This blog article was supposed to be about hope—at least that was my plan for this post. But the hopes of so many USAmericans are at the point of being betrayed by two Democratic Senators and by all 50 Republican Senators, and one of the hopes for Pres. Biden that I wrote about on January 20 seems to have been completely dashed.
The Dashed
Hopes for the Biden Presidency
One of the
hopes for the Biden Presidency that I included in that Jan. 20 blog post was
this: “Restoring political bipartisanship to the Capitol.” But rather than
political bipartisanship being restored, if anything, it has even worsened
during these nine months Biden has been in the White House.
Another hope
I had for the current administration was concerted effort to combat the problem
of global warming. That hope has perhaps not been completely dashed, but right
now it looks as if there will be far less done in that regard than so many of
us hoped for.
The dashed
hope for bipartisanship seems almost entirely because of the intransigence of
the Republicans, and especially the 50 Republican Senators under the leadership
of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.
But the hope
for significant action in combatting climate change has largely been dashed by Democratic Senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.
Right now, the only bipartisanship that seems operative is that which is killing the Biden agenda, as captured in the following political cartoon by Bob Englehart way back on June 9.
Criticism
of Sens. Manchinema
In
the U.S. Senate, 48 of the 50 Democratic Senators have been solidly in support
of the President and his agenda. But with no Republican votes on most matters,
it takes all 50 Democrats (plus Vice President Harris’s tie-breaking vote) to
pass bills that can’t be filibustered.
Senators
Manchin and Sinema have been so united in their opposition to especially the
costly Build Back Better (BBB) legislation that their names have sometimes been
conflated to Manchinema (check out #Manchinema).
Sens.
Manchinemas’ main criticism of the BBB bill has been the price tag: they have been
unwilling to approve little more than half of what the other 48 Democrats have
been willing to support. And, sadly, at this point it seems that the major
proposed cut is money to combat global warming.
I
find it deplorable that just two Senators can wield so much power on such a critical
issue. The long-term future of the country, and perhaps the world, is being
jeopardized to a greater or lesser degree by just these two.
And
the same two Senators have also been unwilling to consider support of a
proposed change in the filibuster rule in order to pass the For the People Act,
the voting rights bill which is so badly needed to protect American democracy.
Criticism
of the 50 Republican Senators
Among
Democrats, and especially those with progressive views, there is strong
criticism of Sens. Manchinema—and for good reason. Perhaps it goes without
saying, but the criticism of all the Republican Senators should be even
stronger.
For
example, the proposals in Biden’s Build Back Better proposal would benefit a
multitude of USAmericans, not just Democrats. And the global warming counter-proposals
are to ward off dire changes that would be detrimental for all, not just
Democrats. But there is no Republican support.
And
then what about voting rights? Back in 2006 when Bush was President, the Senate
voted 98-0 to extend the landmark Voting Rights Act for another 25 years. In
2013, though, the SCOTUS wrongheadedly gutted that bill.
And
then on Oct. 20, not even one Republican Senator would vote to even consider Manchin’s
watered-down bill to protect voting rights. Manchin promised he would get ten
Republicans to vote for the bill, which was less than the original Democratic
proposal. But he failed to get even one Rep. vote.
So,
yes, I am quite critical of Sens. Manchinema—but even more critical of the 50
Republican Senators, especially because of their unwillingness to help protect
democracy in this country.
_____
**
On Oct. 21, The Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson posted an insightful
opinion piece that is closely related to the above article; you can read it here (with no
paywall).
.jpg)
The first, and thus far the only, comments received regarding today's blog post is from Thinking Friend Judy Trullinger, who lives in my home county in northwest Missouri--a county where about 80% of the voters in 2016 and also in 2020 voted for Trump.
ReplyDelete"I agree it is hard to be optimistic right now. I can not AT ALL understand how the senate Republicans--and really any Republican still supporting Trump--can blindly blunder on in some kind of fantasy world not considering the consequences. I am very angry, though, with the complaints against Biden and his falling approval rate.
"This time last year, there was only an estimation that a vaccine would be ready by 2021. I lived in fear that Trump would win and the sickness I felt every morning when I awoke to the Trump nightmare would continue. But Biden did win. I remember the huge and really miraculous relief I felt then.
"But then it felt like we might not get through to Inauguration Day, but we we did and that day was so well thought out and more perfect than could be hoped for in a pandemic. Biden was immersed in all this mess that was not of his own making, but somehow the vaccines rolled out--at least where we got ours (in rural red Missouri! no less!)--the second one by Feb 22--the process was streamlined and professional and amazing. We can watch the CDC’s announcements knowing Trump has no input.
