Category Archives: Democrat

Senate Democrats backtracked after initially voting earlier Saturday to call witnesses in Donald Trumps second impeachment trial following new revelations about the former presidents activity on Jan. 6 as rioters were storming the U.S. Capitol.

Their reversal on calling witnesses capped a dramatic and chaotic two hours in the Senate. The impeachment trial appeared ready to wrap with a quick vote on Trumps acquittal until a dramatic Friday-night revelation about the former presidents conduct while the Jan. 6 violence unfolded shook up the trial.

According to CNN, Trump reportedly responded with mockery after House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) called him on Jan. 6, pleading with the then-president to call off his supporters prompting a shouting match between the two men.

Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are, Trump told McCarthy, according to a CNN report published Friday.

The conversation between the two men, which sheds more light on Trumps state of mind as rioters hunted for lawmakers in the halls of Congress, was confirmed directly by Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-Wash.), who is one of the 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump last month.

House impeachment managers argued among themselves until early Saturday morning whether to call for witnesses following the bombshell report, per a Democrat familiar with the situation. At 9:55 a.m., five minutes before the trial was to resume, the managers indicated to Senate Democrats they wanted witnesses. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the lead impeachment manager, then announced to the Senate at 10:00 a.m. that his team wanted to hear from Herrera Beutler.

The surprise announcement threw the Senate into discord.

The chamber recessed briefly, before gaveling back into session and voting 55-45 to allow witnesses in the trial. Five Republicans joined every Democrat in voting to hear witnesses, in a win for proponents of holding Trump fully accountable.

But after the vote, in yet another twist, the Senate agreed not to depose Herrera Beutler directly. Her deposition would likely have prolonged the proceedings and possibly opened the floodgates for other witnesses to be called by Republicans, threatening President Joe Bidens agenda in Congress. Moreover, Democrats felt the House managers did not have an adequate plan as to what came next.

Senate Democrats gave them the votes, but the managers didnt know what their next step was, said one Democrat familiar with the situation.

Instead, House impeachment managers agreed with Trumps attorneys to simply enter into the trial record a statement from Herrera Beutler summing up Trumps call with McCarthy. Democrats signed off, and the Senate moved on to closing arguments.

Some Democrats made the case for admitting new testimony in the wake of CNNs report on Friday. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) suggested deposing McCarthy and Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), who also spoke with Trump that day, as well as asking the Secret Service to produce communications back to the White House regarding Vice President Mike Pences safety during the siege.

Democrats initially seemed ready to move on prior to the Friday-night revelation, viewing the case against Trump as open-and-shut. But that surprise turn made them reconsider if only briefly.

Subpoenaing witnesses would almost certainly have prolonged the trial, something Democrats wanted to avoid in order to move on to more politically popular issues such as passing additional coronavirus relief. Democratic lawmakers are racing to send a $1.9 trillion coronavirus bill to Bidens desk by March, when added federal unemployment insurance is due to expire for millions of Americans.

Democrats also knew that witness testimony wasnt likely to change the minds of many Republicans who were ready to acquit Trump before House impeachment managers had even delivered their opening arguments. Only a handful of Republicans are considering voting to convict Trump, far short of the 17 votes needed.

Trump is now expected to be acquitted later on Saturday, with senators heading home for a weeklong recess immediately after the vote

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Calling all HuffPost superfans!

Sign up for membership to become a founding member and help shape HuffPost's next chapter

Read more:

Democrats Quickly Back Down After Voting To Call Impeachment Witnesses - HuffPost

POLITICOs James Arkin breaks down why the 2022 Ohio Senate race will be a bellwether of Rust Belt politics in the post-Trump era.

But they see the outcome of the trial, which begins on Tuesday, as a reflection of Trumps viability and influence in the GOP moving forward. And they believe a conviction, which would require the support of at least 17 Republican senators, would simply embolden Trump and enrage his base in a way that hurts the party in 2022 and 2024.

He does a pretty good job of being a victim, a GOP senator, who requested anonymity to candidly address the internal party dynamic, said of Trump. If he were to be convicted, there would be an uproar among his supporters. And it would probably energize them.

Ahead of the trial, Republicans are predicting that no more than a handful of GOP senators will join Democrats in voting to convict Trump, especially after 45 out of the 50 Republicans in the chamber voted last month to declare that the Senate has no jurisdiction over a former president.

Trumps allies are already dreading the trial, though, fearful that a public discussion of the events of Jan. 6 in which a pro-Trump mob stormed the Capitol after the then-president rallied with them at the White House could damage Trump long-term. GOP senators acknowledged those risks for Trump, even as the trial is shaping up to be a referendum on his standing in the party.

