Having taken time out for the holiday and to compile the 5 years of Trump diaries into an ebook, I am now wondering, was it me or was it Trump? There are plenty of us who have written rather prodigiously on this site over the past 5 years—many far more productive than I. As the Trump embers die off, I find myself uninterested in the same natty particulars of his life that had rankled me in the past. He refuses to concede? He is pardoning the entire Confederate army? The newest Russian Battleship will be named after him? Sorry, I really could give a damn now that he has been ousted. The frosting on the cake would be a post-presidential conviction and years of remorse. I am not holding my breath, however, this is a man who has the words to “My Way” memorized--- backward.
Here’s what I am thinking now: if I were the Democratic leaders in the House and Senate what should be the next step? We are at a crossroads as Joe Biden and Kamala Harris begin their historic term. As some Dems plan on “making moves” to remove leadership and to move the party to the left or center I believe they are missing the point. The fight within the party has little to do with direction, it has to do with purpose.
The stars that are aligning for Democrats are similar to the ones that carried the party to majorities nearly a century ago. From 1918 through 1932 Republicans held power in the House for ten consecutive years. It was only the historic election of FDR that Democrats regained control of the lower house. House Democrats held majorities for the next 32 of 44 terms. Similarly, the Senate was held by Democrats during the same period 31 of 42 Congresses. Most of the Republican majorities have come after the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980. So, what’s the point?
Well, it can be inferred that events shaped these political outcomes. Certainly, it is easy to assume that the Great Depression and World War II had much to do with Democratic majorities that carried Democratic control through mid-century. Likewise, the Reagan landslide in 1984 helped the Republican cause in the latter years. There is no doubt that the Supreme Court decision in the landmark Citizens United v. FEC (2010) decision has helped the Republican surge of late by providing Super PAC dollars to corporate Republicans in national elections. But the impact of Citizens United may really lay in its influence in the unheralded state and local elections—the “secret sauce” of much of the latest Republican success. The impact state legislatures have had on national politics has really been generated by gerrymandering.
The arguments against CU include the likelihood that corporate issues are often at odds with the welfare of individuals. But the problem goes beyond the money and influence. Groups have been donating money to Super Pacs on both sides, and the election predating the CU decision was the most expensive to that date. The real problem is the corruption of the system that money and influence helped create. The dollars need a willing and craven recipient for the mendacity to take hold. As the ACLU notes on their website,
“It is also useful to remember that the mixture of money and politics long predates Citizens United and would not disappear even if Citizens United were overruled. The 2008 presidential election, which took place before Citizens United, was the most expensive in U.S. history until that point. The super PACs that have emerged in the 2012 election cycle have been funded with a significant amount of money from individuals, not corporations, and individual spending was not even at issue in Citizens United.”
They argue that the answer is to inject fairness into our elections by providing public financing that levels the playing fields. While this may not be a particularly welcome view on this site, I am frankly tired of the daily outreach for donations to combat Citizens United as if this were the most important issue for the nation going forward. It is not. Racial equality and voting rights legislation are what should be at the top of the next administration’s to-do list. Citizens United provides fuel for this effort, but it did not create the ideology. In fact, the reverse is more likely.
For those who would argue that these goals cannot be accomplished in the wake of corporate funding, I would argue that racism and voter suppression are driven by emotion and not dollars. The assaults on the rights of minorities and voting rights began anew the day after the historic passage of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights legislation in 1963-64. The attacks on public education were begun the day integration was codified into law. Make no mistake, the issues that separate Republicans and Democrats all revolve around the loss of privilege that was presaged by the Democratic renunciation of the corrosive effects of institutional racism and the denial of rights that follow.
The ferocity of these assaults is made in inverse proportion to the demographic shifts from majority-white voters to rising numbers of minority voters. They are exacerbated by the impact of greater educational opportunities for minority students that came about because of the integration that was promulgated by Brown v. Board in 1954—a decision that took more than 15 years to become effective in practice. It is further under attack by the growing impact of women who have taken a larger role in governance both on the national and local levels. The change Republicans resist is now becoming a reality that can only be held off by their threats to sell out their nation and with it their souls. Either their party or our democracy will prevail—the two at this point cannot coexist.
The battle here is against progress and modernity. The future in America is not so much a revolution as it is evolution. The entire era that preceded this century was a progression from border immigration stations, like Ellis Island, to middle-class status, to the boardroom. The glaring exception to this model was reserved for native Americans and our earliest enslaved “immigrants” who had no choice in their relocation to America.
The new administration and its party leaders can no longer pretend that there is a differentiation, a set of options, in preparing policy to correct these historic insults. There is no “centrist” policy to weigh against a “progressive” one. In this case, it is right vs, wrong. Likewise with immigration and voting rights issues. If we Democrats are to stand for anything, we must stand for this. There may be other fish to fry in the legislative basket, and many of these may have political dimensions—may lean to the left or be more centrist—but individual and voting rights have no “sides,” no direction left or right for Democrats and should not be sidetracked by issues of lesser consequence. They must be dealt with first by a united Democratic effort within the first days of the Biden-Harris administration.
I might add that the Dems adopt a “consequences be damned” approach because if these issues are not dealt with now—once and for all— there is little basis for seeking consensus, for working for a ruling majority, for assembling working coalitions among the competing interests in our party. Without equity and fairness, we are no better than republican-lite.
There are many among us who compare our time with the period in our history that defined our struggle for equality from the Civil War forward. For a nation that proudly professes our love of freedom, we forget the challenges many of our people still endure. The difference then was that in that era the White House was occupied by a man many consider our greatest president. Today, we live in an era that is rife with internal strife and a protected caste of racist actors at the top levels of government. They give cover and comfort to intolerance and bigotry in our streets, while we have been led by a man most consider to be our worst president ever.
In our most recent national election, that man received more votes than any other losing candidate, and in fact, was defeated by a man who, in order to defeat him, received the most votes ever recorded in any national election. It required a multi-racial tsunami to overcome white privilege, a coalition of interests to defeat what can best be described as an attempt to dissolve our democracy. There can be no distance between Democrats on the real issues that must be addressed this time. We have faced the enemy---it ain’t us.
