Skip to content

Month: March 2023

Mr. Economy wants YOU!

Especially if you’re underage and undocumented

The graphic above popped up on Twitter last light and then Helaine Olen did this morning in writing about kids working in meatpacking (Washington Post):

“A self-supporting and self-respecting democracy can plead no justification for the existence of child labor,” wrote Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1937, as he sent the legislation known as the Fair Labor Standards Act to Congress. With the bill, which also established a national minimum wage, lawmakers condemned the ghastly practice of children toiling on factory floors to the past.

But American child labor is making a comeback. Underage children are operating fryers in restaurant kitchens and assembling parts at auto plants. Last month, when the New York Times published a blockbuster expose on how some of the nation’s mostprominent companies depend on subcontractors who illegally employ migrant children, it brought attention to an ongoing horror. The Economic Policy Institute recently crunched Labor Department data and discovered an almost 300 percent increase in child labor violations since 2015.

Kids from Central America as young as 12 are found working in auto parts and meatpacking plants. What we are seeing is a largely Republican effort to roll back protections for workers, Olen insists, but Democrats sometimes join in as well. In Arkansas, in Ohio, in Minnesota and Iowa.

And in Congress. A bipartisan bill would allow parents who own logging operations “to employ their 16- and 17-year-old children to operate mechanized equipment.” Under supervision, dontcha know:

Meanwhile, not a single Republican has signed onto legislation recently introduced by Senate Democrats that would significantly increase the fines on companies for violations of child labor laws, from the maximum of $5,000 per violation up to $132,270 for routine violations, and from $15,138 to $601,150 when children are seriously injured or killed on the job.

In addition to claiming expanded paid work for teens is a win-win for employers and financially needy children, advocates are draping their appeals in the language of parental rights. That’s right — the same logic that dictates parents should be able to protect vulnerable teens by blocking controversial library books, sex ed and the full racial history of the United States. Requiring work permits for children under 16 “steps in front of parents’ decision-making process,” said the Arkansas state representative who spearheaded the successful measure there.

Yes, of course, lowering average labor costs for business is about parental freedoms and teaching initiative and the value of hard work. Gotta get people serving Mr. Economy years earlier on the front end and then squeeze more out of them on the back end by postponing access to Social Security and Medicare. Because what’s good for Mr. Economy is good for America.

Olen adds that the push to loosen child labor laws is not a 21st century Republican innovation. Ronald Reagan tried it in 1982.

Teenage workers are injured at significantly higher rates than adults employed in the same roles. Working more than 15 hours a week during high school is associated with a higher chance of failing to graduate from college. Academic performance can suffer — which is particularly concerning after a pandemic that saw significant drops in reading and math scores. And immigrant children seeking asylum especially need to attend school, not be pushed into full-time work at 12 or 13 years old.

Not to mention that kids sustaining debilitaiing injuries from dangerous work will draw conservative condemnation for being rendered unable to serve Mr. Economy. Why, the little deadbeats are just faking it to draw disability checks. That undocumented kids are likely ineligible to receive SSI benefits won’t stop the Tucker Carlsons from propagandizing otherwise.

Alexandra Petri satirized the push to loosen child labors just weeks ago. Idleness is a greater threat to children than gun violence:

How dare these children, with their small, nimble fingers, fritter away even a moment that they could be spending sweeping a chimney or, perhaps, working in a coal mine? If minors weren’t supposed to be mining, why is it right there in the name? There are only so many hours in the day, and every hour children spend in a library being exposed to ideas, or playing (even if they are playing at farming, a noble trade), or singing a little song to themselves just for fun, or making friends, or laughing because someone is wearing a silly hat, is an hour they will not be able to receive extremely low wages for doing a dangerous task. How sad. Our children are a valuable resource. We must protect them, at all costs.

I don’t call people holding the view that humans exist to serve the Market the Midas Cult for nothing.

Weaponizing the judiciary committee

Jim Jordan doing his MAGA thing

From Pro Publica:

House Republicans have sent letters to at least three universities and a think tank requesting a broad range of documents related to what it says are the institutions’ contributions to the Biden administration’s “censorship regime.”

The letters are the latest effort by a House subcommittee set up in January to investigate how the federal government, working with social media companies, has allegedly been “weaponized” to silence conservative and right-wing voices. So far, the committee’s investigations have amplified a variety of dubious, outright false and highly misleading Republican grievances with law enforcement, many of them espoused by former President Donald Trump. Committee members have cited supposed abuses that include the FBI’s search of Mar-a-Lago, its investigations of Jan. 6 rioters and the Biden administration’s purported use of executive powers to shut down conservative viewpoints on social media.

Now, universities and their researchers are coming under the spotlight of the committee, which the Republicans have labeled the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. The letters, signed by Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, who is chair of both the House Judiciary Committee and the subcommittee, were sent in early March.

They cover an investigation into how “certain third parties, including organizations like yours, may have played a role in this censorship regime by advising on so-called ‘misinformation,’” according to a copy of one of the letters obtained by ProPublica.

Jordan knows that there was no censorship. It’s complete bullshit. But there we are. He’s going to assault the idea that such a thing as right wing disinformation even exists.

Maybe he should call some QAnon believers to testify to that.

The Michigan GOP is the future of the party

Actually, it’s today’s GOP

Not to mention that this longstanding argument has always been ridiculous. They truly believe that if only Hitler hadn’t tightened some gun laws for Jews and “undesirables,” there would have been no holocaust. Really? Jews were less than 1% of the population. And in case they haven’t noticed, Hitler conquered most of Europe. I don’t really think the German Jews could have held him off with some pistols. It’s so ludicrous it makes you want to scream. But the gun nuts have been saying this for years and now the party itself using actual holocaust images to make their sick, absurd point.

Good luck, Meatball

Has he met any teenagers?

Members of the cast of “Euphoria”

These people are living in a dream world. Do they think that teens and young adults are docile cows they can herd at will? Ridiculous:

 Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis ′ administration is moving to forbid classroom instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in all grades, expanding the controversial law critics call “Don’t Say Gay” as the Republican governor continues a focus on cultural issues ahead of his expected presidential run.

The proposal, which would not require legislative approval, is scheduled for a vote next month before the state Board of Education and has been put forth by state Education Department, both of which are led by appointees of the governor.

The rule change would ban lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity from grades 4 to 12, unless required by existing state standards or as part of reproductive health instruction that students can choose not to take. The initial law that DeSantis championed last spring bans those lessons in kindergarten through the third grade. The change was first reported by the Orlando Sentinel.

Hey keep it up guys. You’re going to turn the Millennials and Gen Z into Democrats for the rest of their lives. You’re going right at the place they live and what they care about. You will lose this and lose it bigly, as Trump would say.

Update —

Apropos of nothing:

A former Florida lawmaker who sponsored a bill dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay” law by critics has pleaded guilty to fraudulently obtaining COVID-19 relief funds.

Joseph Harding entered a guilty plea on Tuesday in federal court in the Northern District of Florida to one count of wire fraud, one count of money laundering and one count of making false statements, according to court records.

Harding faces up to 35 years in prison, including a maximum of 20 years on the wire fraud charge. A sentencing hearing is scheduled for July 25 at the federal courthouse in Gainesville.

A bread and butter crime

It looks like the Manhattan DA prosecutes a lot of people for the crimes Trump is suspected of committing:

According to the Times, it’s still a tricky case with the need to attach it to the federal election crime in order to make it a felony, but nobody can say that they don’t ever try people for crimes like this.

They fear their voters

The Bulwark’s JV Last distilled what we all know about the GOP and their voters into a nice concise analysis:

Roughly speaking, there are six things an elected Republican could say about an indictment of Donald Trump:

1.Trump’s alleged actions are deeply concerning.
2.Let the legal process play out; I have faith in our justice system.
3.No comment.
4.Yes, Trump’s alleged actions are concerning; but because of various externalities, the wiser course of action would have been to not indict.
5.Democrats and this Soros-backed prosecutor are out of control. We will fight this to the bitter end.
6.Donald Trump is innocent of all charges; this is a miscarriage of justice.

This is not science, but my sense is that the distribution of these positions among elite Republicans will look basically like this:¹

The two unlabeled slivers are “These allegations are troubling” and “wiser not to indict.” I peg them at 1% positions.

Maybe I’m off at the margins But this is close enough for the purposes of our discussion. So let’s move on.

Now this also isn’t science, but here is my rough sense of the percentages of elite Republicans who secretly wish Trump would disappear versus the percentage who really want more Trump:

Do I have this exactly right? Probably not. But we’re in the ballpark. Give elite Republican veritas serum and the majority of them will tell you that they want Trump to go away and it doesn’t matter how.

This creates an obvious tension with the first chart. If a strong majority of Republican elites want Trump gone, then why is a supermajority of them going to the mattresses to either proclaim that Trump is innocent or attack the legal case against Trump?

What we have here is a paradox of pain.


And now we get to the part that is science. Because we have lots of polling on how Republican voters feels about Trump. They approve of him. They want him leading the party. And they want him running for president in 2024.

The source of the paradox becomes clear now, yes?

Republican elites are desperate to get rid of Trump. But they know that their own voters are deeply invested in keeping Trump. So they will respond to an event which could achieve their objective by visibly trying to prevent it from achieving their objective.

And all the while secretly hoping that their efforts at intervention will fail.

Which is something we’ve seen before:

On Monday, Jan. 11, Mr. McConnell met over lunch in Kentucky with two longtime advisers, Terry Carmack and Scott Jennings. Feasting on Chick-fil-A in Mr. Jennings’s Louisville office, the Senate Republican leader predicted Mr. Trump’s imminent political demise.

“The Democrats are going to take care of the son of a bitch for us,” Mr. McConnell said, referring to the imminent impeachment vote in the House.


Which brings us to a second paradox: If Republicans have been here before, and tried this strategy, and seen it fail, then why are they doing it again?

There are a couple plausible explanations: principle or negative polarity, for instance.

But my best guess is it’s because elite Republicans are at such a disconnect with their voters that they simultaneously disdain and fear them.

That’s why you’re forever seeing anonymous Republicans quoted in news reports giving their true feelings about Trump. That’s why you saw all of that private correspondence in the Fox / Dominion lawsuit.

And then remember this?

On the House floor [on Jan. 6], moments before the vote, Meijer approached a member who appeared on the verge of a breakdown. He asked his new colleague if he was okay. The member responded that he was not; that no matter his belief in the legitimacy of the election, he could no longer vote to certify the results, because he feared for his family’s safety. “Remember, this wasn’t a hypothetical. You were casting that vote after seeing with your own two eyes what some of these people are capable of,” Meijer says. “If they’re willing to come after you inside the U.S. Capitol, what will they do when you’re at home with your kids?”

And this?

[Gonzalez] made clear that the strain had only grown worse since his impeachment vote, after which he was deluged with threats and feared for the safety of his wife and children.

Mr. Gonzalez said that quality-of-life issues had been paramount in his decision. He recounted an “eye-opening” moment this year: when he and his family were greeted at the Cleveland airport by two uniformed police officers, part of extra security precautions taken after the impeachment vote.

“That’s one of those moments where you say, ‘Is this really what I want for my family when they travel, to have my wife and kids escorted through the airport?’” he said.

Also this:

“If you look at the vote to impeach, for example, there were members who told me that they were afraid for their own security – afraid, in some instances, for their lives,” [Liz Cheney] said.

Or this:

Asked if she would have signed it [a letter urging the state’s congressional delegation to reject President Biden’s win], [Kim Ward] indicated that the Republican base expected party leaders to back up Mr. Trump’s claims — or to face its wrath.

“If I would say to you, ‘I don’t want to do it,’” she said about signing the letter, “I’d get my house bombed tonight.”

There are so many more.


Whatever you want to say about Democratic elites and their voters, the two groups are basically in-sync. And to the extent that Democratic elites are out of sync with their base, they aren’t terrified of these voters. Joe Manchin had kayakers yelling at his house boat. Kyrsten Sinema was followed into a bathroom by rude college students. Neither are concerned about militia dudes with long guns.

Republicans have discovered that their voters are bullies. And rather than stand up to these bullies, or switch parties, they hope that someone else will deal with them on their behalf—even as they enable the bullies and make a show of defending them.

He’s right. Obviously. But what did they think would happen when they radicalized a bunch of armed racists? Did they think they would be immune?

As for the elites, I do think they have a plan: wait this out until Trump dies and then everything will go back to normal. And they’re right. Without Trump the party will still be a bunch of radicalized armed racists but he won’t be there to agitate against them. That’s all that matters.

James Comer: Dan Burton Redux

We’ve been here before

There are so many lawsuits and criminal investigations involving Donald Trump in the news right now that it’s hard to keep up. The indictment he announced was coming on Tuesday didn’t materialize but by all accounts, it is imminent, possibly even today. If that happens Trump won’t be immediately handcuffed and extradited to New York on Con Air. Prosecutors will arrange for him to appear for an arraignment which, according to the New York Times will disappoint Trump as he is looking forward to the spectacle so that he can “show strength.” I don’t buy that but I can certainly see that he might look forward to bilking his loyal following for another chunk of their social security checks by playing the martyr.

Lucky for him, his defenders have circled the wagons and are preparing to fight fire with fire.

At the moment they are concentrating their efforts on Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Trump himself has called him every name under the sun, of course, but his defenders are homing in on a complaint that he is abusing his power out of partisan animus (which is hysterical coming from them.) House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., went on record immediately denouncing the case as “an outrageous abuse of power by a radical D.A. who lets violent criminals walk as he pursues political vengeance against President Trump.” Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky distilled Republicans’ feelings on Tuesday into one basic cri de guerre: Lock him up.

No, not Trump — the District Attorney.

McCarthy directed the House of Representatives to begin an investigation into Bragg and his office, citing some interest in knowing whether he was funded by the federal government which is a reach. Nonetheless, Committee chairs Jim Jordan, Bryan Steil and James Comer immediately sent a letter to Bragg saying “your decision to pursue such a politically motivated prosecution—while adopting progressive criminal justice policies that allow career ‘criminals [to] run[ ] the streets’ of Manhattan — requires congressional scrutiny about how public safety funds appropriated by Congress are implemented by local law-enforcement agencies” and demanded that he immediately come to Washington to testify before the committee. They may have to “de-fund the prosecutor” you see in order to prevent him from abusing his power.

What other jurisdiction they believe they have for doing this is obscure and Oversight Chairman James Comer doesn’t seem to know what it is either:

If you can make heads or tails out what he’s trying to say there, good luck to you. But at this moment nobody knows what charges or under what laws Bragg may be bringing so this whole federal pushback is premature, to say the least. A respectable Oversight Committee chairman would hold his fire until he has the facts. But James Comer is not a respectable Oversight chairman and in that he is upholding a long-standing GOP tradition.

The Times published a long profile of the new chairman on Tuesday, in which he’s extolled as a major political talent with a huge future ahead of him — and also revealed him to be exactly the kind of hypocritical, hyper-partisan operator he appears to be. For instance, Comer admitted that as a candidate for governor, he was involved in a devious plot to discredit a girlfriend who alleged he had abused her and helped her get an abortion — by siccing a prosecutor on to a blogger who had been publishing the information. (He seems to know a lot about how abuse of power works.)

He is obsessed with Hunter Biden and what he commonly refers to as “the Biden Crime family” but he knows it’s all a lie. He’s just giving the MAGA folks what they want. It’s clear that he is completely devoid of integrity. But lest anyone get the idea that he is something unique to the Trump era, he is not. He is following in the footsteps of one of the great GOP Oversight Committee reprobate chairmen in history: Dan Burton of Ohio.

Dan Burton ascended to the powerful chairmanship in 1997, immediately after Bill Clinton’s re-election victory and he didn’t waste any time in going after what was the right called “The Clinton Crime Family.” (They do believe in recycling their insults.) He’s especially remembered for his pursuit of the idiotic rumors emanating from the right-wing fever swamp about White House aide Vince Foster’s suicide, famously saying of Clinton, “if I could prove 10 percent of what I believe happened [regarding the death of Foster], he’d be gone. This guy’s a scumbag. That’s why I’m after him.” He even re-enacted a fantasy of the alleged crime in his backyard by shooting a canteloupe with a gun and causing unfathomable misery to Foster’s family with his endless sensational probing of the tragedy.

