Politics Archives - the bird on fire

My Visit to the 2024 Rancho Mirage Writers Festival

March 15, 2024 by szachik@pvs.org Leave a Comment

By Senior Indiana Behr

A couple weeks ago, I attended the Rancho Mirage Writers Festival for the third time. I always love this event, and I met some very interesting people and saw some very cool programs, so I decided to write a blog article about it. Here are my top favorite sessions.

Day 1

On the first day, I started off with a session where Valerie Biden Owens, President Biden’s sister, was interviewed by Leslie Stahl of 60 Minutes. This was a really interesting start to the festival, and it was very enlightening to see what Owen’s experience has been as the sibling of a politician who first ran for office (and won) 54 years ago. Apparently, she has been involved in every one of his campaigns as a senior staffer. She also told a very interesting story about seeing someone on the flight to Palm Springs wearing an “FJB” hat, which stands for F*** Joe Biden. She talked about how it’s difficult for her to reconcile that people don’t see her own brother as a person because of the power he holds, and she also told some funny stories about her childhood with the now-President.

I also saw a very interesting and funny session with famous author and filmmaker John Waters. One of my favorite movies, Hairspray (1988), was directed and written by Waters. It almost felt like a stand-up comedy routine, which is really rare for the often serious Rancho Mirage Writers Festival. Waters’ delivery was pretty vulgar and a little stomach churning at times, to the point where I can’t really repeat what he said on the blog, like when he talked about having sexual relations in a voting booth. He actually apologized for this talk being scheduled right before lunch…. Overall, it was one of the most entertaining sessions and was really hilarious.

Day 2

I started off this day by seeing the host of MSNBC’s The Beat, Ari Melber, interview former Trump administration staffer Cassidy Hutchinson. Hutchinson is notable for testifying against the former President and his associates to the “January 6 Select Committee” in 2022. I was familiar with her because of her testimony, but it was really interesting to hear more about the experiences of her time in the White House that weren’t disclosed during her Congressional testimony. I also have always liked Ari Melber’s interviews on MSNBC, so seeing one in real life was a fun opportunity.

Assistant to former President Trump’s Chief of Staff, Cassidy Hutchinson, penned the book *Enough*. Indy got a signed copy.

I also saw a fascinating discussion between 2022’s Pulitzer Prize in History winner Ada Ferrer and Dr. Elizabeth Cobbs regarding Cuba and its historical relationship with the United States. This event had a really low turnout which was surprising to me since it was such a good topic. Cuba is the only country that the United States has a full trade embargo with, and many people on all sides of the political spectrum have noted that the embargo really does not do much other than harm ordinary Cubans who have already suffered under a repressive dictatorship. There are also further sanctions because Cuba, under the Trump administration, was recognized as a State Sponsor of Terrorism alongside the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea), Syria, and Iran. There is really no basis for this, especially compared to the other three, which Ferrer and Dr. Cobbs discussed. They also discussed how President Obama began a “thaw” of the icy US-Cuba relationship. Obama removed Cuba from the State Sponsor of Terrorism list, normalized relations, and stepped towards the shuttering of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp. Nearly all of the thawing process was rolled back from the first day to the last week of the Trump administration, and President Biden has done little to return relations to Obama administration “thawing.”

I also saw a discussion with Donna Brazile. Brazile served as the acting Chair of the Democratic National Committee from July 2016 to February 2017. She took over after former Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned when leaked emails showed she was secretly favoring former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over Sen. Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Party’s 2016 nominating process, when party officials are required to remain neutral. Brazile took over in the interim, and also was simultaneously serving as a CNN contributor. Once again, DNC emails got leaked, and it was found that she used her position as a contributor to secretly give Clinton questions prior to a debate the news channel hosted. Overall, I kind of expected to be annoyed hearing from someone who had been involved in a shady situation, one who oversaw Clinton’s unexpected defeat. Nevertheless, she was astoundingly funny and had a lot of relevant things to say that I really appreciated.

Day 3

On the final day, I started off by seeing Cassidy Hutchinson again, but this time interviewed by conservative pundit Margaret Hoover. Hoover did a great job at making sure that this wasn’t just a rehashing of Hutchinson’s previous session. Instead, she chose to focus much more on her personal life and childhood. Hutchinson also discussed how she entered public service, and how she grapples with still having conservative leanings while feeling disconnected from the Republican Party, and even facing regular death threats and harassment from Republicans. She even told a very funny story about her finding teetotaler and then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, who she served as an assistant to, intoxicated after he consumed multiple White Claw cans thinking it was simply sparkling water.

I also saw a very good talk between author Anand Giridharadas and journalist Ezra Klein. I have been a fan of Klein for several years, even back when he starred in YouTube videos for Vox, of which he is a co-founder. The Rancho Mirage Writers Festival features people from across the political spectrum, but Klein had a much more progressive perspective than many of the liberal speakers. He discussed why people are so much more polarized now than in much of American history. He also got into a rarely discussed subject of Presidential nominating conventions, saying they have been essentially symbolic over the last several decades. For example, Ronald Reagan actually won the popular vote during the 1968 Republican primaries, whereas, in that election, Richard Nixon was selected at the convention. I also got to speak with Klein, along with fellow PVS seniors Gil Maruvada and Landon Elder, which was fun.

Overall, I am really glad I got to go to the Writers Festival for the third consecutive year, and I got to learn a lot of new things and see some very interesting perspectives.

Hot Take: Biden Deserves a Second Term, and He’s Probably Going to Get One

November 3, 2023 by szachik@pvs.org 1 Comment

By Senior Indiana Behr

In the last of our Controversial/Unpopular Opinions post, Indy vouches for President Joe Biden. Indy says, yes, Biden is a viable shot for a second term. Indy is not afraid to stand, possibly, outside popular opinion.

President Biden at his 2012 Inauguration (Photo Source: today.com)

Note: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made an announcement on October 9 that he will be running for President as an Independent due to his opposition to the Democratic National Committee’s public support of Joe Biden. This means Kennedy will likely be on the ballot in the general election in several states. This article was drafted prior to the RFK announcement.
–Indy

Full disclosure: My positions often align with the Democratic Party. As such, given the current field of the Democratic 2024 Presidential Primary, the state of our nation, and the current administration’s performance, I think that Joe Biden is the best option in 2024. However, I think he currently is not doing well in approval ratings and in his primary. I do think he will be reelected, but I think the election will be closer than I would have predicted a few months ago.