"I have watched most all of Biden’s announcements and he is clear and sharp and quick with replies that make sense. He has not been in office for a year and I think he has done an amazing job, considering what he is trying to accomplish. He was not my first choice, but I think he is the absolutely right man for this job and I can’t even begin to think of what it would had been like if Trump had won. Yes, it is very dire, the state of our democracy. The 2022 election is nearly as important as the 2020--but really any election should be felt as hugely important and we must not lose our focus. It is certainly not a fair fight when Faux Noise can spew it’s lies.
"Trump had a free and constant bully pulpit--sadly, that isn’t totally gone. But I am grateful that our country elected Joe Biden. When I think back to how I felt this time last year, I am, if not optimistic, I am calm, I am NOT hopeless. I am not in a nightmare. So bring on the ‘hope’ post."
Thanks so much, Judy, for your well-articulated comments. It gives me greater hope knowing that there are people like you (and Tom) even in a place such as Worth County.
DeleteWhile I was posting the comments above, an email came from Thinking Friend Michael Olmsted in Springfield, Mo., (280 miles south of where Judy lives) with these comments:
ReplyDelete"Seems to me that the only agenda the Republicans have is to block anything Democrats support. Life is not about getting everything our way ... it's about helping others, providing freedom with responsibility, working together for the good of all. Could the idea of 'original sin' simply be getting what I want and the rest of you can go to ------?"
I find the concept of "levels of conflict" helpful here. Speed Leas, a church consultant, developed one for church conflicts that's useful here too. http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/1002566/25505807/1412261161317/Levels+of+Conflict+with+Introduction.pdf?token=8fo7T4KLwVnpLfAHbASjh13YUEI%3D. I don't think Republican politicians view this situation as a Level I "Problem to be solved" or a Level II "Disagreement". The conflict has advanced beyond that to a Level Three "Contest" or Level Four "Fight/Flight Battle", and shows many marks of being the most serious and unprincipled form of conflict, Level Five, what Leas calls "Intractable", which is basically all-out war.
ReplyDeleteIn Level Five conflict, people basically have no interest in working together in solving problems - their goal is to hinder and/or destroy the other side, at any cost. Not all Republicans are in Level Five behaviors all the time, but a disturbing number are, and virtually all exhibit signs of being in at least Level Three, and often Level Four.
A key point: It is naive and dangerous to respond to all conflicts as though they are Level One or Two when many are not. A different set of principles must guide us in dealing with, say Level Five conflictants, than with low level conflicts.
Biden is deeply committed to rebuilding a political culture of Problemsolving. For this I greatly esteem him. We must be willing to take chances, otherwise we end up stuck in Level Four and Five all the time! But I'm not hopeful he will succeed, and I worry that time is running out to move to the kind of muscular strategies that will be required to get anything done with Level Four and Five political opponents. As far as I can see their only agenda is to make him a failure - never mind the cost for ordinary Americans. Grinding him down with stasis is their strategy of choice.
Thanks, Ron, for these very helpful comments.
DeleteI had never heard of Speed Leas (b. 1937), but I found that he had a distinguished career as a United Church of Christ Minister and the revised edition of his book "Discover Your Conflict Management Style" is available on Kindle. I hope readers will access the PDF file you linked to.
I also thought the "Levels of Conflict Model" (which you linked to) to be excellent--but perhaps it is more valuable for working on church conflicts or conflicts in business corporations than in the government. Still, I think it does help in analyzing where we are in U.S. politics today.
It seems that many people would like to think that the conflict in the U.S. government is on Level I or perhaps Level II, whereas it seems quite clear, sadly, that it is now at least at Level III and probably higher.
As I may say in my next blog article, I think it is important to be realistic rather than optimistic or pessimistic, and I am afraid that your comments in the last paragraph are realistic rather than pessimistic.
The Levels of Conflict framework of Leas is separate from his booklet on conflict styles. The latter never really caught on anywhere to my knowledge, and I prefer a simpler five styles framework based on the Mouton
DeleteBlake Grid. I developed my own "Style Matters" conflict style inventory in congregational settings, refined it with insight from cross-cultural work and stress management, and it is now quite widely used, by users ranging from Liberty University (which uses it in Pastoral Training programs) to the US State Department, to the Canadian military, not to mention many colleges and seminaries. See it at www.stylematters.net, and any of your readers who want to try it can contact me for a gratis use at ron.kraybill@riverhouseepress.com
And then a few minutes ago I received the following comments from Glenn Hinson in Kentucky:
ReplyDelete"Bravo, Leroy. I’m wondering how much gall it takes for these two Democrats to oppose the will of the president and their colleagues. As your cartoon illustrators, Manchin is doing Mitch McConnell’s work--scuttling the Biden agenda."
