Here's How You Can Help Build Our Green Coalition

Blue America is working with our allies in Congress' Sustainable Energy And Environment Coalition Caucus [SEEC PAC], including old friends we've helped get elected and reelected like Matt Cartwright, Ted Lieu, Pramila Jayapal, Bonnie Watson-Coleman, Alan Lowenthal, Judy Chu, Ilhan Omar, Jim Himes, Barbara Lee, Earl Blumenauer, Steve Cohen, Raul Grijalva, Jerry McNerney, Nanette Barragan and Katie Porter.

Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), chair of Congress' Natural Resources Committee, told us yesterday that "Within the halls of Congress, no group is working harder than the SEEC Caucus to advance clean energy, climate change solutions, and environmental justice while protecting our air, water, wildlife, and public lands from the Trump administration." He further pointed out that "This work is powered by a grassroots network of people pitching in what they can to support this critical work." Blue America and SEEC PAC have teamed up to raise some last minute campaign contributions for candidates both our groups have endorsed:

• Nate McMurray (NY)
• Beth Doglio (WA)
• Marie Newman (IL)
• Julie Oliver (TX)
• Mike Siegel (TX)
• Kathy Ellis (MO)
• Audrey Denney (CA)
• Cathy Kunkel (WV)
• Jon Hoadley (MI)
• Kara Eastman (NE)
• Georgette Gomez (CA)
• Dana Balter (NY)

Let's face it, our planet is at stake in November. If we are going to build a better future for this generation and the next, there is no time to waste.

That's why SEEC PAC and Blue America have endorsed an incredible slate of leaders who will act on this issue. We can't give even an inch. It's essential that we expand our green coalition in the House and continue to push Congress to take up clean energy, climate resiliency, and environmental protections.

These green leaders can become Members of Congress-- with your help. Will you maximize your donation by contributing to these dually-endorsed candidates today?

The Trump administration spent four years taking a wrecking ball to environmental regulations. They hired oil and gas lobbyists and climate deniers to lead the federal agencies tasked with protecting our air, water, and public lands. They ignored the science while wildfires destroyed communities and hurricanes slammed our coasts.

It is going to take work to repair the damage of Donald Trump. We have to rebuild protections for our environment and ensure climate mitigation is a part of those conversations. We have to reinforce the government processes that allow us to protect the American people from reckless pollution and disregard of science and fact.

Climate change and environmental protection have been among the most important items Beth Doglio has attended to as a member of the Washington state legislature. As a congressional candidate, she told us that she's "So proud to have the endorsement of SEEC. My Govenor-- Jay Inslee- founded SEEC when he served in Congress. As a State Representative, I worked with  Governor Inslee to pass landmark policies addressing environmental issues in Washington. We passed a suite of climate policies moving our state to 100% clean electricity, making our existing commercial buildings more efficient and building our mass transit and vehicle/ferry electrification systems. We are on track to meet our greenhouse emission reduction goals in statute. I can't wait to work with SEEC membership to pass bold transformational policies that make the visionary Green New Deal our future."

Progressive Democrat Kathy Ellis told us this morning that she's "running for Congress in a largely rural, 30-county district in Missouri that's been decimated by climate change and deregulation. Our local economy is almost entirely based on the environment, whether it’s through farming, hospitality, or our incredible state parks and riverways. And yet, over the last ten years, we’ve seen the damage that a climate-denier congressman can have: our farmers have struggled greatly because of intense flooding on their farms, our local economy has suffered as a result, and deregulation has caused great pollution of our beautiful waterways-- all while Jason Smith votes against every bill that would tackle these problems. Having the support of SEEC means a great deal to me, as a pro-environment and pro-science candidate. Missouri’s 8th District deserves-- and desperately needs-- a representative who is ready to fight each and every day for legislation that will protect our environment, create jobs, and tackle some of the root causes of climate change. I’m ready to be that person, and I’m honored to have SEEC in this fight with me."

Syracuse area progressive Dana Balter was endorsed early on by both Blue America and the SEEC Caucus. She's a big fan of the fact that the Caucus "s leading the fight in Congress on bold, smart, and strategic clean energy policies. They've also played a critical role in opposing and highlighting the dangers of anti-environmental actions taken by the Trump administration. Rebuilding our economy from the fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic gives us the opportunity to make a significant investment in clean energy jobs-- and the SEEC Caucus is working to make that a reality. Their leadership is invaluable, and I am deeply honored to have their support in this race."

It's going to take a strong green coalition in the House fighting every day to pass comprehensive climate legislation and hold Congress to account as climate change knocks at our door.

That's why SEEC PAC and Blue America endorsed green leaders running in close House races around the country. They're ready to act on climate on Day 1-- but first, they need your help to win their races!

Split a donation between SEEC PAC/Blue America endorsed candidates today to give these candidates a boost with less than 3 weeks before Election Day.

Mike Siegel just added something I want to share: ""I'm honored to have the support of SEEC and Blue America as we build a broad national coalition to combat climate change and build the renewable economy we need. As a Democrat running for Congress in the heart of Texas, I know how important it is that we take bold, courageous steps to address climate change and environmental degradation, even when those steps require difficult conversations with workers and businesses that depend on fossil fuel revenue. The Texas 10th Congressional District is already suffering from the impact of our fossil fuel economy. We have a coal plant in Fayette County that has been polluting the air and water for 40 years; we have widespread fracking operations that release chemicals into our groundwater and methane into our air; we have a Houston region that has suffered five 500-year flood events in five years; and we have Bastrop county, which was devastated by a massive wildfire nine years ago. These natural and unnatural disasters can all be traced to fossil fuel emissions. Even though Texas is built on a fossil fuel economy, we can't put our heads in the sand and pretend that change is not needed. I'm running for Congress to build an unparalleled coalition of unions, environmentalists, ranchers and farmers, progressives and activists of all types, to fight climate change, to create jobs in a renewable economy, and to address the legacy of pollution and environmental injustice. Thank you, SEEC and Blue America for your belief and support, and I look forward to joining with you in the days, months and years ahead, for the good of our planet, and for the good of our nation."

Reforming Government-- Raúl Grijalva Wants To-- Pelosi And Her Team Want To Pretend They Do Too... But They Don't

 

McConnell's never going to allow the Senate to debate it and even if he did and it passed, Trump would never sign it. But that didn't stop Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) from introducing new legislation to end the common practice of hiring lobbyists in a revolving door scheme that swampifies the executive branch-- and it's not just something corrupt Republican do. Corrupt Democrats do it too. Last week, writing for the American Prospect, David Dayen showed how Grijalva is forcing corporate conservative Democrats from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party "to take a stand on whether they will hold a potential Joe Biden administration to at least the same anti-corruption standard that Barack Obama held for himself as president."

