Thank you Dan for this. For me this will be a test to see if the Democratic Party can actually grow a pair or eat Wimpie Burgers and live under the Republican's thumb for a political eternity.
I really am puzzled about why this obsession of Mitch McConnell would matter to more than a few factories/plants that were slow to adopt to new COVID-19 rules, especially when there's very little data showing much resulting litigation.
Part of me wonders if this type of federal liability shield is a dress rehearsal for liability shields for other, more common everyday incidents, and McConnell believes if this passes and courts don't overturn the shield for some reason, then he can start conditioning passage of legislation on a whole host of liability shields for corporations.
Oh, want to pass a climate bill? Liability shield for companies who might cause climate change.
Oh, want immigration reform? Fine, liability shield for all contractors working on immigration/border issues.
Oh, want to expand Obamacare? Fine, but tort reform for hospitals/doctors price of passage.
Oh, want to cancel student debt via legislation? Fine, but no liability as to for profit colleges for failing/defrauding students.
Oh, want a major infrastructure program? Fine, but no liability for construction companies who build something that injures/kills workers and/or users of the final product.
Thank you for expanding on Katie Porter’s brilliant and draining Twitter thread. It’s just all so frustrating, on many levels, because it seems hard to put these ideas into practice.
Not only can Dems not rely on a propaganda machine to create distractions – keeping a paranoid audience focused on irrelevant culture wars rather than real corruption – but as soon as Dems try to expose R's motives, the press will start lecturing about good politics, questioning the effectiveness of such “negative” messaging. I can just hear Chuck Todd asking “Is the Dem strategy to attack rather than offer solutions losing the working class?” with plenty of Op-Eds from Bret Stephens and Danielle Pletka confirming his suspicion. It’s legacy media's version of Ben Shapiro’s “Orange Man Bad isn't a platform.” We’re damned if we do, damned if we don’t.
As Michelle Goldberg wrote, Republicans are shielded from popular rebuke because we’ve all subconsciously accepted that it’s a power-grab operation fueled by white grievance. We expect nothing more, and in fact McConnell's often praised for his cynical tactics. Dems, however, are held to a standard – and unmasking R's often backfires in the press, even as the attacks are truthful and important, because the media focus on partisan optics over substance. And then voters think private citizen Hunter Biden's laptop is just as suspect and dangerous to democracy as senate majority leader Mitch McConnell's corporate ties and single-handed ability to kill a national relief package.
Hi Dan - just saw on some random blog (so take that with a grain of salt), According to Article I, Section 3, Clause 4 of the Constitution, the Vice President, being the President of the Senate, has discretion over who receives "priority recognition" in the Senate. And though it's beena tradition since 1937 to give it to the Senate Majority Leader, there is no Senate Rule that says it *must* be done this way.
For those who may have not know what 'priority recognition" means (as I didn't before reading this), the member of the Senate with Priority Recognition chooses which legislation is taken up and which is not.
According to this blogger, there would be nothing stopping VP-Elect Harris from giving "priority recognition" to Sen. Schumer - and he would be the arbiter deciding which bills would receive a vote and which would not.
My questions here are: 1) is any of that true? and 2) if so, what are the arguments for NOT doing it, other than Democrats seems to be more risk-averse in politics.
I would appreciate if you would comment on what is happening today in Washington where more than 100 House Republicans signed onto an amicus brief in support of the Texas lawsuit aimed at overturning the election results in four swing states. It is also rumored that Senator Ron Johnston may also go along with this insidious plan.
The key word is overturn. They not only want to overturn the election but our constitutional democracy!
I do realize it will go nowhere but the very thought of them trying is a threat to our constitution, our country, and our way of life.
You all have the power to help get this done. Call your Senators and Members of the House now and tell them to speak out on this every day. I just did and it felt good. All they have to do is use Katie Porter's talking points. Tell your friends to make calls too. Calls from constituents matter to elected officials!
Saw this on Adam Jentleson's Twitter page and believe he is spot on: "Maybe the most important fact of covid talks is that without making a single concession, McConnell watched as Dems climbed down from 3.4T to 2.2T to 900B. Now he probably thinks he can put something like his skinny 500Bish bill on the omni/CR, jam Dems with it & they’ll take it." I hate McConnell, but damn he is wily and smart.
Thank you Dan for this. For me this will be a test to see if the Democratic Party can actually grow a pair or eat Wimpie Burgers and live under the Republican's thumb for a political eternity.
Happy Hanukkah.