Polling shows that I am in the minority. Both Democrats (and most Americans) want younger, newer, candidates. Biden is winning pretty much all primary polls, but the alternatives are Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Marianne Williamson. Kennedy is the son of Robert F. Kennedy, and is an anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist who is only prominent because of his last name. Williamson, who also ran in 2020, is a spiritual guru who once said amidst the peak of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in 1992 that “sickness is an illusion and does not actually exist.”

On the other side of the aisle, Republicans are coalescing around former President Donald Trump. Though at one point it seemed like the primary might be close, it really isn’t looking that way these days. As of September 27, FiveThirtyEight ranks Trump as being in first with 54.7%, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in second with 13.8%, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley in third with 6.1%, and Ohio businessman Vivek Ramaswamy with 5.7%. There are a few others also being polled who are below 5%, like former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum.

FiveThirtyEight’s polling aggregate of the 2024 GOP Primary as of September 27th, 2023. (Photo Source: projects.fivethirtyeight.com)

On January 7, 2023, DeSantis was at 40.5% and Trump was at 42.4%. That’s a 1.9% margin, which is very close. But now, Trump is up 12.3% from then, and more significantly, DeSantis is down 26.7%. That is a huge drop-off. What happened? Well, DeSantis had some incredibly embarrassing moments. As the New York Times put it, “DeSantis Lost the Internet,” which is hard to come back from in the digital age. DeSantis doesn’t show well digitally. At one point, one of his staffers posted a video promoting DeSantis’s anti-LGBTQ policies that had a Nazi symbol in it. Once viewed as the future of the GOP, having won the governorship in 2018 as an underdog in an otherwise bad midterm for Republicans, and then winning reelection by nearly 20 points against a former Florida Governor–his reputation is now in the gutter.

As someone who wants Democrats to be successful, the unity seen on the GOP side lately worries me. An incumbent President only polling in the low-to-mid 60s during their primary reelection campaign is not an amazing look. Right now, RFK Jr. is at 15.1% according to FiveThirtyEight. Trump pretty much never polled that low during his 2020 primary campaign, where his two opponents were former Illinois Rep. Joe Walsh and former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld. Ultimately, his challengers received 1.08% and 1.31% of the vote respectively. Trump received 97.14%. I think it is very clear that Biden will win the primary, but clearly not all Democrats are behind him. However, I really do not think that this will affect him much in the general. I think almost all true Democrats will unite behind Biden in the general. I don’t think that this is necessarily the case with former President Trump.

FiveThirtyEight’s polling aggregate of the 2024 Democratic Primary as of September 27th, 2023. (Photo Source: projects.fivethirtyeight.com)

Okay, so I have made it clear that though I think Joe Biden will win reelection; it’s closer than I wish it were. My main point is that I think Joe Biden has so far done well as President, and I think he deserves a second term to finish what he’s started. To be honest, in 2019 during the Democratic primary for the 2020 Presidential Election, I was firmly opposed to then-former Vice President Biden. In fact, he was one of my last choices, and I thought candidates like Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, or Pete Buttigieg would be better. With hindsight, I do not think Warren or Buttigieg would have won a general election. I think Sanders probably would have, but I do not think his presidency would be fundamentally different from Biden’s, and I think he would have struggled with reelection even more.

Biden made many commitments in his run, like most candidates do, that have not been put in place as of yet. However, during his first two years, we had a 50-50 Senate, and Democrats had a very narrow House majority, so of course he couldn’t accomplish everything. The Senate has the filibuster which essentially means most major things actually need 60 votes, and even then, there were two Democratic Senators who made it hard for Biden to pass anything: Joe Manchin, a conservative from very red West Virginia, and Kyrsten Sinema, a Senator from Arizona who tried to water down every one of his proposals. After the 2022 midterms, Sinema became an independent but has still caucused with the Democrats and retained Committee seats as a member of the majority.

First of all, many people think that Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan is a stain on his legacy. However, I think given his options, that was the best choice. I do not think the US should be the police of the world. I think that the initial invasion of Afghanistan in the 2000s was somewhat justified, but once we accomplished our primary goals, we should have just left. The Taliban are absolutely horrible, but American intelligence was apparently stating that the Taliban taking over almost immediately was pretty much impossible. Besides, if the Afghan military wasn’t able to fight for even a week after over a decade of practice, that’s on them! Nevertheless, Biden’s approval rating dropped by a lot after this withdrawal, and pretty much never recovered.

I also think the student loan debt issue has been handled very well by Biden. Some people think he went too far by giving “handouts” by cancelling debt, but some more progressive activists and politicians think he should go farther. I think he has done fine. I think if Biden were to cancel all of the student debt at once, it would immediately be struck down by a judge and ultimately the Supreme Court. I think therefore that his pragmatic approach of cancelling small amounts of student loan debt and temporarily pausing payments in different ways is the most effective way to accomplish this goal. We spend trillions of dollars on our military. So a few billion to help millions of Americans have an easier life is worth it! Some people say, “But what about those who already paid it back?” That’s cool, but other people shouldn’t have to suffer because you did. That’s not justice; that’s just kinda cruel.

I also think the Biden administration’s signature program, the Build Back Better Plan, might have not been successful in some ways, but none of this was Biden’s fault, and what he did accomplish was very impressive. Like I stated earlier, the filibuster in the Senate meant many bills that passed the House in Biden’s first two years struggled to gain traction in the Senate. But what came in the end was the Inflation Reduction Act, which is essentially a watered-down version of the original Build Back Better Act. Almost all of the social safety net proposals did not make the cut because of the filibuster and conservative Democrats like Sen. Manchin and Sinema opposing many of the proposals. However, major climate change solutions made it in the bill that is now law. Prescription drug prices are being significantly lowered, too. It also will help fund new clean energy plans.