This is a very good blog, Leroy! Maybe someday we'll see it as the "book" of Lamentations in the Seat canon.
ReplyDeleteI didn't get to read this as early as usual, so I've read the comments of others, all of whom have responded thoughtfully and insightfully.
I've maintained for a long time that I still have hope but with little optimism. I would confess that I'm beginning to lose hope, too, for the USA. Between the naive Manchin and the grandstanding Sinema, we're apparently not going to make any significant progress in addressing the USA's problems. And since the reactionary and white-supremacist trumpublicans are likely to take over congress in 2022, we're fairly doomed. Unfortunately, for the world, it is disastrous for a country as large and rich as the USA to become a failed state.
Thanks, Anton! -- I hadn't thought of doing a book of lamentations, but maybe that is something that needs to be considered. There is always a lot about which to lament! And yet, I try to be hopeful, and I will keep in mind what you posted this afternoon as I work on my next blog article.
DeleteAbout an hour ago I received the following pertinent comments from Thinking Friend Eric Dollard in Chicago:
ReplyDelete"Thanks, Leroy, for your comments about the current political situation in America. I too am pessimistic as the obstructionists in Congress are foiling almost every effort to intelligently address our problems. It has become a circus of power for its own sake.
"The Republicans are adept at creating non-issues and passing legislation in search of a problem (i.e., voter fraud), but they have no serious policy proposals for the daunting problems we face.
"But what disappoints me the most is the fact that millions of Americans still vote for obstructionist and irresponsible politicians. Seventy-four million Americans voted for Trump, even after experiencing four years of his misrule. Are so many Americans that blind and easily duped?"
[corrected from what I first posted yesterday evening]
DeleteThanks, Eric, for your comments, and I think we are pretty much in full agreement on these matters--and I am afraid that the answer to your closing question is Yes.
But--and this harks back somewhat to what I wrote about on Oct. 15--people see things differently. According to what some of what I see on Facebook, including posts by some of my cousins, it is liberal Democrats who are being duped by politicians such as Biden, Schumer, Pelosi, Sanders, Warren, AOC, etc. Further, they and their supporters have been duped by the socialists (and/or the Communists) and are a real and present danger to the county and must be opposed by all means. And many of these people see this not only as a political issue but as a religious one as well. The liberals are anti-Christian and the only hope for the nation is a return to God and to the Christian roots of our nation.
This seems to be a popular view of many of the "common" people, who are probably not as devious as many of the Republican politicians. The level of conflict is at least Level III, to use the S. Leas "Conflict Model," which Ron Kraybill introduced above. There is hope for mutual respect leading to constructive solution of conflict on Levels I or II, as I understand it, but with many people the conflict has advanced to the stage that resolution is very difficult. If each "side" thinks the other is "blind and easily duped," the problems are going to last for a long time.
Your mention in your reply to Eric that, “many of these people see this not only as a political issue but as a religious one as well,” reminds me of this article:
ReplyDeleteWhy ‘Evangelical’ Is Becoming Another Word for ‘Republican’
“Americans are conflating evangelicalism with Republicanism — and melding two forces to create a movement that is not entirely about politics or religion but power.”
In the article it mentions that the percentage of people who identify as evangelical has gone up since Trump became president. However, many of these ‘converts’ haven’t attended a religious service for many years. They’re jumping on the evangelical bandwagon because they perceive its meaning to be Trumpian GOP.
Clif, thanks for commenting and for sending the link to a pertinent piece worth reading. You (and others) may also be interested in a similar article posted on the 10/24 website of "The Atlantic": https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/10/evangelical-trump-christians-politics/620469/
DeleteThanks for the link to The Atlantic article, The Evangelical Church is Breaking Apart.
DeleteAs I read though it I spotted over a dozen comments worth quoting, but I’ve decided to limit myself to the following:
“He’s heard of many congregants leaving their church because it didn’t match their politics, … but has never once heard of someone changing their politics because it didn’t match their church’s teaching.”
Thanks, Clif, for sharing that important quote from the article in The Atlantic. I think it is really sad that for many people their political views seem to be more important, and more foundational, than their religious beliefs.
DeleteManchin is a rich coal baron, and Sinema hates taxing the rich. Quite a one-two punch with so many crises facing America and the world. Perhaps not enough floods in the east and draughts and fires in the west to get our attention. My guess is Arizona will run out of water before West Virginia runs out of coal.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments, Craig. Along the lines of what you wrote about Sen. Manchin is this article in today's "The Guardian": "Joe Manchin pushes for climate cuts even as West Virginia battered by crisis." Here is the link: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/oct/27/west-virginia-joe-manchin-climate-crisis
Delete