The Nature Of Conservatism-- Profiting From Societal Adversity

McConnell is a master of one thing and one thing only-- obstruction

I'm not going to argue about conservative, greed-obsessed businessmen rushing headlong into markets to profit from societal disruption. It's not illegal and anyone who ever thought a conservative had an predisposition towards ethical or Christian fundamental values was just kidding themselves anyway. My beef, though, is with conservative greed-obsessed elected officials. What I expect from private citizens of a conservative bent is not what I expect from conservative public officials. Nor should you. In two separate polls, a majority of North Carolina voters say Senator Richard Burr, who said in 2016 that he wouldn't run again, should resign for selling $1.6 million in hotel and other stocks based on inside information he obtained as chair of the Senate Intel Committee. He was only one of nearly a dozen conservatives in Congress who were doing the same thing-- selling stocks before the deluge-- although one, right-wing congressman Rob Wittman (R-VA) ran out as soon as he had some inside info and bought thousands of dollars of stock in AbbVie, Inc, which makes antiviral drugs. (His greed and lack of ethics, though, did him no good; he lost money too.) Robert Reich yesterday: Senators Loeffler and Burr-- and any other senator if found to have benefited from insider information about the pandemic, including Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) and Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)-- must resign immediately."

Last night the Washington Post reported that "Trump’s private business has shut down six of its top seven revenue-producing clubs and hotels because of restrictions meant to slow the spread of the novel coronavirus, potentially depriving Trump’s company of millions of dollars in revenue. Those closures come as Trump is considering easing restrictions on movement sooner than federal public health experts recommend, in the name of reducing the virus’s economic damage." Trump had two reactions. First was to tell Mnuchin that a bailout for [his] hotels and golf courses had to be included in any stimulus package and second was that he's opening the economy again, no matter what it does to the efforts to flatten the curve and save lives.

And now Mitch McConnell is leading Senate Republicans to pass a stimulus package that serves their own partisan interests and the desires of the donor class while screwing over working families, the same way they did in 2008. Georgia Senate candidate TeresaTomlinson saw it the same way I did. Yesterday she sent her supporters a note that included this: "Now, amidst a global pandemic, Republican senators are committing insider trading while they try to score a $500 billion slush fund for a corporate bailout that would help their donors. The world’s challenges are too important to continue with failed Republican leadership. We have to defeat the Republicans this November to fix the Affordable Care Act, guarantee universal healthcare, and protect people-- not corporations-- from the coronavirus pandemic."

But wait! Won't Trump fix everything now that we're going from "It's a hoax" to resurrection Sunday in April?

Also Yesterday, Tom Neuburger pointed out the crossroads the country has come to: a collision between two competing imperatives-- "does the nation serve the pathological wants of the few who control it or the immediate and existential needs of the many who live in it?"

The few-- the bankers and profiteers; investors and CEOs of all kinds and stripes; their well-paid enablers in the media and professional classes-- think the coronavirus emergency will pass and "business" (our modern, rapacious way of doing it) will eventually return to normal.

Thus for them, the current crisis represents once-in-a-generation opportunity for theft on the grandest of scales, the plundering of public goods and control in the time of greatest emergency. They think this theft, like the many similar others that went before it, will occur with no consequence for them and only long-term consequences for others-- thefts like the 2000 election, which cost them nothing while adding to their power and credibility, but left a great many others broken or dead; or the theft of family fortunes and futures during the 2008 global meltdown, losses that even today only they have recovered from.

...[T]he massive loss of wealth by the working class after 2008-- wealth they have still not regained-- happened slowly, and in a nation filled with "back to normal" TV propaganda (you don't see the struggling depicted on spry network dramas and comedies) their constant pain has by now been normalized and accepted as just the way things are "for some people." (Those "some people," it must be noted, put Donald Trump in the White House.)

...On whose side will government throw its weight? On the side of the pathological few or the side of the suffering many?

The answer to that question will determine the future of the nation. Will we more resemble the country of FDR and his widely loved government for the people, or that of Louis XVI and his overthrown government of the people. A crossroads indeed. Will the national needs of the many be honored and met? Or will the pathological few light a flame that burns us all?

Now listen carefully to Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), a progressive, not a conservative. Ignore the imbecile talking head asking him questions, but listen to what he is prioritizing.