In terms of his electability, many polls are starting to show him slipping against the likely GOP nominee, former President Trump. Personally, I don’t buy it. I think pollsters are screwing up. And even though the electoral college usually favors Republicans, 2024 may be an exception.

If the 2024 election were held today between Biden and Trump, I think it would go like this. The lightest color is Lean, the slightly darker is Likely, and the dark colors are Solid/Safe. Tan indicates a tossup. I think that Arizona, Michigan, and Wisconsin have a pretty good chance of staying Democratic, and though I think Pennsylvania is a little closer, I’m pretty confident it’ll go blue.

So overall, I am concerned about President Biden’s electability, but nevertheless, I think he will win in 2024. Disagree? Please comment: I’d love to prove you wrong.

Dianne Done-stein?

February 15, 2023 by szachik@pvs.org Leave a Comment

By Political Analyst Indy Behr

Note: Yesterday morning, Senator Feinstein announced she would not run for reelection in 2024. This article was completed prior to this announcement. The announcement proves, “Indy was right.”

California’s Class 1 Senate seat is up for reelection in 2024, and this race is already getting interesting. This seat is currently held by Dianne Feinstein, and she has held it since 1992. She is now 89 years old and still active in the Senate. Typically, new candidates hold off on making announcements regarding candidacy until incumbents state their intentions on filling again their seats.

Then, just a few weeks ago, Rep. Katie Porter (D-CA47), who represents parts of the Los Angeles suburbs including Irvine and Newport Beach, announced her candidacy for the seat. NBC news reporter Alex Seitz-Wald stated that an ally of Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA30), who represents an urban Los Angeles district, told him that the timing of Porter’s announcement–amid major floods across California–indicated Porter was “playing politics.” Just a few weeks later, however, Schiff himself jumped into the race, even as Feinstein refused to state what her plans are.

Many have been concerned about Feinstein’s cognitive health for nearly a year (NPR.org). In October, her home city newspaper, the San Francisco Chronicle, reported that colleagues of Feinstein believe that she “is now mentally unfit to serve.” They stated that an unnamed Democratic member of Congress from California, who had known Feinstein for 15 years, had to reintroduce himself to Feinstein multiple times during a conversation (sfchronicle.com). The Chronicle stated that the colleagues then began discussing ways to get Feinstein to retire before her term ends. This is why many are so surprised that Feinstein, who would be 97 at the end of an additional six-year term, is still not saying she will retire.

While two prominent candidates are in this race already–Porter and Schiff, it is likely that more will join them in the coming weeks. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA12), who represents the city of Oakland and several smaller surrounding cities, was reported as having told members of the Congressional Black Caucus, which she chairs, that she was planning to run for Feinstein’s seat. Lee is 76, and though she is 13 years younger than Feinstein, questions about her age have been raised. The San Francisco Chronicle stated that a source close to Lee told them she would plan to be in the Senate for just one term, and their message to donors now is that she would be a “trailblazer for six years.” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA17) said in January that he too was exploring a run for the Senate seat. Khanna represents the Silicon Valley area.

Of the two candidates currently in the race, there is a stark difference. Porter is a noted progressive and is a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, as are roughly half of Congressional Democrats. Schiff is somewhat more moderate in his policies and is not a member of the Progressive Caucus. While Porter’s announcement video proposed drastic policy changes when it comes to healthcare or taxes, Schiff focused on his record opposing Trump in the House as a member of the House Intelligence Committee and his concern over MAGA Republicans posing a threat to democracy. Barbara Lee is a former co-chair of the Progressive Caucus, and Khanna is a member. Lee was the only member of the House to oppose a bill allowing the US to invade those believed to be responsible for 9/11. Khanna and Porter are two of only six House members who do not take any money from corporate Political Action Committees.

This early in a race, fundraising is a good metric to see where each candidate stands. Though Porter did beat Schiff in terms of fundraising on their respective days of announcement, Schiff already had over $20M in his campaign account, whereas Porter had $7.7M. Schiff amassed a lot of this money during the Trump-Russia investigation, which made him more prominent as a national figure, and he has not had to spend much money campaigning as he is in a safe Los Angeles district. Porter lives in a much more conservative district and won reelection by less than 1% in 2022. Lee has just $54K to her name, as she is both in a safe district and lacks name recognition, for now. Feinstein has nearly $10M currently, yet from October to December 2022, she reported to the Federal Election Commission that she had raised just $558.91. The only poll we have seen so far is a head-to-head between Porter and Schiff, and though Porter is leading by 9%, 37% of California voters remain undecided. In terms of endorsements from members of Congress, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) is Porter’s only endorser, whereas Schiff is already the favored candidate of most of the Democratic House delegation for California, including former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA11) (sfchronicle.com).

I went to watch Schiff get interviewed live at the Rancho Mirage Writers’ Festival just last week. He was asked about whether he thinks Feinstein will run and in the event she runs, whether he’ll position himself as a challenger or drop out. I was planning to ask him this very question. I should have expected that he would give a politician’s answer. He explained that he had let Feinstein know he was planning to run and said that he thought “Feinstein would make the decision she thinks is best for California.” When pressed on whether he would run in this hypothetical scenario, he acknowledged that the audience would be “unsatisfied” with his answer and essentially repeated what he had just said.

Blog Reporter Indy Behr and Adam Schiff at the Rancho Mirage Writers’ Festival last Friday.

All in all, even a year and a half before the election itself, I think this race is already turning out to be quite interesting. In the coming weeks, we should see at least one candidate join the race, and likely by the Spring, Feinstein will state what her intentions are. If I had to guess, I don’t think she’s running, especially based on her raising essentially no money over the last few months. I am looking forward to seeing more endorsements, polling and fundraising reports in the coming weeks.

Indy’s Outlook for the Midterms

November 8, 2022 by szachik@pvs.org 3 Comments

By Junior Political Pundit Indiana Behr

SPECIAL ELECTION COVERAGE

The midterms are today, and the outlook is…. unclear. In the age of more political polarization than we’ve seen in decades, electoral prediction has gotten much harder. This election’s results are likely to greatly affect our country’s political future, with issues like crime, abortion, taxes, and the Biden administration’s political agenda being in play. I am going to show some of my predictions and some interesting info about what’s to come. I am going to start with some competitive Senate elections, an unlikely gubernatorial standoff, and the swingy Congressional race in a new district that covers Rancho Mirage, Palm Springs, Palm Desert, and La Quinta.