Its going to be aired as publicly as it can be, and its based upon recent events, Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.) said. So I think how he comes out of it, how he rebuilds, Im not sure where that goes. Thats going to be up to him.

To Democrats, an elevated retelling of the events of Jan. 6 is the next-best option to further ostracize Trump given that a conviction is highly unlikely. While Senate leaders are still haggling over the trials parameters, the House impeachment managers will likely be permitted to use videos and other visuals to make their case a serious advantage for Democrats given that much of their case relies on Trumps public statements and other available footage from the riots at the Capitol.

One of the most powerful reasons for a trial here is the public airing of Donald Trumps really heinous criminal wrongdoing and his criminal intent, said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), a former prosecutor and state attorney general. A trial airs a tableau of evidence and proof that can change the way people think about the individual who is on trial. Even when someone is acquitted, they may still be haunted by the facts that come to light at a trial.

Republicans have already signaled their uneasiness with Trumps lawyers, who in an initial filing last week advanced the former presidents unsubstantiated claims that the election was stolen from him. There is widespread concern among Republicans that the arguments on the Senate floor will turn into a re-litigation of Trumps false allegations of election fraud a discussion that GOP senators arent interested in having, as most of them try to move past Trump.

I think this trial will tell us about what the GOP wants to be going forward, added Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). Donald Trump did not just drop out of the sky. Everything that he represents has its roots in earlier iterations of the Republican Party.

With expectations already set, Democrats are already telegraphing a shortened trial that punts on the question of whether to subpoena witnesses, with many in the party worried that this weeks exercise will distract from President Joe Bidens legislative and governing agenda, especially if its elongated by new witness testimony.

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), perhaps Bidens closest confidant in the Senate, said that during his hour-long meeting with the president last week, We did not talk about impeachment. Biden, Coons said, is relentlessly focused on delivering coronavirus relief to Americans, as well as countering China and Russia.

Coons was one of a few Democratic senators who balked at the idea of the House impeachment managers seeking to call Trump in as a witness for the trial, calling it a terrible idea. The Delaware Democrat, like many others in the party, is eager to get the trial in the Senates rear-view mirror.

Republicans, too, want to get through the trial as quickly and painlessly as possible. Apart from arguing that the proceedings are unconstitutional, they have not mounted a substantive defense of Trumps actions. Many of them have already publicly said they believe Trumps rhetoric was reckless and irresponsible.

Focusing on a procedural defense, though, allows Republicans to defend the most popular figure in their party without having to justify the alleged conduct at the heart of the Houses impeachment case.

I think most of the focus is going to be on the constitutionality and the precedent set by trying a former officeholder, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said.

Other Republican senators have tried to appeal directly to Bidens desire to work on legislation that has a tangible impact on Americans reeling from the pandemic and sluggish economy rather than pursuing what they view as an attempt at partisan retribution against a former president whose influence can target those who vote to convict him.

The whole thing is stupid, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said. I know this: Nothing we do next week on that floor is going to help people get vaccines or more people keep their jobs. We should be focused on that instead.

Of course, not all Republicans want Trump to fade into the background. Several GOP senators have directly benefited politically from Trumps backing, and see little or no downside if Trumps wing of the party prevails in the coming years.

In fact, some of their political fortunes are dependent on Trumps continued involvement in the party, especially given his outsized impact on turnout among the GOP base. And many of those same Republicans worry that some of Trumps voters might not turn out when he isnt on the ballot.

I think this idea that congressional Republicans secretly hate Trump is a partial fiction, said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). I think a lot of them have done very well by him and his movement, and are not looking forward to him disappearing.

The rest is here:

Where Democrats and Republicans agree on Trump - POLITICO

But if Democrats have learned a lot about economic reality since 2009, theyve learned more about political reality.

Obama came into office sincerely believing that he could reach across the aisle, that Republicans would help him deal with the economic crisis. Despite the reality of scorched-earth opposition, he continued to seek a grand bargain on debt. He regarded the rise of the Tea Party as a fever that would break in his second term. He was, in short, deeply nave.

Many progressives worried that President Biden, who had served in the Senate in a less polarized era, who talks a lot about unity, would repeat Obamas mistakes. But so far he and his congressional allies seem ready to go big, even if that means doing without Republican votes.

One thing that may be encouraging Democrats, by the way, is the fact that Bidens policies actually are unifying, if you look at public opinion rather than the actions of politicians. Bidens Covid-19 relief plan commands overwhelming public approval far higher than approval for Obamas 2009 stimulus. If, as seems likely, not a single Republican in Congress votes for the plan, thats evidence of G.O.P. extremism, not failure on Bidens part to reach out.

