American Politics Thread 2013: I'm a cool Rodham grandma in the USA

seems we are very far from any sort of gerrymandering reform

its a super thorny problem and the best solutions are quite radical so idk

yeah, totally. there's the idea of auto-districting (letting a computer handle the district layouts) but then of course you'd have to agree on the parameters for who would be included in each district.

it just seems like there's this glaring flaw in the way things are set up right now. not sure that our heroic patriotic founding fathers realized that partisan district-drawers in the 21st century americans would have access to so much information about the location and political preference of citizens.

i just wonder if there's any group or even just an idea that has a chance, or if everyone has essentially given up hope to solve one of the biggest underlying causes of this whole mess.

same despairing question applies campaign finance reform

yeah. perhaps on campaign finance reform, advocates are waiting to see just how bad it will get. one of the big cases for the supreme court this year holds the possibilities of loosening limits on federal campaign contribution limits. NYT article on it from earlier this year:

The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to hear a challenge to federal campaign contribution limits, setting the stage for what may turn out to be the most important federal campaign finance case since the court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United, which struck down limits on independent campaign spending by corporations and unions.

The latest case is an attack on the other main pillar of federal campaign finance regulation: limits on contributions made directly to political candidates and some political committees.

“In Citizens United, the court resisted tinkering with the rules for contribution limits,” said Richard L. Hasen, an expert on election law at the University of California, Irvine. “This could be the start of chipping away at contribution limits.”

people overrate gerrymandering as the problem and underrate the rural/urban population distribution element

lots people think gerrymandering is overrated as a cause of our current problems, like the reason republicans control the house despite getting ~a million less votes than the democrats has more to do with partisan population density patterns than with how you arrange the districts, because democrats tend to live in highly concentrated democratic areas theres just no way to slice them up so that the house reflects the national popular vote

which is not to say its not a big problem but there are maybe bigger underlying problems that make the whole thing so difficult to fix

ha xp

anyone remember that NH "free state" project? maybe progressives with the luxury of working remotely or freelance should start moving in to tightly held tea party districts

j/k those places are by and large terrible. at least around here, anyway.

i read a good contrarian article about how smokey backroom deals were better than what we have now and how mccain feingold contributed to the whole mess

http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/washington-s-bad-old-days-worked-better-than-the-good-new-ones-20131003

Exactly. So many of the Beltway blowhards who wish Obama cracked nuts like LBJ forget that presidents can't offer bridges and works projects anymore, and even if they could this new breed of congressman will run back home on having resisted what he'd call bribery.

lbj was so tough out there cracking the nuts of, giving bribes to, his own party

blowhards, cracking nuts, messy sausage-making

goddamn those were the DAYS

would be happy with more politicians giving stern talks while on the crapper too

I don't completely buy gerrymandering as the source of all problems. It certainly is an issue, but I don't see it as nearly intractable as it's made out to be. The Democrats had a majority in the house less than 4 years ago, so it hardly seems like the Republican majority is some unbreakable thing that will last forever.

On the other hand, here in Texas it really has been taken to an absurd level. I live in northwest Austin, which is part of a tiny sliver of land that is somehow connected to a district in San Antonio and votes Republican. Why my little neighborhood can't be part of the same district as the rest of the city is kind of hard to fathom.

The census happened though.

Sure, and it will happen again, but we may not even need to wait that long before seeing a shift in power in the House.

oh no majority is permanent, but we'll be dealing with these guys for a few years unless Ted Cruz becomes president, fucks badly his first two years, and turns the House blue.

Seems like the Dems would need to carry the popular vote in the House elections by 7-8pts to overcome the redistricting disadvantage they currently have. They "won" in 2012 by 48.3-46.9 and have a 33-seat deficit. (Other factors, of course - large turnout in Dem-dominated urban areas, some uncontested races, etc).

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BV_zniEIcAAfmdz.jpg

still waiting for the icey/iatee politics podcast

Late this morning, the President telephoned Speaker John Boehner from the Oval Office and repeated what he told him when they met at the White House last week: the President is willing to negotiate with Republicans — after the threat of government shutdown and default have been removed – over policies that Republicans think would strengthen the country. The President also repeated his willingness to negotiate on priorities that he has identified including policies that expand economic opportunity, support private sector job creation, enhance the competitiveness of American businesses, strengthen the Affordable Care Act and continue to reduce the nation’s deficit.