Pennsylvania Senate

John Fetterman (D) and Dr. Mehmet Oz (R) debate in the general election (abcnews.com).

One of the most prominent Senate races in this cycle is the Pennsylvania Senate race. The incumbent, Pat Toomey (R), announced his intention to retire last year, and almost immediately, a bitter Republican primary broke out. The initial frontrunner was the Trump-endorsed former House candidate Sean Parnell, but after a child custody battle with his estranged wife made its way to the media, he withdrew, and shortly after, television personality Dr. Mehmet Oz and wealthy businessman Dave McCormick entered the race. Oz initially lost several polls, and the race seemed to lean in McCormick’s favor… until Trump endorsed Oz. He experienced a surge after this, and after a long election with threats of recounts, Oz won by just 0.07%, less than 1,000 votes.

The Democrats saw this seat as a potential flip in their favor, especially with the incumbency advantage gone. John Fetterman, the incumbent Lt. Governor of Pennsylvania, created an exploratory committee early on, and later officially entered the race. Then, a few months later, Rep. Conor Lamb entered; however, he failed to gain traction even when Fetterman attracted criticism for an incident where he chased a Black jogger with a shotgun in 2013 while mayor of Braddock, Pennsylvania. Fetterman stated he believed the man was connected to a recent shooting, but the jogger was not. Though Lamb received a multitude of endorsements, including three members of the House in Pennsylvania, and over thirty State Representatives, that ultimately was not enough, and Fetterman won with a margin of 32%, sweeping every single county.

Days before winning his primary, John Fetterman suffered a stroke. This has become a central point of the campaign. Due to this, Fetterman has publicly required the use of closed captioning devices to speak with reporters, and he used these devices during his debate with Oz. He has struggled to speak at times as a result, and this showed during the debate, where he occasionally struggled to get words out. Oz has been criticized for being out of touch with Pennsylvanians. Many people have claimed that Oz lived in New Jersey prior to the election, and he has also been called out for promoting medical practices not approved by the FDA on his show. Initially Fetterman led all polls by wide margins; however, it has gotten much closer over the last several weeks. Now, a couple polls show Oz with the lead. FiveThirtyEight has moved their prediction from “Lean D” (barely Democrat) to “Toss-Up.”

Georgia Senate

Another high-profile Senate Race is Georgia’s, where incumbent Raphael Warnock (D) is defending his seat against former football star Herschel Walker (R). The primaries for this race were not very contentious, and both won by very wide margins with no serious competition. The general election, on the other hand, has been the most controversy-filled this year in my opinion.

Almost all of these controversies surround Walker, yet he is still tied with Warnock in several polls, and he has even won several. Several news outlets have alleged that Walker paid for a woman to terminate her pregnancy, and on Monday, the New York Times reported that they had spoken to the anonymous woman, and she reportedly told them that two years after that incident, he unsuccessfully lobbied her to terminate another pregnancy. Walker has denied these allegations. Many have accused Walker of hypocrisy, as his campaign platform states that he has a pro-life stance. Other parts of his past, such as his unsubstantiated claim that he was an FBI agent, or his admittance that he played Russian roulette have also come under scrutiny. Walker may struggle in the general election due to these scandals.

New York Governor

On the left is Lee Zeldin (R) and on the right is Kathy Hochul (D)–the two wrangle for governor of New York (static01.nyt.com).

New York, a typically blue state, is seemingly facing an unlikely competitive race. After two competitive primaries, polling has indicated this race is down to the wire, with most showing incumbent Governor Kathy Hochul (D) ahead. Hochul, the former New York Lieutenant Governor, became governor following the resignation of Andrew Cuomo due to a sexual harassment scandal. The race instantly had a shake-up, as several candidates jumped into the Democratic primary for the position. Attorney General Letitia James launched her campaign early, but withdrew due to polls showing her trailing, and she is now running for reelection. New York City Public Advocate Jumaane Williams and New York Representative Thomas Suozzi also ran, but both candidates did not do well, sometimes polling in the single digits. Ultimately, Hochul won the primary by nearly 40%. This indicates that the Democratic electorate is firmly behind her, but the question is whether turnout will be enough to bring her across the finish line in the general election.

On the Republican side of the aisle, a race that initially seemed competitive ended in a landslide. Representative Lee Zeldin, 2014 New York Governor GOP nominee Rob Astorino, and Andrew Giuliani (son of former New York City Mayor and Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani) were the three main candidates in the election. Despite previously aligning himself with Trump in the House, Zeldin painted himself as a moderate in contrast to other candidates. Polling showed the race was within single digits; however, this proved to be false when Zeldin won by over 20%.

New York is normally a solid Democratic state. After all, Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump by over 23% in the Presidential election. Despite that, this election has been uniquely close. One of the most prominent topics in this election is crime, and this is an issue where Hochul has attracted severe criticism. Crime has risen in New York City, and she has taken a hit for this. Hochul has criticized Zeldin’s support for the pro-life movement, and he deflected this by saying that he would not make any attempts to change reproductive health laws in New York if elected, a state where 63% of people have said they support expanded abortion rights. The latest poll from Emerson College shows Hochul at 52% and Zeldin at 44%, with 3% being undecided at this time.

US House CA-41

Incumbent Ken Calvert (R) and challenger Will Rollins (D) vie for the newly-drawn 41st district (gannett-cdn.com).

Following California’s redistricting, the incumbent Representative for Rancho Mirage, Palm Springs, and several other parts of the Coachella Valley switched from Raul Ruiz (D) to Ken Calvert (R). This race has become very competitive, as this is now a district that Trump won by just 1%. Trump endorsed Calvert, stating that he is, “a leader on National Security and Strongly Supports our Brave Military and Vets.” Calvert’s opponent is Will Rollins (D), a former prosecutor who received the second most votes in California’s nonpartisan jungle primary system, where all candidates are on the same ballot, and the top two candidates move to the general election regardless of party affiliation. Rollins has very effectively established his presence in the district. In fact, his signs are planted right outside of our school, and I see his television and YouTube ads daily. While I have seen the occasional Calvert sign, his presence is much less significant in the valley. The latest poll showed Calvert up by just 3 points, and Cook Political Report predicts this race as “Lean R,” their closest ranking after “Toss Up.”

