Pages

Friday, June 28, 2013

If Wendy Davis is a Terrorist What is Mitch McConnell?

     It's quite amazing to hear the overheated rhetoric about Wendy Davis' 'terrorism' and how 'outrageous' it was for her to stop something that the majority of a congressional body wanted.


      "This is straight out of an anarchist playbook,” Charmaine Yoest, president and CEO of Americans United for Life, told POLITICO about the Texas standoff. “I think we all need to duly note this [filibuster] is the only way they could win. That actual vote on the bill did pass.”

     The only way they could win. Yet I never hear Mitch McConnell worrying that this is the only way he can win. 

     "Yoest says the pro-abortion rights groups and the noisy protesters at the Texas Capitol are fooling themselves if they think the public wants unfettered access to late-term abortions."

    “What happened [Tuesday] night was really outrageous,” Yoest said. “What you’re seeing is a political position, not shared by the majority of the American people, becoming increasingly desperate as they lose through democratic processes. So they created absolute chaos [Tuesday] night. It’s the only way they could win."


    A Texas state GOPer felt she was a terrorist.   


     Rick Perry wondered why she hadn't learned from her own example-being born to a single mother and being a teenage mother herself? She should realize from that experience that abortion is wrong in all cases, I guess. Yet, even his fellow Texas GOPer sees that this was very clumsy of Perry. 
  
    "Perry subsequently claimed that he was actually offering praise of the Democrat, but Republican state House Speaker Joe Straus evidently doesn't have the governor's back on the matter. Straus said Friday that Perry's remarks undermine the GOP's effort to pass what would be one of the most restrictive abortion measures in the country."

    “Disagreements over policy are important and they’re healthy, but when he crosses the line into the personal, then he damages himself and he damages the Republican Party,” Straus told The Texas Tribune.


     Overall, Ms. Davis' one courageous act may well be the spark to galvanize women, liberals, all supports of women's rights. As a Politico piece noted today, this has been a pretty good week for Democrats:

     "This is what Democrats hoped it would feel like to be back on the right side of history.
Over the last week, four foundational aspirations of the modern Democratic Party converged in four days of unexpected triumph"

     "The Supreme Court struck down a law barring federal recognition of same-sex marriages. President Barack Obama announced aggressive new emissions regulations to fight climate change. The Senate passed a dramatic immigration reform plan with a supermajority vote. And a Texas legislator’s filibuster over abortion access turned into a national media sensation, energizing the left."

      "In every instance, Democrats feel they carried the day on an issue essential to the progressive identity – equal rights for gay couples, protecting the environment from global warming, tolerance of immigrants in general and Latinos in particular, and forceful commitment to women’s abortion rights."

     The fact is that in significant ways the country is more liberal, certainly on social issues than 20 years ago.Then on economic issues we have the Great Recession thanks to the 'revolution' of Reagan and friends.  Abortion is the one area that we're told the country is not getting more liberal, but rather more conservative, more 'prolife.'

     True there was one big disappointment-Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act being struck down. Yet, this too, can really only hurt the GOP more with minorities. While my prediction is that they will pass immigration-Boehner, no matter how much theatrics or even if he has to first try another Plan B-will ultimately let it come for a vote, and all it needs is to come up: it has the votes. 


    However, now what's going to be done about writing a new Section 4-as this is what SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts and friends says is needed? Are we going to have the specter of Mitch McConnell filibustering the Voting Rights Act? As Josh Marshall suggests the historical images may be too much.     

    On the assumption that the Voting Rights Act process will follow the same path other legislation has traveled this Congress, the Senate will act first, and the House will have to decide whether or not to follow suit. Democrats can exert pressure, but they’re effectively cut out of the decision.
    “I would like to see something called — well, I haven’t even discussed this with my caucus, but — the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, which would address the concerns that the Court put in its decision about Section 4,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi told reporters Wednesday. “It’s really a step backward and it’s not a reflection of what is happening in our country in some of these places. And when we put that bill together, when it was passed last time, it passed overwhelming, overwhelming 98 to nothing in the Senate and 390-something to almost nothing in the House. And it was bipartisan and we came to terms on it, in a way that we were all jubilant about the passage of it, Democrats and Republicans alike.”
     "House Speaker John Boehner’s office has referred questions about Voting Rights Act to the House Judiciary Committee, and its chairman, Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) intends to hold a hearing on the issue in July, to examine the implications of the Court’s decision, according to a committee aide."
     "But what legislative steps the committee will take remains a mystery."
     “The 2006 reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act did not change the criteria that determines which jurisdictions are subject to the special rules that require them to get advance pre-clearance from the Department of Justice or a federal court before they can change their voting rules,” Goodlatte said in response to this week’s decision. “The Supreme Court has now decided that original coverage formula does not meet constitutional requirements. This decision in no way affects the permanent, nationwide ban on racial discrimination in voting found in Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which remains in place.”
     It's good to know that racial discrimination is still banned! Thanks a lot for that, Senator Goodlatte! Meanwhile, I really like the optics of forcing McConnell and friends to veto something called the Voting Rights Act. If they do, they'll be out of the frying pan by passing immigration reform but now into the fire. The justiied outrage of the American people might become so great that 2014 will be that rare off year election where the Dems pick up seats. Meanwhile the GOP's House majority may not be quite as safe as we're always told. 
     By all means, I like Speaker Pelosi's idea to call it the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. I just want to see McConnell filibuster this, I really do. I think the Dems should dare him to do it. 

     That this is just the worst kind of corner for McConnell, Boehner and friends to be put in is underscored by the fact that they just can't answer the question even. Boehner doesn't trust himself to say anything about it, he has to delegate this to Goodlatte. 

      P.S. Call Mitch McConnell's office and ask if he will.

      http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/cgi-bin/newmemberbio.cgi?member=KYSR&site=congressmerge

      Ask Boehner if he'll allow a vote on it.

      http://www.speaker.gov/contact


    





    

1 comment: