1. Trust The Plan, Q
On Thurs. 14 Jan. right before B*iden’s Inauguration and due to foreign interference in the 2020 Presidential Election, Trump instigated the Insurgency Act, declared Martial Law and deferred his power to the US Military. Since then the US has been...
More from 🇺🇸I Support Our Military & Law Enforcement🇺🇸
More from Biden
Biden clearly should not do #1. The problem with #2 is that reconciliation delays the inevitable and creates a tiered system where issues that happen to be ineligible - like civil rights and democracy reform - are relegated to second-class status and left to die by filibuster.
This👇is the danger. By using reconciliation you’re conceding the point that major legislation deserves to pass by majority vote, but only certain kinds for arbitrary reasons. Plus the process itself is opaque and ugly. You risk laying a logistical & political trap for yourself.
All the “here’s what you can do through reconciliation” takes are correct but also look through the wrong end of the telescope. Any of the items mentioned, or a small number of them, would be relatively easy. But putting them all together in one leadership-driven mega package...
... with no committee involvement and no real oversight, enduring tough press for jamming a massive package through a close process and stories about lobbyist giveaways while dodging the adverse parliamentary rulings that are virtually inevitable and still maintaining 50 votes...
It’s possible! Maybe the mega-ness of the package ends up helping hold 50 votes. But the ugliness of the process is being underpriced. And to what end? You’re just delaying the inevitable since you can’t use it for civil rights nor can you allow civil rights to die by filibuster.
Biden will have two options:
— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) January 23, 2021
1. Cut the price tag sharply to court GOP support.
2. Use reconciliation to do what he can with 50 votes\u2014some stuff has to go, like $15 wage.
(A 3rd option is nuke the filibuster but @PressSec says he doesn\u2019t favor that.)https://t.co/AV49BcmDaI
This👇is the danger. By using reconciliation you’re conceding the point that major legislation deserves to pass by majority vote, but only certain kinds for arbitrary reasons. Plus the process itself is opaque and ugly. You risk laying a logistical & political trap for yourself.
Obvious answer is 2b where you tie yourself in knots trying to go nuclear lite and totally lose the plot in the process
— Liam Donovan (@LPDonovan) January 23, 2021
All the “here’s what you can do through reconciliation” takes are correct but also look through the wrong end of the telescope. Any of the items mentioned, or a small number of them, would be relatively easy. But putting them all together in one leadership-driven mega package...
... with no committee involvement and no real oversight, enduring tough press for jamming a massive package through a close process and stories about lobbyist giveaways while dodging the adverse parliamentary rulings that are virtually inevitable and still maintaining 50 votes...
It’s possible! Maybe the mega-ness of the package ends up helping hold 50 votes. But the ugliness of the process is being underpriced. And to what end? You’re just delaying the inevitable since you can’t use it for civil rights nor can you allow civil rights to die by filibuster.
1. Ben Rhodes’s comment dismissing the concerns of former political prisoners and US hostages in Iran regarding Rob Malley’s potential appointment as Iran envoy is deeply unprofessional and offensive. As my own story illustrates, not everything is about partisan DC politics.
2. In 2016 I was a Princeton graduate student who excitedly supported the JCPOA and the new era of Iran-US diplomacy it was meant to usher. Such was my optimism that I actually went to Iran for dissertation research. That’s when my nightmare began.
3. I was arrested by Iranian security forces and held hostage in Evin prison-away from my wife and infant son-for more than 3 years. The regime knew I was innocent and told me so. It took me 40 months in Evin to comprehend what had happened to me.
4. As a political prisoner I’ve likely had more intensive contact with Iranian hardliners than most Iran watchers in the US, especially US govt officials like Mr. Rhodes and Malley. I believe the insights derived from that experience have a unique value.
5. I support strengthening the nuclear deal, but am convinced the JCPOA of 2015 is well-intended yet inadequate. Simply lifting pressure against Iran and allowing it to benefit from economic integration produced NO further incentive for the regime to change its behavior.
I think Joe Biden should pick his Iran envoy, not Tom Cotton and a bunch of cheerleaders for MBS and American authoritarianism. Elections have consequences.
— Ben Rhodes (@brhodes) January 22, 2021
2. In 2016 I was a Princeton graduate student who excitedly supported the JCPOA and the new era of Iran-US diplomacy it was meant to usher. Such was my optimism that I actually went to Iran for dissertation research. That’s when my nightmare began.
3. I was arrested by Iranian security forces and held hostage in Evin prison-away from my wife and infant son-for more than 3 years. The regime knew I was innocent and told me so. It took me 40 months in Evin to comprehend what had happened to me.
4. As a political prisoner I’ve likely had more intensive contact with Iranian hardliners than most Iran watchers in the US, especially US govt officials like Mr. Rhodes and Malley. I believe the insights derived from that experience have a unique value.
5. I support strengthening the nuclear deal, but am convinced the JCPOA of 2015 is well-intended yet inadequate. Simply lifting pressure against Iran and allowing it to benefit from economic integration produced NO further incentive for the regime to change its behavior.
You May Also Like
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