I hope you found some of these races interesting, and I encourage you to do more research about our local Congressional race and other local races, and, for any senior students, teachers, administrators, parents, or anyone else reading who is eligible, please vote!

We Need to Abolish the Electoral College

September 7, 2022 by szachik@pvs.org 1 Comment

We’re concluding our look at causes. Indiana, who feels strongly about many things, expresses passion for the Electoral College–not for keeping it, but for abolishing it.
Blog Advisor Zachik

By Indy Behr, Junior

What is the Electoral College?

In the United States, Presidential elections are not actually decided by the people directly. They are decided by a compromise made between the Founding Fathers in the Constitution called the electoral college. A candidate wins the election by winning at least 270 of the 538 possible electoral votes. Voters decide how a group of electors vote, and these electoral votes are then certified every four years on a day you may recall, January 6, and the events that transpired on this day in 2021 have led to the Electoral Count Reform Act being introduced in Congress, which would make several changes to the electoral college certification process such as establishing the Vice President’s role in certifying the vote as ceremonial and raising the objection threshold to 20% of both the House and Senate, as opposed to the current system where only one member of each body is required to object.

The electoral college is an antidemocratic institution that allows a minority of voters to determine the future of our country, and it no longer has any use. I believe that America cannot truly be referred to as a democracy until the electoral college is abolished, and until then, serious reform is required.

*Supporters of former President Donald Trump* *storm the US Capitol* *as a Joint Session of Congress is counting the electoral votes of the 2020 Presidential election.*

Disproportionate Representation

If anyone should be upset about the electoral college, it should be us Californians. Wyoming, the least populated state in the US, has 581,000 citizens, according to the US Census Bureau. Due to its size, Wyoming has only one Representative in the House of Representatives and, like all states, two Senators. The amount of electoral votes a state receives is simply the amount of people in their Congressional delegation. This means that in Wyoming, one electoral vote represents 135,000 citizens. California has a population of 39,538,000, and has 55 electoral votes (this will change to 54 in the 2024 Presidential election). Therefore, one electoral vote represents 712,000 people. However, one electoral vote represents just 195,000 people in Wyoming. Yes, you heard that right, a voter in Wyoming has more than three times the voting power as someone in California. Some Republicans argue that Democratic voters concentrated in big cities choosing who wins in the end is unfair, but guess what? That is where the actual people live!

Forgotten States

Another issue with the electoral college means that during a Presidential election most states are not visited by candidates, and most states don’t even see candidates’ TV ads as there is no point. This is because some states are so partisan that it is near impossible for a candidate to win. The fact that candidates feel that trying to promote their candidacies to voters is a waste of time is incredibly problematic in my opinion, and unfortunately the candidates are indeed making a strategic decision in this case. The electoral college is for the most part a winner-takes-all system, meaning that regardless of how narrow or wide a statewide win is, all electoral votes go to the winner, with the exception of Maine and Nebraska. In 2020, six million Californians voted for Donald Trump, and two million Ohioans voted for Joe Biden. Despite this making up almost 10% of the total popular vote, these people never had their voice heard. Donald Trump never made a single visit to California because he knew that it was simply impossible to outright win the state, meaning winning swing votes would not benefit him. In this model presented by the New York Times, we can see that TV-ad buys in the 2020 Presidential election were concentrated in just a few states. California did not have a single ad! Trump and Republicans spent many millions on ads in Florida and won in the end, and yet he won one million more votes in California than in Florida. In spite of this, California’s winner-takes-all system gave all electoral votes to Biden, and Florida gave all electoral votes to Trump.

Faithless Electors

Though luckily in 2020 we did not see any, in 2016 we saw a massive uptick in what are known as faithless electors, likely due to both major party candidates being relatively unpopular. Many people do not realize this, but electors are actual individuals assigned to vote for one party in the event they win. These electors are selected by the state party of the winning candidate. However, in almost half of the states, electors are able to vote for another candidate regardless of the will of the voters. Trump was expected to win 306 electors, yet only won 304. Clinton won 227 instead of 232. Seven of the 538 total electors voted faithlessly. Do you know who Faith Spotted Eagle is? I didn’t, yet she won an electoral vote in 2016. The late Colin Powell, George W. Bush’s Secretary of State, won three electoral votes. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) won two electoral Vice Presidential votes, one being with Powell, one from Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

In 2016, Hilary Clinton won the state of Washington over 500,000 votes, or 15.7%, yet a whopping 33% of the electors voted for candidates who did not appear on the ballot. Though some of these candidates received a small amount of write-in votes, Powell won three votes, or 25% of the total electors, with a grand total of zero votes. In 2004, John Edwards was Democrat John Kerry’s running mate, and yet in Minnesota he received both the Presidential and Vice Presidential nod from one elector. And, because these slates of electors are selected by the victor’s party, these electors are often relatives of politicians or retired lobbyists. Both former President Bill Clinton (D) and his wife Hillary Clinton (D) were Biden electors in New York, as were the New York City Comptroller and the Temporary President of NY’s State Senate. A Florida State Senator, Keith Perry (R), was a Trump elector in Florida. The only disqualifying factors for electors are being an incumbent US Senator or Representative, and since the Civil War, having engaged in rebellion or insurrection against the country.

Faithless Colorado elector Michael Baca casts his ballot in 2016. He chose to support a former Ohio Governor, Republican John Kasich, rather than Hillary Clinton.