In 1998 Burton was one of Clinton’s most vociferous critics during Special Prosecutor Ken Starr’s investigation — until it was reported that had secretly fathered a child in an extra-marital affair years before. (There were a lot of Republicans caught in that particular trap that year.) He spent millions of dollars investigating allegedly corrupt Democratic campaign fundraising even as he was an incorrigibly corrupt fundraiser himself and delivered openly for those who funded him. One of Donald Trump’s top advisers David Bossie first came to national attention working for Burton as his “investigator” when he was exposed for editing some transcripts causing even then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich to denounce the investigation as a “circus.” He was anti-vax before anti-vax was cool.

It’s hard to believe, I know, that a quarter century ago, the House GOP was just as batshit as they are today but they were. There may have been more sane ones but they behaved the same way the vanishing few behave today. They just let it happen.The Times article ends with a most telling anecdote about the man who is on TV every day railing about “abuse of power”:

Mr. Comer recalled a local deputy sheriff who had recently pulled him over for speeding but let him go when he realized who he had nabbed — only after leaning in to ask one question.

“We going to get Biden or not?”

At least he didn’t call him a scumbag. I guess that’s progress.

They don’t care

The two-day poll, concluded on Tuesday, found 54% of respondents – including 80% of the former president’s fellow Republicans and 32% of Democrats – said politics was driving the criminal case being weighed by a Manhattan grand jury.

Seventy percent of respondents, and half of Republicans, said it was believable that Trump during his 2016 presidential campaign paid the adult film actress Stormy Daniels for her silence about an alleged sexual encounter.

Some 62% of respondents, including a third of Republicans, said it was also believable that Trump falsified business records and committed fraud.

So a large number of Republicans obviously don’t care that he paid the hush money, and committed fraud. The rest are delusional. No surprise there.

Bracing for impact

“Serious creativity” lacking from the left

There isn’t a lot of outside-the-box thinking among Democrats. For all the Left’s attraction to novelty and appreciation for creativity, stepping outside their safe spaces is not something many established Democratic operatives do. They color inside the lines Republicans ignore.

Greg Sargent warns that should Donald Trump be indicted by the Manhattan district attorney’s office over his concealing hush-money payments to a porn star, Democrats seem unprepared to meet both the moment and the expected Republican backlash:

Democrats will have to marshal some serious creativity in response. The extraordinary move by House Republicans to insert themselves into Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s investigation of Trump provides Democrats with an opening to do just that.

This week, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and other top Republicans sent a letter to Bragg demanding documents and testimony related to expectations that Bragg might charge Trump over a hush-money payment to a porn actress in 2016. The letter declared this an “unprecedented abuse of prosecutorial authority,” even though no charges have been filed.

But it’s not clear that Jordan, the Judiciary Committee chair, has thought this through. The course of action signaled by the letter — also signed by Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) — could go sideways for Republicans in unforeseen ways.

A smart, ah say, a smart Democrat might help those Republicans’ plans go sideways. But we might have to hope that happens on its own. Even if Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) sees this move by Jordan, et al., as “the kind of political culture you find in authoritarian dictatorships.”

Republicans will treat whatever charges Trump faces — in New York, in Georgia, or in federal court over Jan. 6 — as illegitimate, just as they treat any election in which Democrats defeat them at the polls. This, despite the Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s office regularly indicting New Yorkers for falsifying business records.

Not charging Trump might constitute special treatment,” Sargent believes.

Still, one inside-the-lines approach Democrats have proved good at is turning congressional hearings into effective counter-programming to Republican histrionics. Early GOP House majority efforts this year have already misfired.

House Republicans may not have the option of not voting on a criminal referral against Bragg should he dismiss their demand for documents and testimony, Sargent suggests, given the heat Trump allies are giving “Republicans like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (Calif.) for offering merely qualified defenses of Trump.”

Democrats nationwide will need more than counter-messaging in congressional hearings to stay ahead of the wave of extremist propaganda (and potential violence) headed their way.