Beyond that, Biden and company appear to have learned that caution coming out of the gate doesnt store up political capital to do more things later. Instead, an administration that fails to deliver tangible benefits to voters in its first few months has squandered its advantage and wont get a do-over. Going big on Covid relief now offers the best hope of taking on infrastructure, climate change and more later.

Oh, and Democrats finally seem to have learned that voters arent interested in process. Very few Americans know that the Trump tax cut was rammed through on a party-line vote using reconciliation, the same maneuver Democrats are now pursuing, and almost nobody cares.

Finally, I suspect that Democrats realize that getting policy right is even more important in 2021 than it was in 2009 and not just because of the economics. When much of the opposition party wont acknowledge election results, condones insurrection and welcomes conspiracy theorists into its ranks, you really dont want to pursue policies that might fall short and thereby empower that party in the years ahead.

View original post here:

Opinion | How Democrats Learned to Seize the Day - The New York Times

This triumph did not mean complete success for the New Frontier, the historian James Smallwood wrote in a 1973 journal article on the Rules Committee fight, it only meant that the entire House could consider its proposals and that the majority would rule.

Here in the present, Senate Republicans arent the only ones pumping the brakes on the presidents agenda. On Monday, Manchin announced his total support for the Senate filibuster in an interview with Politico. If I havent said it very plain, maybe Senator McConnell hasnt understood, I want to basically say it for you. That I will not vote in this Congress, thats two years, right? I will not vote to change the filibuster.

Likewise, a spokeswoman for Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona said that the senator is against eliminating the filibuster, and she is not open to changing her mind about the filibuster.

In 1961, the prospect of gridlock and the possibilities opened up by a new administration motivated a coalition of liberals and moderates to change the rules and clear a path that would, in just a few short years, allow Congress to pass some of the most important legislation in its history.

Today, liberals see the opportunity of the moment. But moderates dont appear to be frustrated enough with gridlock and inaction to change the rules of the chamber. They seem to think they can negotiate Republicans out of their partisanship and win votes for policies a $15 federal minimum wage, a new Voting Rights Act that Republicans have already deemed unacceptable. And they seem to think that failure wont matter, that Americans wont notice how the Democratic Party campaigned on help and assistance but never delivered. Yes, without the filibuster to protect them, moderate members will have to take the occasional tough vote. But their constituents will probably care more about checks and vaccines than whether their senator voted with their more liberal colleagues.

At this point, American elections are almost completely nationalized. The broad, diverse coalition that is the Democratic Party will either rise or fall together. Even members with their own personal political appeal need the entire party to win if they are to wield any influence over government. If Manchin wants the government to spend $4 trillion on infrastructure, then hell need the Democratic Party to succeed in as many areas as it can.

The first step toward victory is a government that can act. So, sure, moderate Democrats can keep the filibuster if they want. But they should prepare for when the voting public decides it would rather have the party that promises nothing and does nothing than the one that promises quite a bit but wont work to make any of it a reality.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. Wed like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

See more here:

Opinion | Democrats Should Act as if They Won the Election - The New York Times

Virginia Democrat Sen. Tim Kaine said Wednesday he has drafted a resolution to censure former President Donald Trump for his actions on Jan. 6, a method Kaine thinks would be faster way to hold Trump accountable than an impeachment trial and allow the Senate to move forward with Covid-19 relief and Biden Cabinet confirmations.

Kaine said he had been talking with "about" 40 of his colleagues for a few weeks about the "the likelihood that we would fall short on impeachment," and use up time that could be used to pass a "dire" relief package.

He said there had been "some" interest in a censure motion, but noted that the House has now sent an article of impeachment to the Senate, so the chamber must act.

After the vote yesterday in which all but 5 Republicans joined Sen. Rand Paul in claiming that holding a trial for an ex-president is unconstitutional, Kaine said he thinks there's "maybe a little more interest now" in looking at censure as an alternative way to hold Trump accountable.

Pressed further on his views that censure could be an "alternative" to a trial, Kaine said"to do a trial knowing you'll get 55 votes, at the max seems to me to be not the right prioritization of our time right now."

He cast doubt on the likelihood there would be a strong appetite for the measure if the Senate fails to convict the former president, telling reporters, "I just don't know that there's going to be more appetite to talk about Donald John Trump after the trial."

Kaine would not elaborate on how many of his Republican colleagues he's been talking to and suggested that there wouldn't be a point to moving forward with a censure if it wasn't going to get adequate GOP support.

"If we could do something like this and have it be bipartisan, and thereby potentially avoid the trial, I think that would be beneficial but we're not there yet," he said.

This effort by Kaine is still a very long shot, CNNs Lauren Fox notes.