Popular Vote Winners Losing

In 1824, 1876, 1888, 2000, and 2016, the individual who won a plurality, or in 1876, an outright majority of the popular vote, lost the election. The electoral college gives so much more power to residents of smaller states that in 2016, despite winning the popular vote by 2.8 million or 2% in 2016, Hillary Clinton lost by 77 electors. In 2000, Democrat Al Gore defeated Republican George W. Bush by over 500,000 in the popular vote yet lost by five electoral votes in the end, or four if you do not recognize a faithless elector who did not vote at all. In the end, the conservative-dominated Supreme Court forced Florida to end an ongoing recount, and according to CNN, “The studies also show that Gore likely would have won a statewide recount of all undervotes and overvotes, which are ballots that included multiple votes for president and were thus not counted at all . . . . The studies also support the belief that more voters went to the polls in Florida on Election Day intending to vote for Gore than for Bush.”

Florida vote counters try to determine which candidate was selected on a ballot in 2000.

Conclusion

To me, it is very clear we need to abolish the electoral college. However, this would require a Constitutional amendment which has an approximately 0% chance of passing within my lifetime. It would require 67% of both the House and Senate to pass, which itself is completely impossible considering the Senate also has the issue of disproportionately representing smaller states, and it then would require 38 states to ratify it through their legislatures, even more unlikely. So, in the meantime, we are going to have to continue dealing with the electoral college. However, we can support reform so that we can scrap the winner-takes-all system like Nebraska and Maine have done, and we can also support banning faithless electors. But, if you really want your voice heard, your only option is to move to a swing state like Wisconsin.

Though support among Republicans has dropped, most people still support abolishing the electoral college as of 2018.

Удалять*

September 1, 2022 by szachik@pvs.org Leave a Comment

Junior Remy Haring continues with his second installment of his serial fiction inspired by The New Order–a mod for Hearts of Iron IV. If you recall, Remy visits an alternate dark history here, where, in WWII, the Axis powers have won.

Zeya, Amur, the Russian Far East, January 23, 1962

Rodzaevsky was sitting at his mahogany desk in his office. Behind him two flags flanked him — horizontal, yellow, black and white tricolor with a double-eagle grasping a bundle of sticks on each. To his left was an ashtray; to his right was a pile of photos of dissidents. Some had a red X drawn over their faces; others didn’t. Their occupations ranged drastically from those of lowly citizens to bureaucrats to the most trusted officials of his own cabinet. One photo in particular stood out to him.

It was an old black and white group photo from the beginning days of the Russian Fascist Party (RFP). Rodzaevsky was in the center with Grigory Semyonov on his left and Mikhail Matkovsky on his right. In each of their hands was a raised shot glass of vodka. None of them had a red cross marked over their faces. The photo was marked, “Harbin, Manchuria, September 13, 1932.” As Rodzaevsky was looking down at this photo, he heard a knock at his door.

“Enter,” Rodzaevsky ordered.

A Blackshirt entered the room. His uniform was pristine, all black snow gear with the only splash of color being his medal of the double-eagle grasping a bundle of sticks.

“The dissident Vlodimir Kozlov has been eliminated,” reported the Blackshirt. “He was hiding out in a forested neighborhood a few kilometers away from Zeya. He was… difficult but has been pacified. Given the remote area and that I was under the cover of night, I doubt anyone saw.”

Without another word, Rodzaevsky dismissed him with a wave of his hand. After the door shut, Rodzaevsky took a red marker from his drawer and crossed out the face of the most recent victim. Kozlov had been a middle–aged woodsman and a father of two. It was his youngest child who had reported him for the crime of freemasonry.

Rodzaevsky leaned back into his chair and turned on the radio:

“This morning, at 4:00 a.m. CET, the Swiss Seismological Service detected a seismic event from southern Burgundy that reached a 4.6 on the Richter scale before suddenly ending with no aftershock. The Swiss government has come to one terrifying conclusion: the SS State of Burgundy has successfully tested its first nuclear device.”
Radio Free Alps

*Purge

Status Report: Colombians in Protest

May 26, 2021 by szachik@pvs.org Leave a Comment

Blogger Evan writes about the current situation in Colombia and why people are protesting. He also explains why it is important and necessary that we protect the protestors. — Editor-in-Chief Roman Rickwood

By Evan Spry, Politics Editor

It has been over four years since the Colombian government signed a peace deal with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), ending a five-decade long conflict that affected every part of Colombian society. 2016 was supposed to be the start of a long and peaceful process of implementing the people’s ideas into the government with cooperation from the Colombian establishment. Unfortunately, broken promises on both sides have fostered the rise of the far-right in the government and dissent from the people on the streets. The current figurehead of this right wing movement in Colombian government is Ivan Duque.

Duque formerly served in the Colombian Senate where he opposed and condemned the peace agreement with the FARC (britannica.com). As a self described “extreme centrist,” Duque fits right into the Democratic Center, the right-wing political party he represents. This party’s main stance is its aggressive anti-rebel approach.

Unsurprisingly, this vehemently anti-rebel approach has led to a stagnation in the cooperation between former fighters made up of different rebel factions. And, with right-wing government and current poverty reminding Colombians why they rebelled in the first place, tension rose. As the boiling point was almost reached, COVID-19 hit, and everyone was forced indoors. The pandemic-related pause on the economy was destructive to the already wavering economic situation, causing more and more people to become impoverished. And, as soon as Colombians were allowed back on the streets, they went. But not to work, to protest. The poverty that many Colombians live in was exacerbated by a new tax law aimed at stimulating the economy. This new law would only raise taxes on basic goods and services such as fuel, public services, and pensions/wages. Obviously, this didn’t sit well with the average Colombian, so they took to the streets. Since the protests started on April 28th, thousands of demonstrators have participated in protests all around the country (apnews.com).

The Colombian government did end up repealing the controversial tax bill that raised prices on everyday commodities, but they didn’t fix the wider issue of poverty that many Colombians experience. This led people to continue protesting, which in turn led to more confrontations with the police and Colombian armed forces. Keep in mind, many of these policing forces were under the command of right-wing anti-communists that saw the protests as an act of rebellion. In order to stop the rebellion, these officials, like Ivan Duque, ordered the police to treat the protesters like rebels. This meant excessive use of force, police brutality, unlawful arrests, and even killings. According to Reuters, “Local advocacy group Temblores says 40 protesters have allegedly been killed by police, while Human Rights Watch said it has received 46 credible reports of protest deaths and verified 13” (reuters.com). Fortunately, amid all the unrest, certain communities have grown closer together. The third largest city in Colombia, Cali, has faced the brunt of the violence between protesters and security forces with local indigenous groups stepping in to support and protect the protesters. The support Colombians are providing for each other against the government has even inspired Colombian mayors including that of Cali to condemn the federal government’s actions and address the issues facing Colombians. According to Colombia Reports, “Mayor Jorge Ivan Ospina urged the president to visit Cali to address the ‘political problem of a national nature’ that has manifested itself most violently in Cali, which is also reporting food shortages.”