Crackpot Republicans in Ohio and Texas are breaking the law by using the pandemic as cover to prohibit all abortions. That's what conservatives have always done and will always do-- look for ways to push their toxic, anti-family agenda whenever they can take advantage of an opportunity, no matter how dire.

Today, Bernie, reacting to the decision by the Trump Regime's FDA to grant Gilead Sciences a seven-year monopoly for antiviral medication remdesivir for potential treatment of the coronavirus, said "It is truly outrageous that after taxpayers put tens of millions of dollars into developing remdesivir, Trump’s FDA is exploiting a law reserved for rare diseases to privatize a drug to treat a pandemic virus. The Trump Administration must rescind this corporate giveaway to Gilead and make any treatment and vaccine free for everybody. Now is not the time for profiteering in the pharmaceutical industry. Now is the time to bring our scientists together to develop and produce the best treatment for the coronavirus as quickly as possible. When Jonas Salk developed the polio vaccine 65 years ago, he understood the tremendous value it would have for all of humanity, and he refused to patent it. Right now, we must put human life above corporate profit. We cannot give pharmaceutical corporations a monopoly on treatments that could save millions of people during this crisis."

Believe It Or Not, Broadband Access Is More Important In Peoples' Lives Than Putin-Gate

Virginia's first congressional district is one of those bizarre gerrymanders that makes no sense for anyone but Republican career politicians. It's an odd concotion that stretches through 22 counties from the DC exurbs in Prince William, Fauquier and Stafford counties down through Fredericksburg south to the suburbs north of Norfolk in Middlesex, Mathews and Newport News counties. In 2012 Romney beat Obama 56.2% to 43.8%. Last year both Trump and Clinton did worse, respectively, than Romney and Obama. Trump won 53.6% to 41.2%. The incumbent congressman, Rob Wittman, first elected in a 2007 special election after Jo Ann Davis died, hasn't ever had a DCCC challenge. Last year he was elected against Matt Rowe 60.9% to 35.8%. He won every county in the district but one (Fredericksburg). Whittman spent $1,040,883 on the election and Rowe spent $45,755. The DCCC never acknowledged he was even running.

In 2018 the Democratic candidate is a progressive former Marine and a young father, Edwin Santana Jr. He lives in Stafford County with his wife and son. And they're having a daughter in a couple of months. We asked him to introduce himself to DWT readers by tackling an issue of local importance unlike the big national issues like TrumpCare, Putin-Gate, Climate Change, etc-- but something that would make his constituents' lives better. Before you read it, though, I want you to think about one related matter-- This is how scared Wittman already is of Santana's challenge (from Wittman's Facebook page):

"After reviewing this legislation and receiving the Congressional Budget Office score today, it is clear that this bill is not consistent with the repeal and replace principles for which I stand. I do not think this bill will do what is necessary for the short and long-term best interests of Virginians and therefore, I must oppose it. I do believe that we can enact meaningful health care reforms that put the patient and health care provider back at the center of our health care system, but this bill is not the right answer. This doesn’t change the fact that we need to repeal Obamacare, as I have voted to do. I stand ready and willing to work with my colleagues on legislation that expands choices, increases access, and reduces costs.”

Connecting Virginians to the 21st Century
-by Edwin Santana Jr.,
candidate, VA-01

It wasn’t that long ago that I can remember watching anxiously as the yellow AOL man trudged begrudgingly from left to right across the computer screen as the digital subscriber line, what we all know as DSL, connected me to the phenomenon that was the world-wide web. While the internet has been in existence for quite some time, it was just becoming widely commercially available in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s. By my senior year in high school, the internet was being rapidly integrated into everyday life-- Facebook launched shortly before my freshman year of college. At school, program suites, such as Blackboard and online databases like JSTOR (short for Journal Storage, founded 1995) were still in their nascent stages and relegated to the obscure realm of academia. Taking the internet’s technological evolution into perspective, it is clear today that the use of-- and as a prerequisite, access to-- the internet has become an integral part of our daily lives.

Today the internet serves as the primary medium through which we interact with the world around us. Education, business, healthcare and many other facets of society have increasingly integrated the use of high-speed broadband internet into their operating concepts. As such, access to high-speed broadband internet no longer remains a luxury, but instead is now an essential requirement. Far from the enhancement that the web brought to our lives a decade ago, without access to reliable and fast internet, you are now “out of the loops” in a world that is deeply interconnected and constantly evolving.

