situation caused by Democratic officials’ past disregard for the norms of election administration.
The controversy in Nottoway predates Republicans taking a majority on the board earlier this year. A special prosecutor was called in last year to look into various allegations of wrongdoing by the board and election office, and the county’s former registrar has filed a federal lawsuit claiming she was wrongfully fired.
[Read more: Special prosecutor trying to sort out elections drama in Nottoway County]
When the board was under Democratic control, former state elections Commissioner Chris Piper sent Nottoway officials a letter ordering board members to be re-trained on the duties of the office and the Freedom of Information Act due to the high volume of complaints the state was receiving about the way the election office and board meetings were being run. During the midterm elections last year, a judge rejected an attempt to keep some Nottoway polling places open after the normal closing time after concerns were raised that not all candidates had been notified of the move.
On Thursday, Nottoway County Democratic Committee Chairman Thomas Crews reminded the board the decision to hire Rodney Reynolds was bipartisan. The upcoming personnel decision, he said, should be similarly bipartisan in order for Nottoway residents to have confidence Republicans aren’t orchestrating a “hostile takeover” of the election office.
“We do not want to see Nottoway County turned into Buckingham, but that is the dangerous road down which we could end up traveling,” Crews said.
Diana-Lynn Wilkins-Mitchell, a Nottoway resident who has repeatedly asked the state to intervene in the county’s elections drama, pointed to the recent attorney general opinion to assure the Electoral Board it has every right to make a change if it feels hiring a new registrar is in the best interest of the county.
“Somehow in all of the things going on, we have lost sight of one important fact,” Wilkins-Mitchell said. “Which is that the code of Virginia dictates how we move forward in everything we do.”
Under Virginia law, registrars are appointed to four-year terms on a timeline that puts them up for reappointment by July 1 of this year. The law says registrars “shall continue in office until a successor is appointed and qualifies.”
The recent opinion from Miyares, issued in response to a request from Del. Kathy Byron, R-Bedford, said the law shouldn’t be interpreted to mean registrars are entitled to a “lifetime appointment” when the General Assembly clearly envisioned four-year terms.
“The board may replace the registrar for a wide variety of reasons, including for example, underperformance, availability of a better candidate, or any other permitted reason,” Miyares wrote. “A board, however, may not refuse to reappoint an incumbent based on prohibited grounds such as race or other legally protected status or political affiliation.”
Any local process of hiring a new registrar, Miyares said, “must be objective and apolitical.”
Last week, Buckingham moved a step toward normalcy when a local judge made an appointment to fill an empty Republican seat on the Buckingham Electoral Board. The local GOP previously nominated just-fired registrar Luis Gutierrez for the seat, but withdrew his nomination after the move was reported by the Virginia Mercury and set for a public court hearing.
As of June 1, the new Republican member of the Buckingham Electoral Board is Sandy Banks-Bertwell, a real estate agent who previously served on the board but had quit in April. In a nomination letter to the judge, Buckingham County Republican Committee Chairwoman Ramona Christian said Banks-Bertwell had resolved “out of state work issues” and could return to the board.
“The intense persecution from Jordan Miles left her little time to pursue her career as a real estate agent in Virginia and South Carolina,” Christian wrote, referring to Democratic Buckingham Supervisor Jordan Miles. “Sandy believes she is now in a better position to handle the pressures of the electoral board and her career.”
Asked for a response to the “persecution” claim, Miles said he’s had virtually no interaction with Banks-Bertwell outside of public records requests and speaking at formal board meetings. The board should get to work “hiring a competent, permanent registrar,” he said, instead of “peddling fairy tales.”
Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sarah Vogelsong for questions: info@virginiamercury.com. Follow Virginia Mercury on Facebook and Twitter.
Sen. Joe Manchin—the West Virginia lawmaker reviled by progressives for his climate-killing policies and many Democrats over his repeated sabotage of his own party's agenda—said Sunday he has still not decided about whether he might make a third-party run for president in 2024.
Asked by "Fox News Sunday" host Shannon Bream if he's decided on a possible run with the billionaire-backed "No Labels" or otherwise, Manchin applauded the group "pushing very hard to the centrist middle" and "making commonsense decisions," but dodged a direct answer to the question.
"If Plan A shows that we're going to the far reaches of both sides, the far left and the far right, and the people don't want to go to the far left and the far right, they want to be governed from the middle," Manchin said. "I think there is… you better have that Plan B available and ready to go."
When pressed by Bream on his consideration of a presidential run, Manchin replied, "Not ruling anything in, not ruling anything out."
Last month, as Common Dreams reported, journalists with More Perfect Union dove into the secretive funding of No Labels—which offers itself as a harmless, more middle-of-the-road option to the two major political parties in the U.S.—and found that much of the money behind the group comes from "a whole lot of billionaires with a history of opposing democracy."
\u201cA group calling themselves "No Labels" has suddenly emerged as a huge financial backer of Kyrsten Sinema.\n\nThey're also floating the idea of running Joe Manchin for President.\n\nWe dug into them, and found a whole lot of billionaires with a history of opposing democracy.\u201d
— More Perfect Union (@More Perfect Union) 1684768082
In a 2018 column, financial industry watchdogs Porter McConnell and Rion Dennis identified No Labels as part of a cabal of so-called "centrists" who are really just "wolves of Wall Street in sheep's clothing," hiding behind their harmless-sounding name to mask very insidious intent.
"For years, the group No Labels and its close partner, the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, have quietly promoted policies that are wrapped in the mantle of bipartisanship and pitched as "non-ideological," while being in the pay of corporate interests," McConnell and Dennis explained. "They produce reports, sponsor events, and weigh in on policy on behalf of unnamed corporate donors."
Critics of a No Labels' candidate in 2024 say it's strikingly obvious that the true motive for such a move would be to slice off enough gullible voters to create a path for Donald Trump's reelection.
Copyright © 2023 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | Manage Preferences
For corrections contact corrections@rawstory.com, for support contact support@rawstory.com.