Grijalva's new bill would "deny confirmation of any nominee to an executive branch position who is currently or has been a lobbyist for any corporate client or officer for a private corporation, in this or any future administration. That would include all Cabinet officials, and any of the roughly 1,200 Senate-confirmed positions throughout the federal government. The letter, endorsed by Demand Progress, the American Economic Liberties Project, the Revolving Door Project, and the Sunrise Movement, represents a baseline request for personnel in the next administration. Groups had proposed something similar to this for months, but not this sweeping a ban, and not with the full-throated support of a House committee chair."

The Grijalva rule is a stronger version of President Obama’s lobbyist ban. Under Obama, any registered lobbyist was barred from government service in the issue area where they lobbied until they had been unregistered for two years. On the way out, these officials couldn’t lobby the government for the remainder of the administration. Obama’s rule was a little leaky, as it didn’t apply to unregistered, de facto lobbyists who were obviously engaged in influence-peddling, lobbyists registered outside the two-year ban, or lobbyists hired for a government job outside their lobbying area.

It’s been long forgotten and is now somewhat risible, but Donald Trump also has a lobbying order in place, which replaced his predecessor’s. The Trump rule allows lobbyists into the government as long as they recuse themselves from anything they lobbied on for two years. It also allegedly bans former executive branch members from lobbying the government for five years, though it only applies to the agency where they worked.

According to one count, 281 lobbyists had worked in the Trump administration as of last October, including the secretaries of defense, interior, energy, labor, and homeland security, along with Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Andrew Wheeler. In addition, several former Trump officials found a way around the modest post-government lobbying ban.

The Grijalva rule tightens the Trump and even the Obama standard significantly. Not only is there no safe-harbor period for former lobbyists-- they’re out of government no matter how long ago they lobbied-- but the rule includes all officers of private corporations, of which there have been many in the past two administrations.

...Biden hasn’t committed even to restoring the weaker Obama-era order on lobbying, despite promising a kind of Obama restoration throughout his campaign. Numerous business types have been pitched for top slots in a Biden administration, and his transition team includes former Apple lobbyist Cynthia Hogan, Facebook director Jessica Hertz, and Jeffrey Zients, former Facebook board member and president of Cranemere, a conglomerate that buys and sells businesses. TIAA-CREF CEO Roger Ferguson and co-CEOs of Ariel Investments John Rogers and Mellody Hobson have also been mentioned as potential Cabinet-level officials.

Yesterday Grijalva told me that "No democracy can survive if it has one set of rules for the public and another for insiders. Americans have seen decades of special corporate favors and billion-dollar giveaways, and they won’t accept that as the natural state of things any longer. If we’re going to restore faith in our government, we have to end the revolving door, not just reverse it, and we have to end corporate government once and for all." We need to ask ourselves what the leaders of both parties find unacceptable about that premise-- and why they are so doggedly in favor of the status quo. 

Wednesday, the Washington Post ran a Pelosi-generated piece on House Democrats' unveiling "a sweeping package of reforms... designed to strengthen Congress’s ability to check the executive branch and prevent abuses of power, especially by the president." No mention of Grijalva or his proposal-- just more bullshit from Pelosi and her disgustingly GOP-like, corrupt leadership team. "The package," wrote Karoun Demirjian, "which its architects have informally referred to as “post-Trump reforms,” includes measures to restrain the president’s power to grant pardons and declare national emergencies, to prevent federal officials from enriching themselves, and to accelerate the process of enforcing congressional subpoenas in court. It also includes provisions to protect inspectors general and whistleblowers, increase penalties for officials who subvert congressional appropriations or engage in overt political activity, and safeguard against foreign election interference. Taken together, the proposals represent the Democrats’ long-awaited attempt to correct what they have identified as systematic deficiencies during the course of President Trump’s tenure and impeachment, in the style of changes Congress adopted after Richard Nixon left office. Unlike the post-Watergate reforms, however, which took years to enact, today’s House Democrats have collected their proposed changes under one bill reflecting several measures that have been percolating piecemeal through the House."

It's all about Trump and doesn't touch any of the systemic corruption that has made DC one of the swampiest cities on the planet. Pelosi and Hoyer should have learned a lesson from all the millions of Americans who voted for Trump in 2016. They're incapable of learning any such lesson.

Shahid Buttar is the San Francisco reformer running for Pelosi's seat in November; there's no progressive, just a contest between a corrupt garden variety Democrat and a real fighting progressive. Today, Buttar told me that "Unfortunately, Democrats have followed the Republican playbook in Washington for years. The bipartisan revolving door between K St. and Capitol Hill is the dirty secret of Washington-- and a big part of the reason why our government has grown so unresponsive to the needs of voters struggling to endure the compounding crises of our times."

He said he's "running to replace the leading corporate Democrat in part to help the party grow more responsive to grassroots concerns, and to help make our government more responsive to We the People. I’d be eager to support Rep. Grijalva’s bill in Congress, and to promote other checks and balances to limit and counteract corporate influence peddling in Washington."

Demirjian continued that "In a joint statement, seven committee chairs [though not Grijalva] signaled their legislation is intended to 'prevent future presidential abuses, restore our checks and balances, strengthen accountability and transparency, and protect our elections. It is time for Congress to strengthen the bedrock of our democracy and ensure our laws are strong enough to withstand a lawless president,' the statement says. 'These reforms are necessary not only because of the abuses of this president, but because the foundation of our democracy is the rule of law and that foundation is deeply at risk.' All good stuff... except for the steaming pile of hypocrisy sitting in the middle of the room in plain view.

Nate McMurray is the progressive Democrat in western New York taking on the newest slimy little Trumpist in Congress, hereditary multimillionaire Chris Jacobs, a complete knee-jerk kind of politician. Nate, in contrast, is an independent-minded leader who told me yesterday that "The Democratic leadership is not really well connected to working people and communities. And it really shows-- Democrats lost a lot of ground over the years at the state and local level. But the situation is fixable. The grassroots of the Democratic party has bold initiatives that excite and inspire voters to get involved, and the Democratic Leadership would do well to really listen."

Liam O'Mara is running for a southern California seat occupied by one of the most overtly corrupt members of Congress, Crooked Ken Calvert. When Fox News was looking for a corrupt slimebag to use as an example of DC corruption, they did a Mike Wallace special on Calvert's corruption. This morning Liam told me to call him old-fashioned or "an idealist; call me whatever you like-- but I believe that a government of the people, by the people, and for the people ought to serve only the people-- not corporations and wealthy special interests. Our elections need to be publicaly funded, and all lobbying, in the sense of contributions, needs to end." The topic boils his blood. He continued:

Lobbying used to mean catching someone in the lobby and pressing your case-- that's it! And advocates for bills make perfect sense to me. But when someone can come at you flush with cash from a corporation and say, please vote for things we like, and here's a million bucks to keep your job... that shit needs to be illegal. Now. Right fucking now.

We have hundreds of congresscritters taking vast amounts of cash for their campaigns, and that should be understood as bribery, plain and simple. A bribe is something offered in exchange for a decision in your favour. What else can we call it when someone takes a corporation's money, then votes to advance that same corporation's interests? It's a damned bribe!

I don't care which party you call home-- if you take a big wad of cash from someone and then push their legislative agenda, you are violating your oath to serve the people and the Constitution of this country. It's way past time for some changes. We need to apply the laws properly against bribery, pass a total ban on cash lobbying, introduce publicaly-funded elections, and, as the president disingenuously put it, drain the swamp!

 

Oh, Boy Another Brooks Brothers Riot!

A gang of Republican thugs that varied in number between between 6 and 20 and led by clownish Floridian Matt Gaetz, staged a noisy disruptive sit-in in the secure hearing room (SCIF-- Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility), refusing to allow a scheduled deposition in the impeachment investigation-- which have been devastating for their Regime-- to continue. They breached House rules by bringing their phones into the secure area and Gaetz, who is an obese alcoholic with a long police record to start with, ordered pizzas and coke and is daring Democrats to have him arrested and carted out of the room. It was like a meeting of the Freedom Caucus featuring all the Trumpist nuts, like Mark Meadows (NC), Steve Scalise (LA), Andy Biggs (AZ), Mark Walker (NC) Louie Gohmert (TX), Steve King (IA) and Gym Jordan (OH). As Ted Lieu pointed out, "When you don't have the law or the facts you attack and disrupt the process. And you may wonder why is it happening now? Because Bill Taylor gave a devastating opening statement yesterday. They're freaked out. They're trying to stop this investigation." Jim Himes (D-CT), one of the top members of the Intelligence Committee, told me "It was kind or absurd. Especially since they disrupted the many Republicans who were in the deposition along with Republican counsel. It’s all just a ploy to avoid focus on the President’s abuses of power." Matt Cartwright (D-PA) didn't want to discuss it at all. He told me that "it's a sophomoric distraction to take attention away from the devastating Taylor testimony" and warned me that if I "write a post about it, it’s a victory for Gaetz." (Come on, that photo of Gaetz, day dreaming about AOC, up top is a victory?)

Former Democratic congressman Alan Grayson from Orlando noted that "A lot of Republicans support Donald Trump even though Trump is a putz. Gaetz supports Trump because he’s a putz. (And I leave it up to you to decide to whom “he” refers in that sentence.)" Jamie Raskin (D-MD) told me that "The Gucci rioters were just trying to distract America from Ambassador Bill Taylor’s devastating testimony yesterday. With no substantive answer to the overwhelming evidence of the Ukraine shakedown, the GOP is now left with pathetic stunts that violate the rules of the House and make a mockery of the honorable pantheon of real civil disobedience heroes. This was the only sit-in protest in American history designed to cover up presidential high crimes and misdemeanors and aid foreign despots. When I saw a bunch of GOP members chortling over pepperoni pizza about their heroic obstruction of the work of Congress, I realized Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King would be turning over in their graves. What a fraud!" The details of Bill Taylor's testimony was deadly for the Trumpists since it entirely blew apart their absurd "no quid pro quo" argument. They don't want two days in a row of that kind of talk, so they refused to allow deputy assistant secretary of defense Laura Cooper to testify.

Over half of the Republican freaks who made a big show of barging in and acting like barnyard animals are actually members of the Oversight or Foreign Affairs committees, which means if they haven't been at the depositions it's because they were busy doing something else-- like calling campaign contributors-- or too lazy. They're certainly all entitled to be at all the depositions. The hissy fit was just staged to make Trump feel like he has some support in the House.

Saleha Mohsin, Jennifer Jacobs and Josh Wingrove reported on the GOP fit for Bloomberg by pointing out that Trump had advance knowledge and supported the stunt. They wrote that "During a nearly two-hour meeting, which focused mostly on the impeachment inquiry, lawmakers shared their plans to storm into the secure room… Trump supported the action, saying he wanted the transcripts released because they will exonerate him." As you know, the transcripts are far more likely to send Trump to prison than to exonerate him.

House Republicans send out their best to protest impeachment-- Louie and Matt

I got this on background from an Intelligence Committee official:

After Tuesday’s devastating testimony by Ambassador Taylor, over two dozen House Republican Members sought to prevent another witness from cooperating by forcing their way into the Intelligence Committee spaces in violation of house deposition rules. The stunt, in service of the President’s demand that they 'fight harder' to obstruct a legitimate impeachment inquiry, has meant that the witness has had to wait for hours for them to leave. They engage in this circus-like behavior because they can’t defend the President’s egregious misconduct. The House Parliamentarian has ruled that these members are in violation of House deposition rules.

And in a major security breach, these Republican Members brought their electronics into the secure facility (SCIF). Although several members later removed their devices, after being advised by the Sergeant at Arms and security personnel that there were members still in possession of electronic devices, some Republican members refused to completely remove them.

It is worth remembering this Gowdy quote during Benghazi: "[Issa] is not a [Benghazi] committee member and non-committee members are not allowed in the room during the deposition. Those are the rules and we have to follow them, no exceptions made."

Meanwhile, the chairs of the three committees heading the Ukraine aspect of the impeachment-- Adam Schiff (Intelligence Committee), Eliot Engel (Foreign Affairs Committee) and Carolyn Maloney (acting chair of Oversight Committee) sent this letter to the Trumpist Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan.

As part of the House of Representatives’ ongoing impeachment inquiry, our Committees have now obtained detailed information identifying specific documents in the possession, custody, or control of the Department of State that are directly and highly relevant to the inquiry.

These documents include information central to the inquiry’s core area of investigation: the President’s efforts to press Ukraine to initiate investigations that would benefit his personal and political interests, and not the national interest.  These records include, but are not limited to:

• Written readouts and write-ups of meetings and conversations that document activity and conduct under investigation by the Committees;
• Email correspondence that pertains directly to matters under investigation that occurred both before and after President Trump’s July 25, 2019, call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky;
• Diplomatic cables that relate, among other issues, to the President’s decision to withhold vital military aid to Ukraine and document interactions with Ukrainian officials about matters under investigation;
• Text messages and electronic communications, including from personal devices, from witnesses in the inquiry; and
• Memoranda to file drafted by Department officials, including memoranda that document efforts to press Ukraine to initiate politically-motivated investigations to benefit President Trump and that raise concerns about false representations by the Department to the Committees and that document efforts to intimidate or silence employees.

“The Committees consider the refusal to comply with a duly authorized congressional subpoena as obstruction of the lawful functions of Congress and of the impeachment inquiry. Because the Committees have gathered evidence about the direct relevance of these documents, including highly significant information contained in these materials that pertain to allegations that the President abused the power of his office for personal political benefit, the Committees may draw the inference that their nonproduction indicates that these documents support the allegations against the President and others.

Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) reminded us today that "Trump abused his power and threatened our national security when he attempted to extort Ukraine into investigating a political rival. Instead of upholding their oath to defend the Constitution, House Republicans have decided to defend the President. They complain about the process, but remain silent on the President’s crimes. This is a shameful abdication of responsibility, and a historical embarrassment to our country."

Early this morning, the White House officially responded to yesterday's childish and ineffectual Republican Party tantrum and pizza party on Capitol Hill:

Who Needs The Grand Canyon? Trump Ready To Fill It In-- Turn It Into A Mining Site... Build Condos, Hotels And A Golf Course Or Two

It looks like next week there's going to be a vote in Congress on whether or not our children and grandchildren will still have the Grand Canyon. A couple of months ago the House Natural Resources Committee approved bills by its chairman, Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) to protect the country's most iconic natural wonder from Trump and his uranium mining special interests. H.R.1373-- the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act has 122 co-sponsors, although none of them are Republicans. Grijalva's vice-chair on the committee, Deb Haaland (D-NM) explained her support for the bill: "After the extractive industries mine away our natural resources, they should clean up their mess. But uranium mining has had a toxic impact across the southwest, leaving behind thousands of abandoned mine sites on the Navajo Nation leaving taxpayers on the hook for cleanup. Just yesterday I met with several Navajo members who lost family members to the toxic effects of uranium mining and who themselves are suffering with resulting health problems. We cannot allow people to suffer from these preventable impacts simply to do the bidding of the mining industry, and Chairman Grijalva’s bill will protect the Grand Canyon ecosystem and the people who call it home."

Sandy Bahr, director of Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon Chapter, added "Sierra Club is thrilled to see bills move forward that not only protect the Grand Canyon, but other places as well by removing uranium from the critical minerals list. These are important steps to permanently protect the public lands surrounding the Grand Canyon from uranium mining pollution. Preventing more toxic pollution and cleaning up existing contamination on public, Navajo, Havasupai, and Hopi lands, must be a top priority. We hope Senator Sinema will now show leadership and introduce the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act in the Senate to establish a legacy of safeguarding Grand Canyon." Brad Powell, president of the Arizona Wildlife Federation added that "A permanent mineral withdrawal around the Grand Canyon is simply the right thing to do. The Grand Canyon is one of the great natural wonders of the world. The lands around it must be protected from the known threats of uranium mining so that future generations will be able to continue to hike, raft, hunt and fish in the area."

The bill, if passed by both houses of Congress and signed by Trump, would protect an area of approximately 1 million acres north and south of Grand Canyon National Park from new mineral extraction activities.

Grijalva's related bill, H.R. 3405-- Removing Uranium From the Critical Minerals List Act-- is also garnering widespread support. Taken together, the bills represent a concerted effort to end the mining industry’s push for special treatment from the federal government. Amber Reimondo, energy program director at the Grand Canyon Trust told the media that "Nuclear experts say that the U.S. is at no risk of a uranium supply shortage and the majority of Arizona voters, Republicans, Independents, and Democrats, agree that the Grand Canyon region is no place for obtaining uranium. It's time to reject the unwarranted environmental shortcuts uranium is set to receive as a 'critical' mineral, remove uranium from the critical minerals list, and permanently protect the Grand Canyon from the inherent threats of uranium extraction."

Randi Spivak, public lands program director at the Center for Biological Diversity explained that Grijalva's bill "protects one of the most famous landmarks in the world. It’s a wonderful gift to all Americans now and in the future. Years from now people will look back and wonder why it was even controversial. For seven decades this region has been afflicted by dangerous uranium pollution. It’s well past time to ensure the life-giving waters and springs of the grandest canyon on Earth will be permanently protected from toxic mining. We applaud Congressman Grijalva and tribal leaders for their years of leadership protecting the Grand Canyon region."

Arizona progressive congressional candidate Eva Putzova told me she "supports the bills introduced by Rep Grijalva to protect the areas surrounding the Grand Canyon from Uranium mining and to remove Uranium from the Critical Minerals List Act. For generations, native people, and their natural environment  have been poisoned by uranium mining and its disastrous aftereffects. In a sense it has been a continuation of genocidal policies against them. The Grand Canyon must be protected from the greed of the billionaires and their Republican enablers who could care less about the beauty of the Grand Canyon or the lives of those who have lived there and nearby for thousands of years."

I Re-Editted Yesterday's Politico Hit Piece On Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez So It Makes More Sense

For politics junkies, yesterday started with a pre-dawn Rachael Bade/Heather Caygle click magnetic piece at Politico, Exasperated Democrats try to rein in Ocasio-Cortez. One of my former jobs was editor of Alternative Rock, one of America's first punk zines. I was also the west coast editor of Country Music Magazine at one point. So I decided to re-edit the Politico piece for them-- really for my own amusement... but, hey; it's Saturday! Let me begin, though, with a couple of questions and a comment Ro Khanna gave me: "What happened to the classical liberals-- those who believe in JS Mill? Shouldn’t we in Congress welcome a diversity of viewpoints and dissent? The more ideas we have to debate, even including outliers, will help refine the thinking of the body and force us to examine conventional assumptions. I am grateful that we have folks like an Ocasio, Amash, or Massie willing to speak their mind, even when I disagree with them." Former Florida Congressman Alan Grayson (like Ocasio-Cortez, born in the Bronx)-- another progressive with a mind too independent for status quo corporate Dems-- told me yesterday after reading the Politico piece that "The critics are just jealous of her popularity and success. As she said, 'don’t hate me because you ain’t me.'"

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is already making enemies in the House Democratic Caucus-- and some of its members are mounting an operation to bring the anti-establishment, democratic socialist with 2.2 million Twitter followers into the fold.

Petrified servants of the status quo within the House Democratic Caucus are continuing their desperate efforts to force Congress' most popular member-- Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez-- to OBEY! Beltway status quo publications like our own will continue to back the effort.

The effort, described by nearly 20 lawmakers and aides, is part carrot, part stick: Some lawmakers with ties to Ocasio-Cortez are hoping to coax her into using her star power to unite Democrats and turn her fire on Republicans. Others simultaneously warn Ocasio-Cortez is destined for a lonely, ineffectual career in Congress if she continues to treat her own party as the enemy.