Moderate Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin threw cold water on the idea on Wednesday, telling reporter,This is much, much more serious than anything that we've ever seen in our lifetime and it's really the purpose of having the articles of impeachment in the constitution, he said, adding, it's really a mechanism or tool, if you will to deter it.

We all want to make sure that no one ever does this again, never thinks about doing something like a seditious insurrection such as that, said the West Virginia Democrat.

Sens. Ron Wyden and Bernie Sanders avoided offering a direct opinion on the censure matter, claiming they were focused on other issues for now.

"Right now, what I'm focused on is doing the work that we're scheduled to do. We'll be starting that shortly. And I said quite some time ago that the key to unity is accountability. I still feel that way," Wyden told reporters

Read more here:

Latest on Biden presidency and Trump impeachment: Live updates - CNN

Ross K. Baker, Opinion columnist Published 7:00 a.m. ET Jan. 25, 2021

Self-examination and opening lines of communication can be valuable, and no hand-wringing or sacrifice of any Democratic constituencies is necessary.

In spring2013, after their defeat in the 2012 presidential election, the Republicans conducted an autopsy on their party to determine how things went wrong. There were recommendations for tactical and organizational changes, but the most important of them involved a call for outreach to groups of Americans who had either been shunned by the GOP or been considered unlikely recruits to the ranks oftheir voters: African Americans, Latinos and members of the LGBT community. Inone of the more ironic developments in modern American political history, three years later, Republican primary election voters chose a man who espoused views that were the very antithesis of those recommendations.

The paradoxical result of the inquest should not be read as proof of that such exercises are useless.In truth, there is no reason why such autopsies should be conducted only by the losers. Winners such as 2020 Democrats would be well-advised to conduct one of their own about why 74millionAmericans voted against them and why they lost strength in the House of Representatives.

Soul-searching is not a prevalent mood among Democrats right now after the invasion of the U.S. Capitol and the re-impeachment of former President Donald Trump. They are entitled to a temporary feeling of triumphalism, but there is also cause for them dosome reflection on how they should reach out to the tens of millions of voters who rejected them and who are sullen and even rebellious. This is not to argue that hardcore Trump loyalists or believers in implausible conspiracies can be won over. Rather, it involves how hard the winners are willing to work to understand the losers.

The Democratic Party since the 1930s has been the home of both the better-educated and racial minorities. But for most of the period was also the political home for blue-collar workers. By the 1970s, two of its most reliable bases of support found themselves at odds with each other. As African Americans advanced demands for both the expansion of political rights and economic advancement, the Democrats blue-collar voters perceived these gains as coming at their expense. Busing to achieve integrated schools and affirmative action became emotional flash points.

President Joe Biden in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington, DC, on January 21, 2021.(Photo: MANDEL NGAN, AFP via Getty Images)

Bridging this divide became a kind of political high-wire act for Democratic presidential nominees. Theydid not always manage this very well, as seen in Hillary Clintons basket of deplorables referenceto Trump followers in 2016 and Barack Obamas dismissive they cling to their guns and religion in 2008 in referenceto some GOP voters.

Trump impeachment: Trump is deflating. Delay his impeachment trial to help Biden and raise conviction odds.

High-mindedness in adherents to a political party is an unstable substance that can mutate into contempt and virtue-signaling. I have spent enough time among hardcore Democrats, especially those in the academic world, to recognize this character flaw. I also pick up the scent of it among people in politics and the media. Profiling is a practice directed not solely at members of minority groups.

I dont know that it would have made much difference in the long run but I think that the liberal knee-jerk reaction of hes not my president to Trump's electionforeclosed an examination of why he was the choice of so many Americans. They might have come to conclusion that his election was just a case of gullibility on the part of a lot of voters, but a closer analysismight also have revealed some legitimate grievances overlooked or dismissed by Democratic leaders.

Never a bottom: The defining phrase of Donald Trump's presidency was 'new low'

Autopsies are post-mortem, but Joe Biden's victory might be a valuableoccasion for at least a diagnostic self-examination on the part of Democrats. This doesnt mean the convening of some grand council of party elders or an exercise in hand-wringing and pearl clutching. President Biden comes to the task of openinglines of communication and dialogue with certain built-in advantages, based on both his background and his style. No loyal Democratic constituency needs to be sacrificed; this is not an exchange of prisoners.

It will not be an easy task for Biden to establish channels of communication with people who believehis election was fraudulent,but they need to be persuaded that their refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of his election however misguided does not place them beyond the pale and that their grievances will be at least acknowledged.

Ross K. Baker is a distinguished professor of political science at Rutgers University and a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors. Follow him on Twitter:@Rosbake1

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2021/01/25/democrats-need-2020-autopsy-who-voted-against-them-why-column/4217998001/

Continue reading here:

Democrats need an autopsy to figure out why 74 million Americans voted against them - USA TODAY

The handling of a harassment investigation into Rep. Diego Hernandez has caused tension among Democrats.

PORTLAND, Ore An independent investigation found that Oregon State Representative Diego Hernandezlikely created hostile work environment for two women at theOregon StateCapitol after they tried to end romantic relationships with him.

The reportis dated January 22 and was first reported publicly by OPB on Monday.

On Tuesday, the handling of the investigation and allegations against Hernandez caused such tension among the Democratic Caucus that one state representative said hes likely to change his party affiliationto independentas soon as tomorrow.

In a phone interview, Rep. Mark Meek (D-Clackamas County) said there was a high chance hed leave the party over this process. Between one and ten? Its an eight,he saidof the likelihood hellleave the Democratic party.

Meek said heand other frustratedDemocrats, whom he refused to name, support the women who raised concerns aboutHernandez. They also support the investigation into his behavior, the findings of which will be turned over to the House Committee on Conduct next week.

What they dont support, he said, was House leadershipspecifically Speaker Tina Kotek (D-Portland)publicizing the investigation into Rep. Hernandez, calling for him to resign and removing him from committee hearings before thefullprocess played out.

Meek saidpassing premature judgment on Hernandez and enacting punishments, as a result, is an example of what can go wrong in a supermajority.

The system is broken, and they were out for Diego without due process, Meek said. Ive been wrestling with this, watching and witnessing what our caucus means, what the supermajority means, and Ive been in the supermajority. But do I think its healthy? NoDo I think our average citizen is heard and respected? No.

Meek said he had read the summary of the report into Hernandezs conduct but not the full 33-page report.

KotekcalledforHernandez to resign camein May of last year after the states Legislative Equity Officer and an independent investigator recommended that leaders take immediate actions to protect Hernandezs accusers.

In response to Meeks claims, Kotek said via email The conduct committee is evenly split between Republicans and Democrats. This isnt about politics. Its about upholding a safe working environment in the Capitol. To suggest otherwise is offensive.

The frustrations boiled over a day afterOPBfirstreportedthenews that theoutside investigation found Hernandez likely created a hostile work environment for two women at the Capitol after they tried to end romantic relationships with him. Investigators found both women felt their careers were in jeopardy because of the breakups.

One of the women told investigatorsthatafter she tried to end things, Hernandez texted and called frequently, left flowers on her car at the Capitol and showed up at her home unannounced, prompting her to hide in her closetwhere he couldnt see her.Eventually, the woman told investigators, Hernandez stopped texting about their relationship and started sending texts criticizing her work performance.

The investigation also found a third woman had reason to feel uncomfortable working around him after their relationship ended. Investigators wrote the representative sent her texts that could reasonably be interpreted as controlling and abusive.

None of the womenarenamedin the investigation.

Hernandez, who won reelection in 2020, issued a statement on the investigation Tuesday. It read in part, Dating when you are young is hard. Some dating relationships do not end definitively, but rather slip away over time. There is often some confusion, mixed signals, and strained emotions. To anyone I made uncomfortable in my personal life, I sincerely apologize.

Thestaterepresentative went on to say he comes from poverty and a lot of trauma and it has taken me a long time to understand, grow and learn from it.

He ended the statement by saying he looks forward to presenting his rebuttal at next weeks conduct hearing, writing Too often we have seen the conduct rules politicized, cases tried in the press, and punishment meted by leadership before investigations are complete in reality its afear-basedsystem that traumatizes all sides inanunreasonably lengthy process that has no basis or intent in restorative, reconciliatory, or transformative justice.

Kotek issued a statement on the investigation as well, writing I believed [the women] then and I believe them now. Im focused on doing everything I can to ensure the Capitol is a safe working environment and that people can do their work without the threat of harassment or retaliation.

The investigation into Hernandezs conduct is one of the first after lawmakers completed a massive overhaul of the states reporting and vetting system when it came to complaints about harassment in the workplace. That overhaul stemmed from a watershed moment in 2019 when a series of complaints from nine women who worked at the Capitol resulted in a $1.1 million settlement.

This is not Rep. Hernandezs first run-in with accusations of this type. Hetook a leave of absence from the Legislature after domestic violence allegations against him were made public earlier this year.

A woman he had dated and lived with between January and April 2019 wrote he was prone to violent outbursts, including throwing things at her while under the influence. She said that he usually mixed alcohol, narcotic pills and marijuana.

That woman, whom KGW is not naming, later requested a dismissal for the order after what she called intimidation tactics from Rep. Hernandez. She declined to comment for this story.

See the rest here:

Democratic state rep threatens to leave party over handling of harassment investigation - KGW.com

Democrat Andy Ruff set out with plans to flip Indianas 9th Congressional District in the 2020 election. After months of traveling across southern Indiana, Ruff said he knew on Election Day the results were inevitable.

You could make a strong impression on someone, Ruff said. But if you had a D by your name, you were just excluded immediately from being a possibility.

Ruff lost to two-term incumbent Republican Trey Hollingsworth by 28 points, keeping with southern Indianas rightward trend. In the state legislature, every state Senate seat in southern Indiana is held by a Republican outside of Bloomington. All three southern Indiana congressional seats have been held by Republicans since 2011. In Indianas rolling hills, 9th District Democrats such as Baron Hill and his predecessor, Lee Hamilton, are long gone.

The results have left Hoosier Democrats in the 9th District puzzled about the past, sorting through the present and uncertain about the future.

***

Todd Lare remembers Baron Hills walks. Hill was the last Democrat to represent Indianas 9th District. Lare considered himself the eyes and ears of the district as deputy district director during a portion of Hills terms.

Hill, a native of Seymour, Indiana, in the 9th District, served in Congress from 1999-2005 and again from 2007-2011. As a representative, Hill walked through the district every summer. Residents would often join Hill on his walks along the 9th District backroads for one-on-one conversation on the issues affecting their families.

He knew how to represent them because he was them, Lare said.

But familiarity did not save Hill. He was voted out for the second and final time in 2010. Throughout Hills time in office, Lare saw changing politics in the region. Most notably, Lare said he believes many conservatives moved out of the Louisville metro area in Kentucky and across the Ohio River into Indianas Floyd and Clark counties.

And after Hill left office, the 9th Districts map changed. In 2011, with Republicans in control of the Indiana Statehouse, the congressional map was redrawn.

Every ten years we have an opportunity, and for the last several of those opportunities, the Democrats have had little say on redistricting, Lare said. If we could get more districts favorable or equally split, perhaps, we would have a better shot at winning back some of the congressional seats.

After the 2011 redistricting, Democratic candidates have not been within 10 points of Republicans in the 9th District. The congressional district and state legislative district maps will be redrawn this year ahead of the 2022 election based on the 2020 census.

Republicans hold a two-thirds supermajority in both the Indiana House and Senate, allowing the party to pass legislation without any Democrats present. Indiana is one of 26 states in the U.S. where the state legislature draws both the congressional and state legislative maps without needing bipartisan support.

Democrats have been hurt by the current map of Indiana congressional districts that favors Republicans, a practice known as gerrymandering. In the 2020 election, 40.7% of Hoosiers voted for a Democrat in their U.S. congressional race. With Republicans holding seven of nine seats, only 22.2% of the Indiana population is represented by a Democrat.

The Indiana state legislature drew the current congressional maps in 2011. Democrats will need to improve their standing in state legislature races by 2030 to have a meaningful say in drawing maps.

Five bills related to a more fair and transparent redistricting process were proposed in the Indiana Statehouse in 2020. None of the bills advanced to the state House or Senate floor.

Democrats can continue to advocate for changes to the redistricting process in the future, but with a current dark red Statehouse, Republicans have full control this year to draw the congressional and state legislative maps, which will be in effect for the next 10 years.

***

John Zody has spent 23 years in Indiana politics. The Bloomington resident remembers starting his political career when south of Interstate 70 in Indiana meant Democrat country.

In Zodys eight years as Indiana Democratic Party chair, he focused on reversing the increasingly red trend across the state, especially in rural regions such as southern Indiana.

In rural areas we are having a tough time, Zody said. We need to keep working on how to reach out to rural voters about the issues that are important to them.

In the 2020 election, Ruff lost badly in the rural counties of the 9th District. Ruff won only 21% of the vote in Lawrence and Jackson counties and 19% in Morgan County.

Republicans trace this rural dominance in southern Indiana to recent economic success for the state and a national Democratic party shifting to the left.

If you just look at the last week and the executive orders coming from new President Biden, those arent going to resonate with southern Indiana, Indiana Republican Party Chair Kyle Hupfer said, mentioning the stoppage of the Keystone XL pipeline and the rejoining of the Paris Climate Agreement as examples.

Republicans have controlled the state Senate, House and governorship since 2011. Hupfer believes this has allowed Republicans to establish a brand while Democrats are unable to dictate any policy.

Ruff points to Democrats problems in rural areas as consequences of a lack of local and reliable media.

