Podcast Episode 2: The Rise of Authoritarianism

The Foggy Bottom Line podcast is now up on YouTube and Spotify. Scott and I discuss authoritarianism in the US and some things Americans can do in response.

Check us out on YouTube and Spotify.

Click on this link for YouTube.

Click here for Spotify.

We’re working to get up on other platforms.

Please like, comment, subscribe and all that stuff. Lots of great content is in the works.

Shutdowns and Filibusters

I see a lot of social media posts from the right blaming the Democrats for the shutdown, including a comment on a LinkedIn post claiming that Democrats forced a shutdown because they wanted to cut federal funding for rural hospitals and redirect it toward health care for non-citizens.

If this LinkedIn account is genuine, you must respect this guy’s background. But if he really believes this is true, he pays little attention to how government works and even less to politics. This is easily the most egregious disinformation, if not outright lie, I’ve seen on LinkedIn – and that’s a high bar.

Yes, Republicans want you to blame Democrats for their failure to pass a continuing resolution (CR) funding the government and the resulting shutdown. They also want you to think Democrats did this because the CR does not include money to provide health care for illegal immigrants.

This is not what happened. Democrats refused to pass a cloture resolution (more on that later) that would allow a vote on the CR because the “Big Beautiful Bill” cuts funding for Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies and Medicaid. Democrats want this funding restored so that working Americans who get health care through the ACA won’t see their health care costs rise to unsustainable levels, and so that poor Americans, mostly Seniors in nursing homes and children in poor families or with disabilities, would not lose coverage. Cuts to Medicaid have already caused rural hospitals and clinics to close, but Democrats want to stop this, not use it to pay for immigrant health care.

Should Republicans agree to restore this funding, Democrats would vote for cloture, end the filibuster, and allow passage of the CR in the Senate (Republicans in the House have already passed it). A filibuster is a somewhat complicated Senate rule that allows 41 Senators to block legislation, including budget votes, simply by filing that intent. Once upon a time Senators had to hold the floor to continue a filibuster, but they got lazy and made it easy on themselves by changing the rules. Today, simply announcing the intent does the trick.

The key thing to know about the filibuster, besides the 60-vote requirement, is that the Constitution does not require it, nor does Federal law. This is a simple Senate rule, which 51 Senators could change at any time. It was originally designed to require different factions to compromise and write legislation that 60 Senators could support, rather than a simple majority. It had that effect, when segregationists used it to block voting and equal rights laws they saw as extremist, and it has that effect today when budget hawks want to cut social infrastructure spending.

In any event, this means that if Republicans, who hold a 51-49 majority in the Senate, wished to end the shutdown they could make this happen simply by changing the rules so that budget or continuing resolution votes cannot be blocked in this way. They have already done this to make it easier for them to approve Cabinet and Court nominations over the objections of Democrats, so ending the filibuster for budget votes would not set a new precedent.

Why they don’t is a good question. Could be that conservatives just hate government so much that closing it looks to them like good policy (except for ICE and the military, I guess). Perhaps they want to use the shutdown to achieve other goals, such as making workforce cuts DOGE didn’t get to, before they end it. Some have speculated that if they brought Congress back to Washington to vote on the shutdown they would have to seat Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ) who just won a special election in Arizona. Seating her would create a majority in support of releasing the Epstein Files.

In any event, Democrats have indeed refused to vote for the Republican budget in its current form. They did this because they want health care funding restored. But this does not mean they are to blame for the shutdown. Republicans could end it whenever they want, and it’s time they – and their supporters – own that.

Jay Jones and Political Violence

As you probably know, the big news in Virginia politics this week, are the texts that Jay Jones, candidate for attorney general, sent to Delegate Carrie Coyner back in 2022, discussing basically the murder of former House of Delegates Speaker Todd Gilbert and Gilbert’s children.

I know Jay Jones. It’s hard for me to believe that he wrote this even as a joke. I don’t understand it. He’s apologized. But, you know, the fact that it entered his head at all is problematic, much less that he put it in a text.

It goes without saying that wishing political opponents and their children dead over a policy disagreement is way outside the bounds of acceptable political discourse, even as a joke or a suggestion that “if they only suffer from their own policies, they might change their minds.”

We can and should do better. And yes, as both an expression of a thought that political violence has a place in policy disputes and as a demonstration of very, very poor judgment – the kind of poor judgement no one wants to see in an attorney general – disqualifies him. His rhetoric disqualifies him. But let’s take a step back and talk a little bit about political violence more broadly.

Yes, assassination certainly counts as political violence and is indeed perhaps the ultimate example. We should work to convince people that Charlie Kirk was wrong on the merits of his policy ideas and even his religion. Simply murdering him without warning violates our most fundamental values and ethics. It’s immoral, plain and simple. 

That said, the America we know today was constructed on a foundation of political violence, starting with forced migration of Africans as slaves. The Boston Tea Party, the American Revolution, genocide against the indigenous peoples who lived here before Europeans arrived, and the attempt by the slave states to protect and expand the right to own human beings as property are all examples of political violence in our history.

Political violence continued after the Civil War in the form of Black Codes, Jim Crow, sundown towns, redlining, and other efforts to suppress the political power of outgroups. Our history is one long thread of political violence, mostly against the weak and defenseless, and mostly justified by those in power as necessary.

Today, ICE raids and the deployment of military forces to American cities look an awful lot like political violence designed to continue the suppression of groups and individuals seen by those in power as illegitimate political actors. The difference between the assassination of Kirk, or Jones’s rhetoric of murdered opponents is that, in this case, it’s agents of the State committing the political violence in our name.

Agents of the State invade apartment buildings. Agents of the state detain Americans without warrants or any kind of probable cause.

Agents of the state kidnap children in Chicago, some of them naked, and held them for no reason on the pretense of searching for gang members who were not there. 

Agents of the state detain people, some of them American citizens, almost all of them lawful residents following the law and deport them to foreign prisons where they cannot apply for redress of this unlawful detention and deportation.

Agents of the state occupy cities on the false pretense of reducing crime where local governments have quite effectively reduced it without their assistance, and who have not asked for that assistance. We know they do this under false pretenses because they end up picking up trash, not fighting crime. 

Now, for those of you who may have forgotten, these were key elements of the Founders’ grievances against the British Crown in 1776.

Quoting the Declaration of Independence:

“For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

He has kept among us in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislatures:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them by a mock trial from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:”

For all the caterwauling by Jason Miyares, his running mate Winsome Sears, and Governor Youngkin about Jones’s violent political rhetoric, they all support political violence as long as it’s committed by agents of the state controlled by their Party.

Jones would push back against this. Miyares will not. 

For this reason, although I believe Jones is not qualified by temperament or judgment to serve as Virginia’s Attorney General, I believe Miyares’ support for Trump and the anti-democratic Republican Party makes him even less qualified.

I therefore plan to vote for Jones and urge my fellow Virginians to do the same. 

Once elected, I would then urge Jones to resign and allow the General Assembly to select his replacement. If Republicans control the legislature after the election, they can appoint Jason Miyares. 

That’s my two cents on this subject, and that’s probably all I’m ever going to say about it again.