Gossip we picked up indicates that Democratic members who are jealous that she dances better than they do or who don't understand what she's accomplishing by working at a grassroots level in transforming the meaning of a turgid, defensive Pelosi-Hoyer party into something that has moved past the 1980s, indicates that they are trying every trick in the book to just get her to sell out and buy into the hive mind that dominates Capitol Hill-- or else!

“I’m sure Ms. Cortez means well, but there’s almost an outstanding rule: Don’t attack your own people,” said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.). “We just don’t need sniping in our Democratic Caucus.”

“I’m sure Ms. Cortez means well, but there’s almost an outstanding rule: Don’t attack your own people,” said 74 year old, tired Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO), a corporate Democratic sell-out with a shameful "C" ranking from ProgressivePunch in a deep blue (D+7) Kansas City, Missouri district. It's worth noting that Rep. Cleaver, once something of a fiery progressive himself (long ago), joined the House Financial Services Committee and has taken $1,810,524 from the Financial Sector while helping to oversee the industries that underwrite his comfy career. Oddly, this isn't illegal and he isn't in prison, although that could change if Ocasio-Cortez has anything to say about it. “We just don’t need sniping in our Democratic Caucus.”

Incumbent Democrats are most annoyed by Ocasio-Cortez’s threat to back primary opponents against members of their ranks she deems too moderate. But their frustration goes beyond that: Democratic leaders are upset that she railed against their new set of House rules on Twitter the first week of the new Congress. Rank and file are peeved that there’s a grassroots movement to try to win her a top committee post they feel she doesn’t deserve.

Corrupt, conservative incumbent Democrats are most annoyed by Ocasio-Cortez’s threat to back primary opponents against members of their ranks she deems too corrupt and too conservative. But their frustration goes beyond that: Democratic leaders are upset that she railed against Pelosi's entirely anti-progressive PAY-GO scam on Twitter the first week of the new Congress. Corrupt, conservative incumbent Democrat and jealous seat-warmers are peeved that there’s a grassroots movement to try to win her a top committee post they feel she doesn’t deserve and won't bother using to extort bribes for the party.

Even some progressives who admire AOC, as she’s nicknamed, told POLITICO that they worry she’s not using her notoriety effectively.

Even some progressives who admire AOC, as she’s nicknamed, told Politico that they worry she’s not using her notoriety they way they want her to.

“She needs to decide: Does she want to be an effective legislator or just continue being a Twitter star?” said one House Democrat who’s in lockstep with Ocasio Cortez’s ideology. “There’s a difference between being an activist and a lawmaker in Congress.”

“She needs to decide: Does she want to be an effective legislator or just continue being a Twitter star?” said one House Democrat who claims to be in lockstep with Ocasio Cortez’s ideology but we won't tell you who it is so you can't ever check whether the two are in lockstep or not. “There’s a difference between being an activist and a lawmaker in Congress.”

It’s an open question whether Ocasio-Cortez can be checked. She’s barely been in Congress a week and is better known than almost any other House member other than Nancy Pelosi and John Lewis. A media throng follows her every move, and she can command a national audience practically at will.

None of that came playing by the usual rules: Indeed, Ocasio-Cortez’s willingness to take on her party establishment with unconventional guerrilla tactics is what got her here. It’s earned her icon status on the progressive left, it’s where the 29-year-old freshman derives her power-- and, by every indication, it’s how she thinks she can pull the Democratic Party in her direction.

The Freedom Caucus didn’t win many popularity contests in Congress the past four years, but it’s hard to dispute the hard-liners’ success dragging the GOP to the right.

It’s an open question whether Ocasio-Cortez can be checked. She’s barely been in Congress a week and is better known than almost any other House member other than Nancy Pelosi and John Lewis. A media throng follows her every move, and she can command a national audience practically at will.

None of that came playing by the usual rules: Indeed, Ocasio-Cortez’s willingness to take on her party establishment with unconventional guerrilla tactics is what got her here. It’s earned her icon status on the progressive left, it’s where the 29-year-old freshman derives her power-- and, by every indication, it’s how she thinks she can pull the Democratic Party in her direction.

The Freedom Caucus didn’t win many popularity contests in Congress the past four years, but it’s hard to dispute the hard-liners’ success dragging the GOP to the right.

Still, fellow Democrats are giving it their best, or planning to in the near future.

So far, most of them have kept their criticism of Ocasio-Cortez private, fearful she’ll sic her massive following on them by firing off a tweet. But a few are engaging with her in the hopes she’ll opt for a different M.O., especially when it comes to trying to take out Democrats in primaries.

Still, some fellow Democrats won't give up in trying to mold her in their own images.

So far, most of them have kept their criticism of Ocasio-Cortez semi-private, fearful that their own shaky bases will turn on them if they show themselves as cowardly sell-outs and tepid agents of the status quo. But a few are engaging with her in the hopes she’ll opt for a different M.O., especially when it comes to trying to take out Democrats in primaries.

Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-N.Y.) is playing a key role. Like Ocasio-Cortez, Velázquez knocked off a longtime Democratic incumbent to win her seat, and they share Puerto Rican roots.

In private conversations with Ocasio-Cortez over the past few months, Velázquez counseled Ocasio-Cortez against targeting her Democratic colleagues in future elections. The two had a “long, long conversation” about the dynamics of Congress and Washington, and how there shouldn’t be a “litmus test” for every district, Velázquez said in a recent interview.

Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY) is playing a key role. Like Ocasio-Cortez, Velázquez knocked off a longtime Democratic incumbent to win her seat, and they share Puerto Rican roots. Before going further, though, we want to share a few lines from Rep. Velázquez's wikipedia page that bring up the criticism she has had "for her close ties to the banking industry and her reluctance to support reform and transparency measures. A majority of her campaign contributions have come from banks, including Goldman Sachs and the American Bankers Association. Opponents have suggested that these contributions influenced her votes in support of the bailouts and her votes against reform and transparency measures. In addition to support for private banks, Ms. Velazquez voted against bipartisan House efforts to audit the federal reserve, both in 2009 and in 2012." Velázquez, another member of the House Financial Services Committee, has scooped up $2,380,936 from the sector.

In private conversations with Ocasio-Cortez over the past few months, Velázquez counseled Ocasio-Cortez against targeting her Democratic colleagues in future elections. The two had a “long, long conversation” about the dynamics of Congress and Washington, and how there shouldn’t be a “litmus test” for every district, Velázquez said in a recent interview.

After she defeated Democratic incumbent Joe Crowley in shocking fashion last year, Ocasio-Cortez supported primary challengers to Democratic Reps. Stephanie Murphy of Florida, William Lacy Clay of Missouri and Mike Capuano of Massachusetts.

Only Capuano lost. But Velázquez told Ocasio-Cortez she should think twice in the future before backing primaries against her colleagues. Murphy, the first Vietnamese woman elected to Congress, represents a swing district and could lose her seat if she’s forced to move left in a primary, Velázquez said during the talk.

