Does Cheney go far enough?

     In the past weeks, several class members have made blog posts about Liz Cheney's rift and eventual ousting from Republican House leadership over her refusal to accept Trump's baseless election fraud claims. Presumably, many students also wrote "Profiles in Courage" for Cheney in the most recent assignment as the stance she has taken is undeniably one that puts morals over politics. 

    A recent opinion piece in The Washington Post questions whether or not Cheney's rift with the GOP/Trump goes far enough to have a significant impact on the party and its power. Jennifer Rubin, the author of the piece, gives a cautionary note to those applauding Cheney: "before people get carried away with the notion that she will defend democracy at all costs, note that some of her answers suggest she does not yet appreciate what is necessary to defeat Trumpism." Rubin cites Cheney's refusal to leave the GOP as the largest hinderance to her supposed goal. She writes that in order to defend democracy, Cheney must help "prevent a GOP majority so long as it is under the sway of liars and authoritarians." Further, Rubin claims as long as Cheney is apart of the Republican party, she boosts the power of those following Trump's lies. 

    Rubin also critiques Cheney's response to Republican measures to restrict voting rights. The Republican ballot measures echo the sentiments of Trump's baseless election lies, yet Cheney will not condemn them as she claims they have been "misrepresented in the media." Again, the author asks whether Cheney is doing what is most logical to achieve her supposed goal of restoring democracy. "She will need to consider the consequences of electing a GOP majority and perpetuating a voter suppression crusade that undermines democracy."

    Here is a link to the full article. I would love to hear others' thoughts on her stance. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/14/liz-cheney-doesnt-go-far-enough/

Liz Cheney Ousted From Republican Leadership

Earlier this week, Sophie wrote about the build up to the vote to oust Liz Cheney from her spot as GOP Conference Chair. As expected, Cheney was voted out of her position as the No. 3 Republican leader in the House today, May 12th. In the same conference letter that House Minority leader called for another vote on Representative Cheney's leadership position, he called for focus on the 2022 midterms and claimed "we are a big tent party." The irony of this is that the big tent doesn't allow for criticism of the lies told by former president Donald Trump. Time will tell if the Republican party not only refusing to distance from Trump, but also ousting those who do want to distance from Trump, will end up to alienating moderate and independent voters who are not part of the core Trump base. 

Cheney has a 82% conservative voting score from the Heritage Action for America, a conservative advocacy group. Representative Elise Stefanik, her expected replacement, has a session score of 56% and lifetime score of 48% from the same group. It is worth noting that Stefanik is facing criticism for not being conservative enough, and her confirmation to the position that Cheney lost has yet to be confirmed. The ousting of a member who is more conservative than her potential replacement demonstrates the hold that Trump has on the Republican party, for loyalty to Trump is now a more important factor for Republican leadership than conservative policy stances. It is also notable that the vote to remove Cheney from leadership was not recorded, likely because McCarthy wanted to protect the Republicans from being critiqued on their vote one way or the other. McCarthy voiced that he is focused on unity of the party against Biden and Democrats going into 2022, so he also likely didn't want focus on the internal division. As Cheney mentioned, this is a defining moment for the Republican party. The 2022 midterms will reveal if this strategy pays off, though as we have discussed, conservative areas are gaining House seats and the opposing party has a major advantage in midterms. So if Republicans don't win, it will be a serious rebuke by voters.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/05/12/us/liz-cheney-biden/liz-cheney-ousted-voted-out 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/10/politics/mccarthy-house-conference-letter/index.html

https://heritageaction.com/scorecard/members/C001109/116

https://heritageaction.com/scorecard/members/S001196/116

Schumer and McConnell showdown previews floor fight on Democrats’ election bill - (Melinda Ximen Blogpost)

 The following is a post from Melinda:

The majority leader and minority leader of the Senate Rules Committee sparred over Democrats’ expansive election and ethics bill. Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell each accused the other’s party of trying to weaponize voting laws to expand its political power. 

This showdown between leaders serves as a preview for the upcoming floor right as the Democrats push forward on the election bill, S. 1. The legislation is a top priority for the party, especially its progressive base. Democrats say they must act as soon as possible to rein in laws pushed by GOP-controlled state legislature that are designed to restrict access to voting.

Tuesday’s markup is expected to last for hours as Republicans are offering 100 amendments. Manchin is the only Senate Democrat to not publicly sign on as a co-sponsor of the bill.

The elections proposal passed the House  on a near-party line vote in March and died in the Senate without a vote. President Biden has repeatedly spoken in favor of the bill, calling for Congress to send it to his desk during his first joint address.

Asian American lawmakers say State’s ‘assignment restrictions’ discriminate - (Melinda Ximen Blogpost)

 The following is a blog post by Melinda:

In an article from The Hill, Representative Andy Kim (D-NJ) describes leaving his job at the State Department after experiencing discrimination based on his Korean heritage. Although he never pursued work in the region, he was informed by letter during the Obama administration that he was barred from working on any issues related to Korea. 

The State’s “assignment restriction” is a heavily criticized policy, cited as a significant barrier to efforts aimed at improving diversity at the State Department. As a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Kim engages with State Department leadership on the restriction issue and to improve the retention and promotion of underrepresented minorities. 

“I just don’t want us to think about that [culture, native fluency, ties to other countries] as a liability or as a potential threat.” - Representative Andy Kim

Governor Gavin Newsom’s New Program

California Governor Gavin Newsom has met the state’s requirement to force a recall election. This recall is a response to Newsom’s efforts to navigate the pandemic and is generally supported by White supremacists, anti-Semites, and those opposed to immigration. Several Republicans have already entered the race to challenge Newsom, including Caitlyn Jenner. The state will vote on two questions: whether they want to recall Newsom and if so, who they would like instead. Newsom is not allowed to be included on the latter list. Currently, his approval rating is safely above 50%, though 4 out of 10 voters said they would recall Newsom. 

Today, Newsom proposed a new program within his $100 billion “California Comeback Plan”. This original plan included provisions from direct relief to reinvestment in public infrastructure and is intended to help Californians bounce back fully from the pandemic. This new program aims to pull from the $75.7 billion in surplus and use $12 billion on a year-over-year rebate. The passage of this plan would send $600 stimulus checks to those earning less than $75,000 and will benefit two out of every three residents. This plan would generate good publicity for Newsom in the face of this recall election, which is needed as more opponents join the race. 

https://www.ppic.org/press-release/four-in-ten-support-newsom-recall-job-approval-holds-steady/ 

House Republicans v. Liz Cheney

Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney is currently under intense fire as the House Republican Conference hopes to replace her as conference chair this Wednesday. She was elected around three years ago, with the support of Republican leadership. Her story from star to pariah is one that deserves attention, especially as our nation grapples with the “post-Trump” era politics. 

Cheney has worked in politics for decades, whether that is serving in GOP positions or hosting on Fox News. She worked at the Department of State and soon assumed the third highest position in the House Republican leadership in 2018. Cheney voted with President Trump 92.9% of the time and has demonstrated serious commitment to the Republican Party. However, she became one of 10 Republicans who voted to impeach Trump after the January 6th Capitol attacks. She has publicly said that “none of this would have happened without the president”. 

The House Republican Conference held a secret ballot to determine whether they could remove Cheney as chair; however, the vote failed. Soon thereafter, the Wyoming Republican Party censured Cheney and called for her immediate resignation. They said they would no longer provide future political funding and to return GOP donations from previous elections. In response, Cheney stood by her vote and said her “vote to impeach was compelled by the oath I swore to the Constitution. Wyoming citizens know that this oath does not bend or yield to politics or partisanship”. On May 4th, House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy said Republicans are worried about Cheney’s ability to “carry out the message”. 

The Republican House members are now awaiting a vote to replace Cheney with Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York. She has demonstrated a more moderate voting record but has been outwardly and fully supportive of Trump. McCarthy stated that the reason behind this vote is because the Republican Party needs to focus on regaining the majority in 2022, instead of a single member. This vote highlights the issue of the Republican Party grappling with and without Trump in power and is definitely an event to watch. 