This fracturing of the government is showing us how serious the situation in Colombia is. If Ivan Duque really cared about the Colombian people, he would step down from office and let someone else (that is more competent) lead Colombia. Hopefully, the cooperation between local governments, activists, and indigenous groups will unite Colombia and lead it down a stable path. If not, the cycle of authoritarian right-wingers will stay in power, jeopardizing any hope of a prosperous Colombia.

Editor-in-Chief: Roman Rickwood

Sources:

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ivan-Duque

https://colombiareports.com/colombia-news/

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-colombia-peace/colombias-farc-delivers-a-fraction-of-pledged-peace-deal-assets-by-deadline-idUSKBN2951QQ

https://apnews.com/article/colombia-business-tax-reform-health-coronavirus-pandemic-4783fa3719a9d204bfdcdfb7fe079a76 ap news

https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/colombian-cities-brace-more-covid-infections-after-protests-2021-05-11/#:~:text=Demonstrator%20demands%20have%20expanded%20to,a%20long%2Ddebated%20health%20reform.&text=Colombia’s%20human%20rights%20ombudsman%20said,civilians%20and%20one%20police%20officer. Death toll

Profiting off a Military Junta

May 14, 2021 by szachik@pvs.org Leave a Comment

The events currently occurring in Myanmar are serious but not well understood by the average American. Read on to expand your knowledge of the wider political world beyond the borders of the United States.

By Evan Spry, Politics Editor

Myanmar has been under the global spotlight recently for a number of reasons, none of them good. The military takeover of the country was reminiscent of past events in Myanmar’s political history, with tensions and casualties being severe and catastrophic.

It has been four months since the Tatmadaw (the Myanmar Army) seized control of Myanmar’s government after an election they lost and claimed was rigged. As of, May 4th, 769 people had been killed while 4,737 had been arrested, according to the nonprofit Assistance Association of Political Prisoners (aapp.org). These numbers are rising, and it doesn’t seem like anyone is doing anything to stop it. This begs the question What can we, the average American citizen, do to impact this situation? Well, besides donating to local activists and humanitarian organizations or calling your local representative, there may be an alternative that is much easier.

The New York Times reports, “[Chevron] has a longstanding relationship with Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise.” This gas company, also known as MOGE, is “state-owned” and “closely connected to the military generals who seized power from elected leaders on Feb. 1” (nytimes.com).

The plot thickens when we head over to the Yadana Gas Field, discovered as recently as 1980. It has produced on average since its start of operation “660 million cubic feet” of natural gas (offshoretechnology.com). This is with the help of Chevron. Because of Chevron’s involvement in the Yadana Gas Field, they have been “…netting annual profits of $100 million to $150 million from its stake in Yadana” (nytimes.com). This same field also bankrolled up to “70 percent of [Myanmar military] operations in past years” (nytimes.com). The New York Times reports Chevron has been sending highly professional lobbyists out to stop legislation that would be contrary to their profits, like sanctions on the military junta and its gas company (nytimes.com).

As you can see, Chevron appears guilty of aiding and profiting off of a military junta’s violent regime. In my opinion, they should be held accountable. The easiest way to hurt Chevron is to just not buy their gas. The situation in Myanmar is a tragedy, and the biggest issues the country faces are within. The various ethnic groups need to band together in the name of democracy and defeat their oppressors. This is obviously easier said than done, but I am praying for everybody in the struggle.

First Editor-in-Chief: Elizabeth Shay

Sources:

Daily Briefing in Relation to the Military Coup

https://www.hrw.org/asia/myanmar-burma#

www.offshore-technology.com

the world is dying…

December 4, 2020 by szachik@pvs.org 2 Comments

by Hannah Hall

As the new administration begins its transition, we see a new era in climate-change policy. Hannah lays it out for us.

We are headed towards an environmental meltdown. And I’m not even talking about the pandemic going on. I may be exaggerating, but our world is dying, and I know you know why….climate change. Our world can only handle so much more.

Unluckily for America, during President Trump’s four years in charge, he has majorly reversed our progress towards climate-change solutions. Just to name a few setbacks, he has pulled out of the Paris Climate Agreement, ditched the requirements of The Clean Power Plan that would have cut our national carbon emissions by 32% by 2030, and removed climate change as a national security threat (nationalgeographic.com).

But, luckily for America, our President-Elect Joe Biden has plans for climate change. He publicly announced that “the number one issue facing humanity” is climate change, and if left “unchecked, it is going to actually bake this planet…[and] we have a moral obligation [to solve it]” (cnbc.com). Biden has three plans: the Tackle Climate Emergency plan, the Clean Energy Future plan, and the Secure Environmental Justice plan. So, to get the gist of these plans across, I have created a bullet list full of quick facts.

Joe Biden will…

work to turn the solutions for climate into opportunities for economic growth, thus creating jobs for middle-class Americans.
ensure America has a 100% clean economy with zero emissions by 2050.
attempt to ensure that our future is protected from the harmful effects of climate change.
re-enter the Paris Climate Agreement.
fund carbon capture, use, and storage (CCUS) technology.
partner with family farmers, ranchers, and landowners to provide more water and encourage the practice of better, decarbonized agriculture.
put climate change back on the list of national security priorities.
increase demand for and integration of more American non-carbon emitting vehicles.
cut energy bills and energy pollution by establishing the Energy Efficiency and Clean Electricity Standard (EECES).
create the Environmental and Climate Justice Division within the US Department of Justice, establish an Office of Climate Change and Health Equity within the US Department of Health and Human Services, and create the position of Climate Czar in the Cabinet.
improve public health in disadvantaged communities by prioritizing, identifying, and systemizing climate strategies to improve their air pollution. ***

***all bullets are sourced from joebiden.com***

So, as you can tell, when Joe Biden becomes our leader, our country has a lot of climate change advances to look forward to. Personally, I am looking forward to the days of our country being protected when these policies are enacted. I hope that now, you are too. But just because Joe Biden’s policies are quite progressive regarding climate change, it doesn’t mean the fight is over.