“Washington is a political animal where a lot of the work that you want to accomplish depends on relationships within the Democratic Caucus,” said Velázquez, who described herself as a “bridge” between Ocasio-Cortez and the caucus. “The honeymoon between the voters that you represent and yourself could be a short one. People want to see results.”

After she defeated Democratic incumbent Joe Crowley in shocking fashion last year, infuriating and striking fear into the hearts of every corrupt status quo Democrat in the House (including to some who had attached their personal stars to Crowley's coattails), Ocasio-Cortez supported primary challengers to Democratic Reps. Stephanie Murphy of Florida, an especially vile reactionary who is supported by family money and is now chair of the Blue Dogs, William Lacy Clay of Missouri (which helps explain the tantrum from Cleaver above) and Mike Capuano of Massachusetts.

Only Capuano lost and Ocasio-Cortez had very little role in that, although the Ayassa Pressley campaign was partially modeled on her campaign against Crowley. But Velázquez told Ocasio-Cortez she should think twice in the future before backing primaries against her colleagues. Murphy, the first Vietnamese woman elected to Congress, represents a swing district and could lose her seat if she’s forced to move left in a primary, Velázquez said during the talk. Velázquez, of course, didn't mention that the Democratic Party would be better off without Murphy, who has blurred the distinction between what Republicans and Democrats stand for, and is busy ruining the Democratic Party brand.

“Washington is a political animal where a lot of the work that you want to accomplish depends on relationships within the Democratic Caucus,” said Velázquez, who described herself as a “bridge” between Ocasio-Cortez and the caucus. “The honeymoon between the voters that you represent and yourself could be a short one. People want to see results.” It could be a short one, especially if Ocasio-Cortez sells out the way Velázquez has and is trying to drag her into the same posture.

Other lawmakers agreed.

“I think she needs to give herself an opportunity to know her colleagues and to give herself a sense of the chemistry of the body before passing judgment on anyone or anything,” said Rep. Yvette Clarke, a fellow New York Democrat.

“She’s new here, feeling her way around,” added Rep. Kurt Schrader (D-Ore.). “She doesn’t understand how the place works yet.”

Needless to say other corrupt status quo incumbents agreed.

“I think she needs to give herself an opportunity to know her colleagues and to give herself a sense of the chemistry of the body before passing judgment on anyone or anything,” said Rep. Yvette Clarke, a fellow New York Democrat, who almost lost a primary from the left herself last year.

“She’s new here, feeling her way around,” added Rep. Kurt Schrader (D-OR), one of the most rot-gut Blue Dog pigs in Congress. “She doesn’t understand how the place works yet.”

Ocasio-Cortez, through her staff, declined to be interviewed for this story. But there are signs that she’s getting the message, at least when it comes to backing primary challenges against her colleagues.

Ocasio-Cortez, through her staff, declined to be interviewed for this story. But there are signs that she’s getting the message, at least when it comes to backing primary challenges against her colleagues. UPDATE: That was some twitter thread her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, unleashed this morning.

In a brief exchange off the House floor recently, she said she wasn’t interested in backing progressive candidates against incumbent Democrats — contradicting her own words after the midterms. She also criticized POLITICO for publishing a story suggesting she considered backing a primary opponent against rising star Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), who many believe could become the first black speaker.

“I’m focused on my job,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

Her spokesman, Corbin Trent, added: “There has been a change in focus — though not a change in ideology.”

In a brief exchange off the House floor recently, she said she wasn’t interested in backing progressive candidates against incumbent Democrats-- contradicting her own words after the midterms. She also criticized Politico for publishing a story suggesting she considered backing a primary opponent against establishment political hack Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who establishment stenographers like Politico always refresh's to as a "rising star" and always claim "could become the first black speaker." We're so silly, it's embarrassing.

“I’m focused on my job,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

Her spokesman, Corbin Trent, added: “There has been a change in focus-- though not a change in ideology.”

Some House Democrats aren’t convinced. They’ve noticed that Ocasio-Cortez has hired two former organizers from the anti-establishment group Justice Democrats to run her office. One of them, her new chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti, told supporters during a November conference call that “we gotta primary folks.”

Ocasio-Cortez appeared to agree with him during the call, arguing that “all Americans know money in politics is a huge problem, but unfortunately the way that we fix it is by demanding that our incumbents give it up or by running fierce campaigns ourselves.”

“Long story short, I need you to run for office,” she told progressive activists on the call. “That's really what we need to do to save this country.”

Comments like that got Ocasio-Cortez off on the wrong foot with her colleagues, to say the least.

Some House Democrats are scared shitless. They’ve noticed that Ocasio-Cortez has hired two former organizers from the anti-establishment group Justice Democrats to run her office. One of them, her new chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti, told supporters during a November conference call that “we gotta primary folks.”

Ocasio-Cortez appeared to agree with him during the call, arguing that “all Americans know money in politics is a huge problem, but unfortunately the way that we fix it is by demanding that our incumbents give it up or by running fierce campaigns ourselves.”

“Long story short, I need you to run for office,” she told progressive activists on the call. “That's really what we need to do to save this country.”

Comments like that got Ocasio-Cortez off on the wrong foot with all the corrupt conservatives in the House, especially from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party who are on the warpath now.

“It’s not unreasonable for people to wonder” whether she will come after them, said Rep. Grace Meng (D-N.Y.). “I’m choosing not to focus on if she’s going to run someone against someone … but by seeing how we can more effectively work with her and bring her ideas to the table.”

“It’s not unreasonable for people to wonder” whether she will come after them, said Rep. Grace Meng (D-NY), a protege and ally of Joe Crowley's. “I’m choosing not to focus on if she’s going to run someone against someone … but by seeing how we can more effectively work with her and bring her ideas to the table.”

Ocasio-Cortez is an enigma to most House Democrats. She’s very friendly in person, chatting up fellow lawmakers and security workers in the Capitol as she’s tailed by admirers and reporters.

Then they see the Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter, where she frequently snaps at critics and occasionally at fellow Democrats. When House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told reporters that a new climate committee that Ocasio-Cortez championed would not have subpoena power, she retweeted the news and chastised Democratic leadership.

“Our goal is to treat Climate Change like the serious, existential threat it is by drafting an ambitious solution on the scale necessary — aka a Green New Deal — to get it done,” she said. “A weak committee misses the point & endangers people.”

Ocasio-Cortez is an enigma to most House Democrats. She’s very friendly in person, chatting up fellow lawmakers and security workers in the Capitol as she’s tailed by admirers and reporters.