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/liz-cheney/ 

The Covid Vaccine, why the vaccination is so politically divided, and how to persuade skeptical Republicans

In a recent CNN poll about 44% of Republicans reported that they were not planning on getting a coronavirus, compared to a much smaller portion of Democrats. This trend is in keeping with what many other polls have found, with a Pew Research poll in late March finding that 83% of Democrats and 56% of Republicans plan on getting a Coronavirus Vaccination. What is particularly concerning is the 27 point gap in support for the coronavirus vaccinations between the two parties. Prior to the coronavirus, the anti-vaccination movement was not nearly as political as it was prior to the coronavirus. 

The anti-vaccination movement was not predominantly partisan, and instead had a large crossover with the alternative medicine movement. The alternative medicine is skeptical of pharmaceuticals, doctors, and the mainstream healthcare system. Part of the reason for this is that the healthcare system is harsh, impersonal, and expensive. The relationship between the doctor and the patient has been devalued as treatment got more specialized and the healthcare system became more efficient and industrialized. On the other hand, alternative medicine emphasizes the relationship between the practitioner and the patient, has well lit waiting rooms, relaxing and low stress environments, and makes the patient feel cared for as a person. Alternative medicine also offers promises of spiritual growth and a single treatment that will solve all of your problems. I have some experience in this area myself, as my mom believes in alternative medicine herself, and has sent me to different alternative treatments in many cases. Thankfully she is a good mother and did not see it as a replacement for my regular doctor, and used it as a means of treating the whole person that she feels gets neglected by the medical system. What appeals to many like my mother is that alternative medicine makes her feel cared for, valued, safe and secure. The treatments that they prescribe are digestible and understandable to her. She generally feels that things that are natural are good and it is always better to use something natural when it is an option. My mom also was not and has never been anti-vaccine, but she legitimately was concerned regarding there effects when I was young. 

During the coronavirus, a large political divide arose regarding wether the coronavirus was real, wether or not it had high death rates, wether or not masks were effective, and wether or not the vaccines can be trusted. The politicization of the coronavirus, no matter the cause, has become a major factor in why many Republicans who receive a flu shot and generally trust their doctors have expressed that they will not be getting vaccinated. The mismanagement and the politicization of of medical experts such as Dr. Fauci, the controversy over mask wearing, the spread of misinformation regarding the virus, and the controversy regarding lockdown measures have all contributed to creating an environment in which many previously pro-vaccine Republicans are skeptical of coronavirus vaccinations. 

Frank Luntz, a long time Republican strategist who is probably the most important name in understanding effective effective Republican messaging conducted a series of focus groups in order to try and determine how to persuade Republicans to receive the coronavirus vaccine. He invited a variety of different speakers such as House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, Chris Christi, and a doctors who are politically conservative. Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy's calls that the vaccine was part of one's civic duty and represented a great political victory for Republicans that they should applaud were not effective. Instead, Chris Christi's personal stories about the coronavirus in his family struck deeply with many of the focus group members. Most important was the medical professionals who were explicitly non-partisan, mentioning that 95% of physicians plan to get the coronavirus vaccine. Members were asked who they most trusted regarding the coronavirus vaccine, with the list including the WHO, the CDC, Anthony Fauci, Donald Trump, and their own doctor. The panelists overwhelmingly said they would listen to their own doctor. While medicine will always be political, and it is impossible to separate the coronavirus response from politics, the focus groups clearly demonstrate that the messaging on vaccinations has to change for the good of the country. Instead of emphasizing what the CDC says, or what Anthony Fauci says, or what nationally recognized health experts, or even prominent Republicans say regarding the coronavirus vaccination, messaging needs to center around the medical professionals in people's personal lives who they trust. If the goal is for people to vaccinate as many people as possible, listen to, understand, and empathize with those who are skeptical, and try not to encourage vaccinations by debating politics. Instead, encourage people to have a conversation with their own doctor who they trust and respect.\

Link to the interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDW8c0cVd20&t=3s

Link to the focus group: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFVlLQduBF8&t=7s