I’m with Sargent on how Democrats should respond (and likely won’t):

A Trump indictment will unleash months of information warfare around a numbingly complex matter never before litigated in the public arena. Democrats sometimes undervalue the importance of sheer creativity in politics, and as ugly as the GOP response has been, Republicans are responding to unprecedented circumstances with new innovations. Democrats must meet them on that battlefield.

Democrats remain risk averse in a time when same-old, same-old is not cutting it.

On a Zoom call Tuesday night, Democratic strategist Tom Bonier spoke to the problem Democrats face in a time when a growing number of voters in North Carolina and elsewhere are choosing to register as independents (unaffiliated in N.C.). Lack of party ID makes it more challenging for Democrats to identify and turn out possible supporters, especially left-leaning young ones. Problem identified. And the solution?

What’s required for 2024 is some creative, outside-the-box thinking and outside-the-lines tactics that risk-averse Democrats so far seem unwilling to entertain. The clock is ticking.

Doubling down on oligarchy

It’s a reflex

Bad economy. Graphic via Reuters.

Running for U.S. Senate is a pricey proposition. Candidates spent on average over $10 million a decade ago and nearly double that by 2016. The Citizens United decision means outside groups now pour in even more than candidates. With Democrats outraising Republicans in the Trump era, the GOP more than ever is looking to oligarchs for candidates who can self-fund (Politico):

Both parties have relied on self-funders before. But this approach has taken on increasing importance for Republicans because they failed to counter Democrats’ massive grassroots fundraising in Senate races during the past two cycles. In 2022 alone, Democratic nominees outraised Republicans by $288 million in the six closest Senate races.

The strategy is also an acknowledgment that the party’s reliance on super PACs funded by its richest supporters has been insufficient. In the last two elections, Republicans were unsuccessful in stopping Democrats from nabbing a narrow majority in the upper chamber. Arming themselves with better-funded recruits, many of whom can give their campaigns tens of millions of dollars, could help them finally net the two seats needed to reclaim the gavel.

Potential self-funders for this cycle include: Tim Sheehy, the Montana founder of an aerospace company, Eric Hovde, a real estate executive in Wisconsin, and West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice, a coal mining magnate.

National Republican Senatorial Committee chair, Sen. Steve Daines of Montana, is looking to candidates either extraordinarily good at fundraising or else swimming in their own cash.

Hovde is considering a run against Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin and could spend into eight figures doing it, Politico reports.

Hovde, who made a failed Senate bid in 2012, also decided against a governor bid in 2022. This time he seems more likely to enter the fray. He has spoken with NRSC officials and has begun engaging potential staff.

“He’s thought about running for all kinds of offices,” said Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), when asked about Hovde.

A U.S. Senate seat is just the fashion accessory for the man who can drop $6 million of his own cash on a Senate race (2012). Or, alternately, on “running for all kinds of offices.” The NRSC is recruiting others like him.

Republican super PACs consistently outraise their Democratic counterparts, especially on the Senate side. But Democrats’ candidate fundraising boom is still a major headache because candidates purchase TV ads at a discounted rate. Their money goes much farther in the final stretch of the campaign when both sides pummel the air waves.

“Republicans face an existential crisis that won’t be solved overnight, but we still need to figure out how to mitigate the damage in the short term,” said Kevin McLaughlin, the executive director of the NRSC in 2020. “Recruiting strong candidates who can both self-fund and win general elections is a great first step.”

Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) set a self-funding record in 2018 when he dropped $60 million of his own cash to defeat Democrat Bill Nelson.

As I’ve said, the GOP does not want to govern. It wants to rule. So it is unsurprising that the NRSC focuses its recruiting on candidates who fit the profile. Seeing government of the people dominated by the ruling class is nothing new. But it may contribute to Americans’ widespread feelings of non-belonging.

The irony of Donald Trump’s popularity with his MAGA base is how his near-genetic sense of grievance heightens their sense of not belonging. He skillfully redirects their anger at “party, race, class, geography, sexual orientation and gender” without drawing so much attention to his class.

It would be cheaper just to drop $25,000 on another passport from another country. Hell, it might be cheaper in some places to buy a kingship and get it over with.