Future of Politics Editor: Jake Sonderman

Sources:

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/02/15-ways-trump-administration-impacted-environment/

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/24/joe-biden-climate-change-is-number-one-issue-facing-humanity.html

https://joebiden.com/climate-plan/

https://joebiden.com/clean-energy/

https://joebiden.com/environmental-justice-plan/

The Times They Are A-Changin’

December 2, 2020 by szachik@pvs.org 2 Comments

When asked about the future of American Politics, blogger Evan Spry chose to spill his personal thoughts on the matter.

By Evan Spry

The world as we know it is in a constant state of change. From population to climate and geography, we humans are hardwired to adapt to this ever-changing environment. Politics, too, adapt over time. How have humans changed and what does that mean for their politics?

In America, as we all know, our political spectrum is dominated by two parties: the Republicans and the Democrats. There are more registered Democrats than Republicans (pewresearch.org). American politics differ from most other countries because of our electoral college system. This system gives more representation to the smaller states, which there are more of. So, our politics don’t always represent the majority of our views. It is pretty much impossible to get rid of the electoral college system because, like every other country with it, it’s written in our constitution.

In the past half decade, we have seen a surge in popularity for and from the left. With young liberals in and out of office making headlines across the nation. However, this movement did not start because of Trump; he just proved their point that we need change. Now that Trump’s rule is over, both parties have a lot of work cut out for them. The Republicans need to maintain relevance without their party head in the White House, and the Democrats need to prove that they are the peoples’ voice by producing policy and legislation that the American people want to see.

Many Republicans are contemplating how they’re going to move forward, with multiple Republicans jumping the Trump ship in acceptance of the Biden administration. However, these Republicans like John Kasich and Mitt Romney are still the same Republicans they always have been. Just because they are reasonable enough to side with the democratic process, in terms of the election, it doesn’t mean that they are Biden-lovers. Don’t let Kasich and Romney, protectors of the status quo, trick you. The same anti-Trump Republicans confirmed Amy Coney Barret as a Supreme Court Justice during an election year, which they were against in the past, heavily reinforcing a conservative dominance in the Supreme Court.

Now, I don’t think the Republicans are doing anything wrong policywise because they are supporting exactly what they “should” be as Republicans. They are acting as standard conservatives. In my opinion, the Republicans’ greatest flaw is their lack of new and original ideas and policies. Some new policy ideas would be nice! Recently, all that seems to be coming out of the conservative think tanks is the notion that the Democrats are overrun with socialists, we should decrease spending on public funding, and that abortion is bad–none of which are new ideas.

Maybe Republicans should compromise on Coronavirus relief. Forbes states, “According to a recent poll from OnePoll, 82% of Americans believe that a one-time stimulus check of $1,200 from the CARES Act is not enough to pay for living expenses in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.” 82 percent! This is way past partisan lines. If you don’t listen to 82 percent of the population, then who are you listening to?! Now, obviously, this poll isn’t 100 percent accurate because OnePoll didn’t poll every single American. This poll is of a small group of people compared to our total population, so you can’t get a perfect analysis of what every American wants. However, it is a good gauge. The least that Republicans could do would be to support a new COVID stimulus plan to keep the population more satisfied and stable.

Now for the Democrats (cracking of knuckles). There may actually be more to unpack here than there was for the Republicans. Unlike the Republicans, the Democrats are much more divided within their own party. With the new, young, and progressive left clashing with the older, more neoliberal establishment, the Democrats really need to support each other more if they want to have a blue government. Similar to the Republicans, I believe that the Democrats also need to cater more to the younger generations that will eventually be leading the country. The thing about the Democrats is they already have the majority of young votes, but they still have many young people that are angry with them. Why is this? Well, I think that young liberals are upset with the Democratic party because they don’t see them taking any risks to promote progress: Where’s medicare for all, a sustainable lifestyle, and gun control?

Also, when establishment Democrats side with Republicans over liberals, you’re sure to see some disappointment from the left. According to The New York Times, “Young Voters Know What They Want. But They Don’t See Anyone Offering It.” If these politicians truly believe in democracy and the democratic process, then they should at least attempt to put policy or legislation in play that the majority of Americans want. There is no attempt from the Democratic establishment to create a public option for medicare, and there’s not enough action about climate change. According to pewresearch.org, “About two-thirds (65%) of Americans say the federal government is doing too little to reduce the effects of climate change….” Both parties agree that this is something that needs to be addressed. But, this would cost money, and legislators question the cost, even if it means saving our lives and securing our future.

We see establishment Democrats and their allied organizations covering up and silencing progressive candidates or policy. For example, Hillary Clinton, with the help of MSNBC, accused young House Representative Tulsi Gabbard of being a “Russian asset” during the 2016 presidential race because she is starkly against our endless wars and wants our troops to come home. Clinton dismissed the fact that Gabbard served twelve months as a combat medic in an infantry battalion in Iraq. Gabbard was not the only victim of the Democratic establishment. Andrew Yang suffered constant rejection, disclusion, and neglect from the media station MSNBC. The Daily Beast reported, “Andrew Yang doubled down on his criticism of MSNBC on Saturday, appearing on CNN to accuse the network of “suppressing” him and “ignoring” his campaign.” With the majority of the Democrat and Republican establishment not addressing the issues of the majority, it’s hard to be excited about anything. But, we do have something…Time.

More and more people that we thought of as young a little while ago will soon be old enough to be in charge of the rest of us. We need to listen to our people and make progress. It’s not a bad thing to have the government spend more money for some time to ensure our future generations some stability. And, as a final note, I want to personally apologize for ranting in your ear for this long. Hopefully Jake will have cut down this article a little; these topics have just been bombarding my thoughts, and I needed to let them out in some way. So, If you actually made it this far, I really appreciate your devotion. One Love.