What I didnt realize was how deeply the negative talk radio and Fox News type of media had sunk into so many peoples minds, Ruff said. I dont think people are politically that different in their policy priorities then when Baron represented the district. Its this cultivated dislike, hatred, identity allegiance that has been created.

Ruff said he believes the current media and political environment creates polarization of political parties.

I could talk to people and get all kinds of agreement of issues on my platform, Ruff said. But they wouldnt consider voting for me.

***

Zodys second term as Democratic chair ends in March. He will be stepping down, but hes not giving up on rural voters.

His playbook starts with avoiding hot button social issues and instead reaching out to voters on kitchen table problems, he said.

You got to look at those issues that are everyday in front of people as they get up and try to go to work, Zody said. Where is health care losing? About a third of our hospitals dont have access to OB-GYN and prenatal services. A lot of those are in rural areas.

Through shifting politics, gerrymandering and greater political polarization, Republicans slowly seized control of southern Indiana and the 9th District. Lare and Zody said they agree Democrats gaining a foothold and even winning back the 9th District is not impossible, but it will be a tedious process.

We need to listen more than talk, Lare said And not just show up on peoples doors every two years.

That effort has seemingly worked for the Indiana Republican Party.

We have election cycle after election cycle, continue to grow the grassroots support of Indiana Republicans across the state, Hupfer said. Weve continued to add volunteers, weve continued to add communication mechanisms to our supporters.

Zody said he hopes that Donald Trump no longer being president will help localize state races instead of making them a referendum on national parties. Democrats recent success in municipal races across Indiana gives Zody faith they can turn the tide in state races, he said.

When we see a decline in local journalism and the outlets that are available, people might turn to national news, Zody said. We need to make sure that we are communicating every way we think we should and can.

Democrats such as Lare and Zody believe a return to local old-fashioned politics in the spirit of Baron Hill can make a difference in southern Indiana.

Its going to take incremental years of work to rebuild and to also rebuild the trust that has been lost in particularly rural areas of the southern district, Lare said. I dont think its going to happen overnight.

Read more:

Democrats lost control of southern Indiana. But some believe they can turn the tide. - Indiana Daily Student

Democrats spent much of the last four years debating exactly how they lost to a fairly unpopular and flawed candidate like Donald Trump in 2016 and what changes they needed to make to avoid another defeat. They debated if they needed to be more liberal or more conservative on policy; if they should be principally focused on the Sun Belt or the Rust Belt, on voters of color, white voters with college degrees or white voters without degrees; if they needed to nominate more white men as candidates or more women and people of color; if they had to talk about race less or economics more.

Now we have President Biden. Biden won the partys nomination and the general election. He has selected people to fill top jobs in his administration and outlined the policies that administration will prioritize. In other words, we now have a pretty detailed picture of where the Democratic Party landed on many of those debates. And the main takeaway is this: A multiracial group of Obama-style Democrats are in charge, just like from 2009 to 2016. Theyre solidly left of center but mostly from the ideological middle of the party, not its leftmost wing. They are establishment types, who served in the Clinton or Obama administrations and generally havent rocked the boat too much in their careers. But this time, the explicit goal is to push and enact more leftward-leaning policies compared to the Obama administration, in particular on both economic and racial issues.

[Related: It Will Be Tough For Biden To Reverse Trumps Legacy Of A Whiter, More Conservative Judiciary]

Its worth briefly telling the story of the Democratic Party over the last four years, to explain how it ended up here. From the day after Hillary Clintons defeat in the 2016 presidential election to the 2018 midterms, Democrats were battling over the partys direction but mostly focused on fighting now former President Trump. The real fight over the partys future came in the 2020 presidential primary. Biden explicitly ran against the more progressive wing of the party that is best exemplified by Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Biden won in large part because of the support he got from the partys more establishment and centrist figures who were wary of Sanders and Warren.

But along the way to his victory in the Democratic primaries, Biden moved left when compared to the Obama-Biden administrations stances. He embraced a government-based health insurance option, for example, which Obama had downplayed. He promised to halt most deportations of undocumented immigrants in his first 100 days in office; Obamas administration deported so many immigrants, some rights advocates dubbed him the deporter-in-chief.

Then, after Biden basically had wrapped up the nomination, two real-world events pushed him even further left. On economic issues, it was the coronavirus pandemic. With the effects of COVID-19 putting many Americans out of work, Biden promised an FDR-style approach as president to help Americans economically. On racial issues, the pandemic, with its disproportionately high death rates among Black Americans, and the nationwide protests after Minneapolis police killed George Floyd pushed the Democratic Party leftward.