Then they see the Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter, where she frequently effectively defends herself critics including corrupt conservative Democrats. When House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) told reporters that he was able to neuter a new climate committee that Ocasio-Cortez championed on behalf of his corporate donors-- he has taken direct payments amounting to $404,970 from Big Oil and Gas-- by making sure it would not have subpoena power, she retweeted the news and chastised Democratic leadership.

“Our goal is to treat Climate Change like the serious, existential threat it is by drafting an ambitious solution on the scale necessary-- aka a Green New Deal-- to get it done,” she said. “A weak committee misses the point & endangers people.” Straight talk like this is what has made her so popular with the Democratic base and so unpopular with corrupt conservatives like Hoyer.

Two House Democratic sources compared her use of Twitter to Donald Trump’s. Just as congressional Republicans constantly withhold criticism of the president out of fear he’ll unleash a tweet at them, some Democrats have done the same with Ocasio-Cortez.

“People are afraid of her,” said one senior Democratic aide.

Two House Democratic sources compared her use of Twitter to Donald Trump’s. Just as congressional Republicans constantly withhold criticism of the president out of fear he’ll unleash a tweet at them, some Democrats have done the same with Ocasio-Cortez, although she has never once released an angry Trump-like tweet directed at any Democrats, including the ones who know in their hearts what scumbags they are and how much they deserve to be flushed down history's toilet.

“People are afraid of her,” said one senior Democratic aide. There are plenty of members who have very guilty consciences and are petrified their own constituents will find out what hypocrites they are.

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) predicted that Ocasio-Cortez will soon learn that Republicans are “the real enemy.”

“She will come to the understanding that it’s a better use of her time fighting the Republican Party than her Democratic colleagues who agree with her on green energy,” said Maloney, who called Ocasio-Cortez “very nice” and “very charming.”

One of the more corrupt Democrats, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), who is chair of the Financial Service Committee's powerful subcommittee on Capital Markets has taken a jaw-dropping $6,327,421 from the banisters but predicted that Ocasio-Cortez will soon learn that Republicans are “the real enemy.”

“She will come to the understanding that it’s a better use of her time fighting the Republican Party than her Democratic colleagues who agree with her on green energy,” said Maloney, who called Ocasio-Cortez “very nice” and “very charming.”

Others aren’t so sure. They point to her first week in Congress: Ocasio-Cortez aggravated Democratic leaders and even some fellow progressives when she tweeted that she’d oppose the Democratic rules package, arguing it would stymie liberal priorities like “Medicare for all.”

Others aren’t so sure. They point to her first week in Congress: Ocasio-Cortez aggravated Democratic leaders and even some fellow progressives when she tweeted-- accurately and much to their embarrassment-- that she’d oppose the Democratic rules package, arguing it would stymie liberal priorities like “Medicare for all.”

House Democrats were also unhappy when she made a play for a seat on the powerful Ways and Means Committee. Lawmakers suspected Ocasio-Cortez was behind a massive online campaign pressing Pelosi to appoint her to the panel, though her office said she was not.

Critics inside the caucus felt she didn't deserve it, given her lack of professional experience on tax issues and her status as a freshman.

“It totally pissed off everyone,” said one senior House Democratic lawmaker of the campaign. “You don’t get picked for committees by who your grass-roots [supporters] are.”

The House's corrupt conservatives from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party were also unhappy when asked which committee she would like to serve on, she asked for the powerful Ways and Means Committee, which conservatives from both parties use as a base for corrupt fundraising but which she would like to reform. Lawmakers suspected-- wrongly-- Ocasio-Cortez was behind a massive online campaign pressing Pelosi to appoint her to the panel, though her office said she was not.

The vile creatures from the Blue Dogs and New Dems, plus others jealous of her popularity and ability to dance developed a narrative that she didn't deserve it, given her lack of professional experience on tax issues and her status as a freshman.

“It totally pissed off everyone,” said one senior House Democratic lawmaker (who we can't name because he's a cowardly worm) of the campaign. “You don’t get picked for committees by who your grass-roots [supporters] are.”

But the issue of pushing primaries against Democratic incumbents such as Jeffries, who was recently elected chairman of the Democratic Caucus, is what’s agitated rank-and-file members the most.

“The chances that the Democratic caucus will stand by and watch its chair get attack and people piling on him — by Democrats! — is so obscene that I think you’ll find one of the strongest reactions that could possibly be anticipated,” Cleaver said.

But the issue of pushing primaries against Democratic incumbents such as Jeffries, who was recently elected chairman of the Democratic Caucus, is what’s agitated rank-and-file members the most.

“The chances that the Democratic caucus will stand by and watch its chair get attacked and people piling on him-- by Democrats!-- is so obscene that I think you’ll find one of the strongest reactions that could possibly be anticipated,” Cleaver said, who, as we explained above, knows where his bread is buttered.

Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) said he’s taking Ocasio-Cortez at her word that “she wants to work with everybody,” as he said she told him. Meeks and other members of the New York delegation intend to nominate Ocasio-Cortez to serve on the Financial Services Committee, an exclusive panel, early next week.

“It’s one thing” for outside activists to go after Democratic incumbents, Meeks said. “It’s another thing when you’re in this institution and you’ve got to work to get things done.”

And speaking of corruption and of Democrats who desperately need to be primaried, Rep. Gregory Meeks (New Dem-NY) said he’s taking Ocasio-Cortez at her word that “she wants to work with everybody,” as he said she told him. Meeks and other members of the New York delegation intend to nominate Ocasio-Cortez to serve on the Financial Services Committee, an exclusive panel, early next week. Meeks, a notorious vote seller, serves on the Financial Services Committee and has taken a cool $3,661,288 from the banksters he's supposed to be overseeing.

“It’s one thing” for outside activists to go after Democratic incumbents, Meeks said. “It’s another thing when you’re in this institution and you’ve got to work to get things done,” he said, shaking with fear and anxiety.

But Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), the former head of the House Progressive Caucus, said Democrats should probably get used to Ocasio-Cortez.

She’s “going to force some of the members to have to align with or against her,” he said. “In that sense, I would assume that can be irritating to some.”

“Maybe it’s the aunt or uncle you didn’t want to invite to the wedding,” Grijalva added, but Ocasio-Cortez “is part of the family.”

But Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), the former head of the House Progressive Caucus, said Democrats should probably get used to Ocasio-Cortez.

She’s “going to force some of the members to have to align with or against her,” he said. “In that sense, I would assume that can be irritating to some.”

“Maybe it’s the aunt or uncle you didn’t want to invite to the wedding,” Grijalva added, but Ocasio-Cortez “is part of the family.”

