Skip to main content

Caucus Politics in “The Land of Steady Habits”

Practical politics in Connecticut – that is, a politics of political action – is reserved only for in-office Democrat politicians. All others, including marginalized Republican political actors, are spectators of the sport, not participants. The entire Connecticut state Republican Party has been effectively benched for decades.

 

Democrats know that permitting Republicans in the state General Assembly to ventilate is harmless because, in a state in which a massive Democrat Party caucus determines political action, words alone do not give rise to political action.

 

Is this state of things a problem for our democracy?

 

The answer to that question is an unqualified “Yes!”

 

Partisan caucus politics is the opposite of democratic or republican politics.  In a vibrant two-party system, words that lead to political action are politically convincing because political action produces public consequences that cannot be distorted by otherwise convincing partisan political actors, rhetoricians practiced in the fine art of fooling, in Abe Lincoln’s words, “most of the people most of the time.”

 

In mature partisan caucus states – the Soviet Union under Stalin, Nazi Germany under Hitler, China under Mao – political action is decided by small party affiliated groups and then imposed by force on the body politic. In a one-party state, politics is shaped not by the consent of the governed but by masterful politicians who rely on a captured media to convince the general public that force in service of the state is the only form of permissible consent.

 

The entire 20th century in free Western republics has been a bloody struggle against rule by such tyrants. There is something in the soul of a free people that will not consent to a politics of force or the dissimulation that precedes it.

 

Orwell has told us that every corrupt practice on earth begins with a successful corruption of the language, and we know that a contrarian media, a non-partisan probing and questioning media, is the best guarantor of honest politics. You cannot nip in the bud a corruption of language that will lead ineluctably to a corruption of culture and politics if those in the media watchtower have fallen asleep or, worse, have become parti pris to the corruption of political speech.

 

The Hill reported on November 12, “The House on Wednesday passed a sweeping spending package to reopen the government, setting the stage to end a marathon shutdown — the longest in U.S. history — that churned economic turmoil around the country and sparked an internal battle among Democrats over the future of the party and how best to take on President Trump… Democrats had demanded an extension of (Obamacare) subsidies as a condition of ending the shutdown. Republicans had demanded an end to the shutdown before any health care talks would begin. And the deadlock dragged on for weeks with neither side budging — a 43-day standoff that shattered the record for the longest shutdown, which occurred under Trump’s first term in 2018 and 2019, by more than a week… In the end, it was a surprise deal struck by a group of bipartisan senators last Sunday that broke the stalemate. But the compromise did nothing to address the expiring Obamacare subsidies, prompting a fierce backlash from liberal Democrats against not only the eight Democratic senators who endorsed the agreement, but also Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has been under fire from the Democrats’ base since he supported a similar Republican spending bill in March.”

 

Obamacare was from the outset a disastrous – not to mention expensive – failure. From its inception, the plan was oversold and underpriced. Because it had been underpriced – so that it might more easily be passed – the Obamacare patient was in constant need of cash transfusions. The latest price upgrade demanded by Democrats was $1.5 trillion, not pocket change.

 

Called upon to pass a clean Continuing Resolutions Bill (CRB), Democrats “filibustered” the bill we were told – for 43 days. A filibuster is a parliamentary procedure in the U.S. Senate that allows a minority of senators to delay or block a vote on proposed legislation by prolonging debate. There were no debates and no filibuster. One cannot imagine the most gifted Democrat orator in the US Senate commanding the floor by talking continuously for 43 days.

 

The Democrat bid was a classic example of government by caucus, an undemocratic attempt by congressional Democrats to subvert an open-government process that would have required an open debate in the greatest deliberative body on earth to appropriate an additional $1.5 trillion to save a dying patient. 

 

No, the shutdown of the entire US government by neo-progressive Democrats was a bid to undo a national election. Its failure was preordained and may cost at least one prominent U.S. Senator, Chuck Schumer, his position as Minority Leader in the Senate. Most commentators expect he will be challenged in a Democrat primary for reelection by some socialists with knives in their brains.  Socialist Mayor H Mamdani of New York City, the financial capital of the United States, will not be available for the position, but other fierce neo-progressives are patiently waiting in the wings.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Lamont Surprised at Suit Brought Against PURA

Marissa P. Gillett, the state's chief utility regulator, watches Gov. Ned Lamont field questions about a new approach to regulation in April 2023. Credit: MARK PAZNIOKAS / CTMIRROR.ORG Concerning a suit brought by Eversource and Avangrid, Connecticut’s energy delivery agents, against Connecticut’s Public Utility Regulatory Agency (PURA), Governor Ned Lamont surprised most of the state’s political watchers by affecting surprise.   “Look,” Lamont told a Hartford Courant reporter shortly after the suit was filed, “I think it is incredibly unhelpful,” Lamont said. “Everyone is getting mad at the umpires.   Eversource is not getting everything they want and they are bringing suit. It was a surprise to me. Nobody notified me. I think we have to do a better job of working together.”   Lamont’s claim is far less plausible than the legal claim made by Eversource and Avangrid. The contretemps between Connecticut’s energy distributors and Marissa Gillett , Gov. Ned Lamont’s ...

Maureen Dowd vs Chris Murphy

  Maureen Dowd, a longtime New York Times columnist who never has been over friendly to Donald Trump, was interviewed recently by Bill Maher, and she laid down the law, so to speak, to the Democrat Party.   In the course of a discussion with Maher on the recently released movie Snow White, “New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd declared Democrats are ‘in a coma’ while giving a blunt diagnosis of the party she argued had become off-putting to voters,” Fox News reported.   The Democrats, Dowd said, stopped "paying attention" to the long term political realignment of the working class. "Also,” she added, “they just stopped being any fun. I mean, they made everyone feel that everything they said and did, and every word was wrong, and people don't want to live like that, feeling that everything they do is wrong."   "Do you think we're over that era?" Maher asked.   “No," Dowd answered. "I think Democrats are just in a coma. Th...