I really am puzzled about why this obsession of Mitch McConnell would matter to more than a few factories/plants that were slow to adopt to new COVID-19 rules, especially when there's very little data showing much resulting litigation.
Part of me wonders if this type of federal liability shield is a dress rehearsal for liability shields for other, more common everyday incidents, and McConnell believes if this passes and courts don't overturn the shield for some reason, then he can start conditioning passage of legislation on a whole host of liability shields for corporations.
Oh, want to pass a climate bill? Liability shield for companies who might cause climate change.
Oh, want immigration reform? Fine, liability shield for all contractors working on immigration/border issues.
Oh, want to expand Obamacare? Fine, but tort reform for hospitals/doctors price of passage.
Oh, want to cancel student debt via legislation? Fine, but no liability as to for profit colleges for failing/defrauding students.
Oh, want a major infrastructure program? Fine, but no liability for construction companies who build something that injures/kills workers and/or users of the final product.
Thank you for expanding on Katie Porter’s brilliant and draining Twitter thread. It’s just all so frustrating, on many levels, because it seems hard to put these ideas into practice.
Not only can Dems not rely on a propaganda machine to create distractions – keeping a paranoid audience focused on irrelevant culture wars rather than real corruption – but as soon as Dems try to expose R's motives, the press will start lecturing about good politics, questioning the effectiveness of such “negative” messaging. I can just hear Chuck Todd asking “Is the Dem strategy to attack rather than offer solutions losing the working class?” with plenty of Op-Eds from Bret Stephens and Danielle Pletka confirming his suspicion. It’s legacy media's version of Ben Shapiro’s “Orange Man Bad isn't a platform.” We’re damned if we do, damned if we don’t.
As Michelle Goldberg wrote, Republicans are shielded from popular rebuke because we’ve all subconsciously accepted that it’s a power-grab operation fueled by white grievance. We expect nothing more, and in fact McConnell's often praised for his cynical tactics. Dems, however, are held to a standard – and unmasking R's often backfires in the press, even as the attacks are truthful and important, because the media focus on partisan optics over substance. And then voters think private citizen Hunter Biden's laptop is just as suspect and dangerous to democracy as senate majority leader Mitch McConnell's corporate ties and single-handed ability to kill a national relief package.
Hi Dan - just saw on some random blog (so take that with a grain of salt), According to Article I, Section 3, Clause 4 of the Constitution, the Vice President, being the President of the Senate, has discretion over who receives "priority recognition" in the Senate. And though it's beena tradition since 1937 to give it to the Senate Majority Leader, there is no Senate Rule that says it *must* be done this way.
For those who may have not know what 'priority recognition" means (as I didn't before reading this), the member of the Senate with Priority Recognition chooses which legislation is taken up and which is not.
According to this blogger, there would be nothing stopping VP-Elect Harris from giving "priority recognition" to Sen. Schumer - and he would be the arbiter deciding which bills would receive a vote and which would not.
My questions here are: 1) is any of that true? and 2) if so, what are the arguments for NOT doing it, other than Democrats seems to be more risk-averse in politics.
Thanks!
I agree. Put pressure on McConnell RELENTLESSLY. Stacey Abrams we need you!
If Ossoff and Warnock do NOT message this to the voting public in Georgia, I will tear my hair out. Great analysis Dan.
Is it murder or blackmail plus murder?
To paraphrase dear Barry G., "Extreme (but accurate) campaign ads in defense of dying and desperate Americans IS NO VICE!!"
Hi Dan,
I would appreciate if you would comment on what is happening today in Washington where more than 100 House Republicans signed onto an amicus brief in support of the Texas lawsuit aimed at overturning the election results in four swing states. It is also rumored that Senator Ron Johnston may also go along with this insidious plan.
The key word is overturn. They not only want to overturn the election but our constitutional democracy!
I do realize it will go nowhere but the very thought of them trying is a threat to our constitution, our country, and our way of life.
Your thoughts please.
But Dan, don’t hold back. What do you really think about McConnell?
You all have the power to help get this done. Call your Senators and Members of the House now and tell them to speak out on this every day. I just did and it felt good. All they have to do is use Katie Porter's talking points. Tell your friends to make calls too. Calls from constituents matter to elected officials!
Saw this on Adam Jentleson's Twitter page and believe he is spot on: "Maybe the most important fact of covid talks is that without making a single concession, McConnell watched as Dems climbed down from 3.4T to 2.2T to 900B. Now he probably thinks he can put something like his skinny 500Bish bill on the omni/CR, jam Dems with it & they’ll take it." I hate McConnell, but damn he is wily and smart.