While wireless carriers such as AT&T and Verizon purport national coverage, 4G wireless connectivity has been replaced by LTE and Apple continues to pump out the latest version of their iPhone-- the fact remains that there are still far too many Americans who lack access to adequate high speed internet. While this is a problem that tends to be concentrated on the socioeconomic strata and demographics most in need in our communities, it particularly effects those in less populated, rural areas where private Internet Service Providers (ISP) have had less incentive to establish mature fiber-optic networks capable of providing next generation high speed broadband internet.

But we aren’t talking about excessive luxury or “nice-to-have” here, we are talking about providing essential services and investing in the future of our communities. The National Broadband Plan, released by the FCC in 2010, provides a comprehensive overview of initiatives the FCC and other federal agencies have set forth in an attempt to increase digital literacy and realize a future in which universal broadband access is a reality for all Americans.

Under the leadership of Governor Terry McAuliffe, the Commonwealth has also made significant gains in providing access to high speed internet available in the state’s schools. In partnership with EducationSuperHighway, a non-profit organization dedicated to improving internet access across the nation, the Governor’s office announced that 72 percent of Virginia’s schools met the minimum connectivity requirement of 100 kbs per student as specified by the FCC. This statistic is a drastic improvement from the 33 percent reported in the non-profits annual state of the states reported just two years earlier in 2014. Access within school systems is essential, but it isn’t the whole picture. As the education system increasingly integrates into online networks and resources, access to quality high-speed internet at home has become as important element to the whole family. Broadband is a requirement for homework, home business and correspondence. Increasingly, people can keep in contact with their healthcare providers from home via web portals. In the “internet of things” the web is increasingly connecting people, their homes and appliances, with the outside world. Just a few of the obvious benefits to these developments here include increased energy efficiency and home security. As exciting as this future sounds, it is a future that can only be realized in a state that enables that tomorrow, today through the investment in the required infrastructure and resources.

While we can’t force the hand of private entities to provide services to rural areas, other options do exist. Municipalities have been trying for several years to bridge the gap within their communities where citizens are unserved or are offered low-quality services as unreasonable costs. The National Broadband Plan specifically recommended that Congress should make clear that local governments can build broadband networks. Federal legislation, like the Broadband Conduit Act of 2015 (HR 3805), was introduced with the intent of building new infrastructure, such as future road networks designed to readily incorporate new fiber optic cable lines without the need for disruptive additional digging. Unfortunately, there are also initiatives at the state level that create barriers to bridging the gap in connectivity across our communities.

The Virginia Broadband Deployment Act (HB 2108), currently on Governor McAuliffe’s desk after passing the Commonwealth’s House and Senate represents one such barrier, preventing public entities from providing broadband services in unserved areas. The bill, introduced by Lynchburg Republican Kathy Byron creates a list of requirements required to be met by any locality that intends to own and operate a broadband or internet communications system3. In a clear move to insulate private interests, the bill mandates imputed private sector costs to any municipality-led effort, which would deter many local entities from offering broadband services to their citizens at reasonable costs1. Imputed private-sector costs is analogous to price-fixing and can be best understood by a portion of the bill itself. Section 56-484.30 subdivision 2.a states:

“The locality or its affiliate shall include within its rates an amount equal to all taxes, fees, and other assessments that would be applicable to a similarly situated private provider of the same communications services, including federal, state, and local taxes; franchise fees; permit fees; pole attachment fees; and any similar fees.”

It is worth noting that the Virginia Association of Counties, has stated that this legislation is not conducive to establishing successful partnerships between private ISPs and municipally run efforts3. The bill was introduced by Delegate Byron but engineered by the Virginia Cable Telecommunications Association, allows ISPs to have their cake and eat it too. By effectively raising the barrier to entry, ISP’s are not required to compete with municipalities who attempt to provide services on their own initiative while simultaneously insulating themselves from the costs of providing essential services to citizens in unserved areas. Section 56-484.30 subdivision 2.b states goes further to ward of potential competition:

“The locality or its affiliate shall not price any of its communications services at a level that is less than the sum of:(i) the actual direct costs of providing the service; (ii) the actual indirect costs of providing the service; and (iii) the amount determined under subdivision 2a.”