"It's not a good faith negotiation if they won't give me everything I want, when I want it, which is now, with nothing in return." - any 3-year old.

the implicit bargaining position of the GOP is that only the Dems have a vested interest in the government functioning.

Wait until the farm subsidy checks fail to arrive.

the implicit bargaining position of the GOP is that only the Dems have a vested interest in the government functioning.

― Hip Hop Hamlet (Shakey Mo Collier),

visa/passport processing continues; I suggest we all get the fuck out while we can.

if the credit of the USG is wrecked there will be nowhere to run to.

i already have a passport

mine has expired, wherever it is

Obama is handling today's presser Q&A like a champ, btw. I'm pissed off at the guy more of the time than not, but he's killin' it today.

I watched about ten minutes after his opening statement, and, yeah, he's sharp.

good point re platinum coin etc schemes http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/obama-dismisses-14th-amendment-argument-for-lifting-debt-ceiling

Bruce Bartlett on the same point: http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/stan-collender/2778/must-read-bruce-bartlett-debt-limit

Boehner's gonna take some form of this fund the gov't/negotiate later deal is my guess

which would amount to complete capitulation to the democrats on his part, considering the wingnuts have been planning this brinksmanship since the last election

agree to continue with the standard process of governing, claim victory

Obama's always killin' it, or him, or someone, when he's not disappearin' it.

http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2013/10/07/obamas-rendition-operation-in-libya-its-like-president-george-w-bush-got-a-fourth-term/

Bartlett's article ends:

My prediction: The GOP is going to refuse to raise the debt ceiling on October 17 based on the calculation that they have at least until October 22 and possibly until October 31 before an actual default takes place. The morning of October 18 they'll issue a statement to the effect of "see, we breached the debt ceiling and nothing happened", followed shortly by a litany of demands that must be met before they agree to a debt ceiling increase, along with a sudden willingness to negotiate over those demands over the following few days.

agree to continue with the standard process of governing, claim victory

― i too went to college (silby), Tuesday, October 8, 2013 3:27 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yeah i guess it just depends on how many republicans are ready to admit defeat and move on

honestly think some of people pushing this are so self-infatuatedly confused that they aren't clear whether the shutdown was a tactic or the goal itself. hence all these vague statements about "keeping up the fight" trending into "we better get something"

yeah thats the scary part

My prediction: The GOP is going to refuse to raise the debt ceiling on October 17 based on the calculation that they have at least until October 22 and possibly until October 31 before an actual default takes place. The morning of October 18 they'll issue a statement to the effect of "see, we breached the debt ceiling and nothing happened", followed shortly by a litany of demands that must be met before they agree to a debt ceiling increase, along with a sudden willingness to negotiate over those demands over the following few days.

pretty sure the stock market will have a fucking meltdown on the 18th

Many Republicans in Congress just do not seem to grasp that there are tens of thousands of federal laws, passed by Congress, signed by the president, and upheld by the courts, plus hundreds of thousands of legal contracts in place, that require the government to spend more than its current revenues. It is the law. If they don't like it, let them change the laws the old-fashioned way, by getting the votes.

the market will probably meltdown long before the 18th if there's no sign of progress. hell, it's been a shit show since the shutdown.

"require the government to spend more than its current revenues."

or raise revenues ffs. if GOP dopes want to make this asinine (but annoyingly effective) argument about how govt should be "run as a business" or how "i cain't run a household budget like this!!", then anyone who's not an idiot will say that besides just cutting spending (which we've done, and Obama hints he'll do more), viable businesses will need to search out new revenue streams. a family would need to take on second jobs, sell shit, whatever to pay off those credit cards. i guess some ppl on the right get it. but no one's listening to them.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/17/60-year-low-tax-revenues-contribute-deficit-growth/?page=all

and yeah, Obama managed to wrangle an end to Bush tax cuts on those making over 450k, but that's kind of a drop in the bucket when you consider how many corporations are paying effective rates of zero, or even NEGATIVE rates - all while whining about admittedly high nominal rates. or how most of the 1% are paying effective rates of ~15% bc the bulk of their income ends up being taxed at cap gains rates.

and to be fair, maybe it's time we rethink child tax credits, EITC, etc.
http://keithhennessey.com/2010/04/15/off-the-rolls/