The racial reckoning made Harris who was already one of the most logical choices as Bidens running mate basically a shoo-in. Harris, like Biden, is a center-left establishment Democrat who has moved leftward as the party drifted in that direction but is not as progressive as Sanders or Warren.

Sanders, Warren and Ocasio-Cortez and the broader left wing of the Democratic Party unified behind Biden in the general election. But the Biden wing had won the primary and that was clear as Biden began to fill top jobs in Washington.

Biden hasnt picked a lot of people for key jobs who endorsed Sanders or Warren for president or who are explicitly tied to the partys more anti-establishment progressive wing. But he hasnt explicitly cast off the left either. Instead, Biden has gone about filling the government and leadership of the Democratic Party with a demographically diverse group of establishment types who have moved left in recent years like Harris and Biden himself. Bidens approach to filling out top jobs is perhaps best exemplified by his choices of Jamie Harrison, who was unsuccessful in his 2020 bid to be South Carolinas first-ever Black Democratic U.S. senator, to be chair of the Democratic National Committee; Alejandro Mayorkas, who would be the first immigrant and first Latino to run the Department of Homeland Security, and Jake Sullivan as national security adviser. Sullivan, who is a white man, is not a unique choice based on demographic characteristics, but the one-time top adviser to Hillary Clintons 2016 campaign urged the party to become more populist after Clintons defeat.

[Is Bidens Vision Of Unity Possible?]

Of course, there are some very progressive people who have been selected to key posts in Bidens administration, including Rep. Deb Haaland as interior secretary and Gary Gensler and Rohit Chopra to lead key financial industry oversight departments. But we couldnt do a story describing seven competing ideological wings in Bidens Washington the way we did in 2017 when Trump came to office. Instead, in the Biden administration, there is one clear, dominant ideological view left of Obama in 2016, not as left as Warren now.

Left of Obama in 2016, not as left as Warren now, of course, isnt a precise ideology. But we are already getting some glimpses of what that means in practice. Incoming White House chief of staff Ron Klain explicitly described the four main focuses of the administration in a memo released the weekend before Biden was inaugurated: [T]he COVID-19 crisis, the resulting economic crisis, the climate crisis, and a racial equity crisis. It is hard to imagine that Obama would have so explicitly included racial issues as one of his top four goals in January 2009. In another leftward shift, Biden has said he will prioritize the economic standing of everyday Americans over trying to keep down the federal budget deficit; the latter had been a focus of Obamas.

At the same time, there is little indication Biden will push for getting rid of the filibuster, forgiving most student loan debt by executive order or other priorities of the more progressive wing of the party. Having a President Biden, instead of a President Warren or President Sanders, means that the left is still largely locked out of power. The Democratic Party spent 2017 to 2020 debating the best strategy to defeat Trump. It will spend the next two years debating what, exactly, Biden should enact and push in terms of policy and what he should do to make sure Democrats do well in the 2022 midterms. And that debate is likely to feature a lot of the same left-vs.-center-left dynamics weve seen before.

[Women Of Color Were Shut Out Of Congress For Decades. Now Theyre Transforming It.]

In short, Bidens Democratic Party will be the most demographically diverse group ever to run Washington and perhaps the most left-leaning since the days of President Lyndon Johnson. The big questions will be how far to the left Biden and his team of establishment types want to go and whether other factors force him to either tack right or go even more left than what they had planned.

Read the original here:

Bidens Team And Priorities Show How The Democratic Party Changed In The Trump Era - FiveThirtyEight

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, seen here at the U.S. Capitol on Thursday, says Democrats don't intend to take nuking the filibuster off the table. Drew Angerer/Getty Images hide caption

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, seen here at the U.S. Capitol on Thursday, says Democrats don't intend to take nuking the filibuster off the table.

Adam Jentleson knows firsthand how powerful a tool the filibuster can be and what's possible without it. He was deputy chief of staff to former Nevada Sen. Harry Reid, who was majority leader in 2013 when Democrats exercised "the nuclear option," eliminating the filibuster for presidential appointees.

Now, Jentleson and a growing number of Democrats argue Senate leaders should eliminate the filibuster for legislation, which would enable Democrats to pass major legislation with a simple Senate majority, instead of the current 60-vote threshold. Jentleson lays out his argument in a recent book, Kill Switch: The Rise of the Modern Senate and the Crippling of American Democracy.

In participating regions, you'll also hear a local news segment that will help you make sense of what's going on in your community.

Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

This episode was produced by Brianna Scott and Brent Baughman. It was edited by Lee Hale with help from Deirdre Walsh and Wynne Davis. Our executive producer is Cara Tallo.

Read the original post:

'We Have To Stop Rewarding Obstruction:' Will Democrats Nuke The Filibuster? : Consider This from NPR - NPR