Image via Wikipedia
Dear America,
This was a big week for the Republicans, foot-shooting wise. First, in the Senate they took the side of big corporations that meddle in electoral politics as if they rather than their executives held opinions. Because of the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United, the campaign reform bill cannot, and does not prevent such abuse of the power of shareholder wealth but merely makes corporations admit that they are doing it, but still it was stymied by the Republican minority. Now, they don't even have to vote against a thing, they just have to threaten a filibuster and they can prevent action, even though they are only the minority party. The Democrats have done what they can about it in that they have promised to bring the bill up over and over again, rubbing the Republicans' collective nose in their allegiance to the very institutions that have brought us plutocracy, financial ruin and a moral code reminiscent of the worship of Mammon that Moses encountered when he came down off the mountain with the ten commandments. But now the Republicans in the House of Representatives have taken a page from the Senate Republicans' book, and a congressman named Weiner has taken the initiative that the Democrats have to take over and over again between now and November if they wish to prevent the resurgence of the Republican Party and with it the reemergence of hypocrisy and the return to primacy of wealth over humanism.
Anthony Weiner is a Congressman from New York. He worked for now-Senator Chuck Schumer when he was a Congressman and in 1999 won the seat from the ninth district in New York for himself. Last week, the Democrats in Congress brought to the floor, or tried to bring to the floor, a bill to aid those 9/11 first responders who have ongoing health problems traceable to their service at that time, and the Republicans in Congress employed parliamentary tactics similar to the Republican use of the filibuster in the Senate, avoiding the issues and avoiding declaring themselves on those issues at the same time, thus insulating themselves from criticism for their position because they haven't taken one. Weiner got up before the members of The House and excoriated their stalking horse on the issue, New York Republican Pete King, who had just pleaded with his party to support the bill, but then, in case that didn't work, accused the Democrats of setting his party up on the issue, and he certainly knows how that is done after watching his fellow Republicans' political tactics. Weiner effused righteous indignation over the demagoguery of Congressman King's attempt to eat his political cake and have it too, and in a confrontation that evoked memories of the Ali-Frazier fight faced Mr. King nose to nose, refusing to yield either the podium or his acrimonious condemnation. All of America saw Weiner's tirade on the internet, and later on the national news, but I am not sure that its significance was understood. The Republican response should be instructive in that regard, but it is strangely lacking in relevancy.
Congressman Weiner's anger was not precipitated primarily by the Republican opposition to the bill, though it seems certain that he would have called them to task for it if the bill had gotten that far. But since the Republicans in Congress prevented debate with their tactics, that ploy was the focus of Weiner's condemnation. In the days that followed, the Republican response seems to have been to characterize Mr. Weiner as a volatile crackpot, and for all I know, he is, but they have missed the point. His rancor was not a function of the Republican opposition, which may even have been shared by the Blue Dog Democrats, and possibly even others. No, his vituperation of the Republicans, and of whoever else was involved in their evasion of responsibility for their position on the matter, was over their pusillanimous refusal to go on record by allowing a vote. Weiner directed them, and us, America, to look at themselves and decide whether they were standing on principle or political expediency in their choice to avoid taking a position on the bill and just killing it anonymously instead. For the first time since the Republicans in the Senate began using parliamentary procedure to control American politics from a minority position, someone called the thing by its right name. He called it cowardice because it was cowardice.
Weiner's outburst took place last Thursday and was on the news that night. But that was the last I heard about it, though I don't pretend that all of the news flows through my consciousness every day, and I may have missed something. But Mr. Weiner, right or wrong, left or right, made a point that we should all be making, Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives, supply side economists and humanists alike. We are entitled to know our congressmen's positions on the issues, and we should be insisting on it. If this is truly a battle of principles-- this confrontation between the Democratic majority in congress and the Republican minority-- neither side should fear wearing their politics on their sleeves and going public with their beliefs. But if what the Republicans are doing is really only a sham intended to hide them from their constituents' scrutiny and prevent their views from becoming public knowledge, then principle has nothing to do with it, and government as they would have it will turn out to be nothing but ideological corruption and philosophical bankruptcy. Weiner's is the real battle cry that should be on all of our lips. We need to force the Senate to change the sixty vote cloture rule. We need campaign finance reform. We need healthcare, financial reform and all the rest. But fundamental to the process of getting what we need is knowing who our representatives are, and more importantly whether they are doing our business as we want them to. This is not a Democratic issue or a Republican one. It is an American issue in these times of trouble for our nation. And it is a moral issue in that we claim to bring democracy as we know it to millions of people in the rest of the world. So for those who are reading these lines, I implore you to make this demand of your Congressman and your Senators regardless of your party affiliation: tell us how you intend for our nation to proceed. Tell the congressmen you elected to cast their votes for or against a law, not for anonymity, regardless of party-- regardless of self-interest, political or otherwise. Tell them all, regardless of party, to show a little integrity for a change. That is the true nature of American democracy: it is not just electoral politics about winning and losing. It is about-- in those immortal words-- truth, justice and the American way. Will you do that America, in your own best interest? Will you demand that of them?
Your friend,
Mike
Leave a comment