While there is an aversion to government led initiatives in the services sector, there are success stories of municipalities partnering with service providers to connect citizens. The Utopia Regional Fiber Consortium of Bristol, Virginia certainly has its flaws, but provides proof that locality-ran efforts in providing broadband services to constituents is a distinct possibility.

It is difficult to quantify the benefits of providing connectivity in a world where the internet touches almost every facet of our daily lives. Today, people use the internet to keep in touch with relatives, medical providers, engage in distance learning and to run businesses. Investing in the infrastructure required for expansion of these services-- particularly into areas currently unserved by independent providers-- is an investment in the productivity of our people and our communities. Where ISP’s won’t provide services due to limited potential of short-term profits, the least we should expect our state’s elected representatives to do is get out of the way of locality-run efforts to bridge the gap in providing essential services to our citizens. Sadly, given some of the recent actions by some of our elected representatives-- particularly the ones bankrolled by these ISPs-- it seems that private interests take a front seat to constituent needs. Investing in Virginia’s future prosperity should not be tied so closely to the bottom line of shareholders and business modeling should not be the sole litmus test on whether residents of Virginia receive access to broadband services in an age where being connected is everything.

Countdown to Election Day: late word on the congressional special elections in OH-05 and VA-01

It's crunch time for the congressional special elections Tuesday in Ohio and Virginia, both currently Republican-held seats with Democratic takeaway potential.

OHIO'S 5th CD
The most curious development in Ohio's 5th Congressional District, where progressive Democrat Robin Weirauch seems close to pulling off a major upset to replace the late Paul Gillmor, is the absence from the campaign trail of House GOP leader John Boehner in support of Bob Latta. Boehner represents the adjacent Ohio 8th CD.

You'll recall that last year Democrats Ted Strickland and Sherrod Brown won this supposedly solid Republican district on their way to being elected Ohio governor and U.S. senator, respectively. Both Governor Strickland and Senator Brown have been highly visible in their support for Weinrauch. You'll also recall that the DCCC almost to the end snubbed the Weirauch campaign, before dumping in $150K, there forcing the NRCC to pour in what's expected to be way more than that--at a time when GOP campaign funds are hardly plentiful. But this is a seat they don't dare lose.

Last word was that the race was so tight that the Weirauch people were eager for volunteers to help man the effort to the end. If you're in the area, call (419) 352-1583 or e-mail phonebank4robin@gmail.com.

VIRGINIA'S 1st CD
One novelty of the contest to replace the late Jo Ann Davis in Virginia's conservative 1st CD will be the use paper ballots, with the unavailability of voting machines owing to the tight turn around from the November general election and the upcoming February presidential primaries.

This is another seat it would be devastating fof the Rs to lose, but Iraq vet Philip Forgit is trying to pull off his upset without any aid from the DCCC, and is being outspent something like five to one by Republican Rob Wittman.

Here's some of what Brownsox reported Wednesday on DailyKos:

It’s been an intense race so far; both candidates were nominated at conventions on November 10, just one month and a day before the election.

Raising Kaine has a great interview with Forgit where they discuss, among other things, Forgit’s positions on trade (he supports fair trade), torture (very critical of waterboarding), and the summer FISA bill (he opposes retroactive telecom immunity).

It must be acknowledged that this district is quite Republican. The PVI of VA-01 is R +8.9, and they haven’t elected a Democrat to Congress since 1977. Jo Ann Davis’s smallest margin of victory was in her first election, which she won 58-37. Bush beat Kerry 60-39 here. Governor Kaine lost the district 51-46 (while winning the state 52-46), and Senator Webb lost 54-44 (while he won the state 50-49).

Is the race competitive? The Republicans sure seem to think so. Tom Cole’s NRCC (in no position to take anything for granted), just spent $80,000, including $10,000 on polling.

That’s a huge chunk of money for them. It is more than Forgit's total for this campaign as of November 21, and nearly as much as Wittman has raised.

Why would they do that? They certainly don’t have the money to spare. They’re not just in financial trouble; they’re broke. At last filing they were $3.6 million in debt, and of the $2.6 million they had on hand, they’ve now spent over $400,000 in a week between OH-05 and VA-01.

They must be pretty concerned about these districts to spend what little cash they have left on races such as these.