No edit needed on those last three paragraphs other than the proper way to identify Grijalva's state. I asked some of the progressives who will be running in 2020 what they thought of the Politico story. Nate McMurray, another independent-minded progressive the DCCC refused to help but who came within 0.3% of winning in an R+11 district and admires Ocasio-Cortez. sent ne a quote from the great Polish poet and diplomat, Czesław Miłosz: "In a room where people unanimously maintain a conspiracy of silence, one word of truth sounds like a pistol shot." Nate said that "Teamwork is important. But standing up for what you believe-- despite the pushback-- matters more. She has demonstrated that she is the opposite of a sellout. And I hope she stays strong, because so many people are watching, looking up to, and cheering for her, including me. By the way, I bet she just got 10k more followers... There is a pattern that has been used to silence women politicians, for as long as there have been women politicians: Belittle their intelligence, dismiss their experience, and if that doesn’t work, say something demeaning about their sexuality. The Republicans are doing this with Congresswoman Cortez. The brilliant thing about her is that she’s smarter than any of them, more experienced than any of them give her credit for, and far too strong to stand for their humiliations."

Today: The Big Pay-Go Show Down In The House

Yesterday I spent hours on the phone talking with members of Congress about Pelosi's Rules Package vote today. That's because her damned Pay-Go provision is part of it. Many of the members I spoke with DID NOT KNOW THERE IS A VOTE AND DO NOT KNOW WHAT PAY-GO IS. By noon I was so depressed I wanted to drown myself. They're just going to do whatever Hoyer and Clyburn tell them to do-- which will absoluetly kill any chance of a progressive agenda in this Congress. Kim Schrier, a physician, is a freshman from Washington's 8th district and is busy being sworn in today. Last night she got back to me with a statement about Pay-Go that threw me for a loop. "Pay Go," she wrote, "brings back fiscally responsible governance and ends the draconian practice of forcing cuts to vital programs to pay for others. It allows new funding sources to keep government working for the American People." I suspect that's what Hoyer and the leadership team are telling members of Congress, especially freshmen, what Pay-Go is. Am I getting ahead of myself here? I'll come back in a minute. Let me turn to my amigo, David Dayen at The Intercept, for a brief explanation-- yesterday-- about this controversy.

He wrote that progressives are pressuring against it-- I haven;'t found any other than Alexandria Ocasio and Ro Khanna-- "the House rules package for the 116th Congress will include a pay-as-you-go provision, requiring all new spending to be offset with either budget cuts or tax increases, a conservative policy aimed at tying the hands of government... Pelosi ran into resistance from progressives, who believe that the rule would make it more difficult for Democrats to pass a host of liberal agenda items, from 'Medicare for All' to a Green New Deal to tuition-free public college. Critics also argue that pay-go creates an unlevel playing field, where Republicans get to blow giant holes in the tax code, as they did with the 2017 tax cuts, while Democrats must pay fealty to the deficit.

The new rule establishes a point of order against any bill that increases the deficit within a ten-year budget window, based on figures from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The House could attach an “emergency” designation to legislation to get around the paygo rule: Congress did this in 2009 to pass the economic stimulus package under President Obama. The point of order could be waived by a majority vote of the House. But this gives the Democratic leadership another lever of control on what legislation can advance, as their assent would be critical to exempting bills from the paygo rule. And members of Congress tend to resist voting to waive the rule, as they worry it creates ready-made attack ads.

There is also a Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act, passed in 2010 under pressure from Blue Dog Democrats, which allows the president to enforce across-the-board cuts if Congress violates pay-go. But the prospect of a president implementing such an unpopular policy is remote. So the House rule looms large by constraining new spending at its source.

Liberals, of course, have plenty of ideas for how to raise revenue. The Trump tax cuts alone offer nearly $3 trillion in potential offsets simply by restoring corporate tax rates, “pass-through” rules on individuals, and inheritance taxes. But the pay-go rule forces Democrats to propose tax increases that Republicans gleefully broadcast. Meanwhile, Republicans, unconcerned with deficits, get to play Santa Claus, freed from having to match tax cuts with anything unappealing.

...At least one Congressional power broker wants progressive Democrats to fight the rules package. “In order for #PayGo to go into effect, it needs to pass the House,” wrote Bernie Sanders advisor Warren Gunnels on Twitter Tuesday night. “If some 18 Dems vote no, it fails. The vote will take place on Thursday. Will enough progressives have the courage to vote no on the first roadblock to #MedicareForAll, #GreenNewDeal & #CollegeForAll? Let’s see.”

The co-chairs of the CPC, Mark Pocan and Pramila Jayapal, look to be trying to tamp down the concern over Pelosi's attempt to ramrod Pay-Go through. They used a statement yesterday, which isn't that different from what I've been hearing from other liberals: "We have been concerned about PAYGO for months, and have had numerous conversations with Rules Chairman Jim McGovern and House leadership about these concerns. We all agree that the real problem with PAYGO exists in the statute that requires it. That is why we will reintroducing legislation in the 116th Congress to end PAYGO. In the meantime Chairman McGovern and House Leadership have committed to us that PAYGO will not be an impediment to advancing key progressive priorities in the 116th Congress. With the assurances that PAYGO can be waived, we do plan to vote for the House rules package and proceed with the legislation to fix the statute." I have tremendous trust in Pramila Jayapal's truthfulness and political instincts. But... Hoyer, Clyburn and Pelosi? Don't make me laugh. Besides, how is a satisfactory PAYGO legislative fix going to get through a wall of Republicans, Blue Dogs and New Dems? And then make it through McConnell's Senate and be signed by the always cooperative Señor Trumpanzee? NO WAY! Voting for a bad rule with the idea of "fixing" it down the road under these political realities, is... well, I won't characterize what I think it is. But, of late, there have been too many New Dems admitted to the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Former co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and incoming chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), told us that he'll "continue to state that pay-go is an unnecessary and misguided policy because it can stifle smart investments that are needed to better our nation and help families. With trillions in tax giveaways to the wealthy and corporations, Republicans are the ones who ushered in a new era of fiscal recklessness-- not Democrats. With the Trump Administration pushing dangerous policies, it is important not to tie our hands while governing. I’m confident our leadership understands these issues and will work toward ensuring pay-go does not impede progress on the policy solutions Americans have demanded." I'd interpret that to mean that today he'll be holding his nose and voting for it.

Tim Ryan (D-OH), often an unabashed Pelosi critic, told the Morning Joe crew yesterday that overall, he's backing Pelosi's efforts. "I don’t think anyone at any point questioned her ability to negotiate, for her to be in rooms like the one she’s going to be in today, like the one she was in last week, and be as effective as anybody else in our caucus or in our party." But that didn't stop him from announcing he's opposing PayGo. "Critical investments in education, infrastructure, and health care should not be held hostage to budgetary constraints that Republicans have never respected."

Saikat is Alexandria Ocasio's chief of staff