Chuck Schumer’s Political Malpractice
Discover more from The Bulwark
Chuck Schumer’s Political Malpractice
Pennsylvania’s GOP discovers the downside of crazy.
Before we get to Chuck Schumer’s latest episode of legislative bumf***ery, I want to call your attention to what’s happening in Pennsylvania, where the GOP is belatedly discovering the downside of sleeping with the crazy.
In the PA governor’s race, what’s left of the Republican “establishment” is in full panic over the possibility that a Jan. 6th coup-attending election-denier might win next week’s primary.
And, in the PA Senate race, the same bunch are in full panic (but I repeat myself) over the possibility that a hitherto obscure, and quite definitely bizarre, candidate might win next week’s primary. Via Axios:
Influential Republicans in Washington and among the nationwide party elite are having a belated "oh s--t" moment over the previously unimaginable prospect that Kathy Barnette could win their party's nomination for the open Senate seat in Pennsylvania.
Thoughts and prayers, of course, for the party that worries about the lunatic fringe but is still all in for the Donald Trump Restoration.
Speaking of which:
Schumer’s abortion vote botch job
It could have been 52-48, or even 53-47, but yesterday Chuck Schumer couldn’t even get 50 votes for his doomed-to-fail performative vote on abortion.
Of course, even with the extra votes, the measure would have fallen short of the 60 votes it needed for passage. But that was never the point of the show vote, which was supposed to be all about messaging. But Schumer managed to bungle even that.
The other day my colleague Tim Miller previewed the Dem leader’s “strategy.”
To the delight of Republican senators, Schumer plans to make Democratic senators vote on abortion legislation that is both unpopular—it would legalize abortions through all nine months of pregnancy, a position most Americans disapprove of—and hopeless, since it does not have the votes to pass.
Here’s a tip: If you are going to force everyone to take a meaningless messaging vote for public-relations purposes, consider choosing a bill that hurts the other party’s popularity, not your own!
With all due respect, the reality was even worse. . .
The point of the exercise was allegedly to fire up the Dem base, but the bill was apparently also designed to rouse the GOP base in opposition. Well, mission accomplished.
Two pro-choice GOP senators, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski both voted no, and Democrat Joe Manchin did what he does best and broke with his party.
"Make no mistake, it is not Roe v. Wade codification," he said of the Women's Health Protection Act. "It is an expansion, it wipes 500 state laws off the books, it expands abortion, and with that, that's not where we are today. We should not be dividing this country further than we're already divided, and it's really the politics of Congress that's dividing the country."
Rail against Manchin all you like, but remember, as Tim wrote last year, Joe Manchin Is the Only Thing Standing Between America and Sen. Cletus Von Ivermectin in 2024.
Both Collins and Murkowski expressed support for codifying Roe v. Wade, but also pointed out that the actual bill that Schumer put on the floor was much more sweeping, and apparently, there was little effort to accommodate their concerns. In a statement, Collins complained that the “overly broad language far exceeds Roe by striking down state laws such as those that require certain materials to be given to the patient, prohibit sex-based abortions, or require parental or guardian notification for minors seeking an abortion.”
I know that it’s more fun to dunk on Collins for the whole calling-police-on-the-chalk-thing, but take a moment to actually listen to her objections. Which are (1) not crazy, and (2) the sort of compromises that will be required in a post-Roe world. Here’s her statement:
“I support codifying the abortion rights established by Roe v. Wade and affirmed by Planned Parenthood v. Casey. That’s not what the Women’s Health Protection Act would do,” said Senator Collins. “Unlike some far-left activists, Senator Murkowski and I want the law today to be the law tomorrow. That’s why we introduced legislation in February that would enshrine the important Roe and Casey protections into law without undercutting statutes that have been in place for decades and without eliminating basic conscience protections that are relied upon by health care providers who have religious objections to performing abortions.
“Contrary to claims from Senate Democratic leaders that their bill would not infringe upon the religious rights of individuals and religious institutions, the WHPA explicitly invalidates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in connection with abortion and supersedes other longstanding, bipartisan conscience laws, including provisions in the Affordable Care Act, that protect health care providers who choose not to offer abortion services for moral or religious reasons.
Last week, when he was asked why he is not considering the GOP senators’ more moderate proposal, Schumer told reporters that Democrats “are not looking to compromise on something as vital as this.”
This is backwards, because, as Matt Yglesias noted, “The most vital issues are precisely the ones where it’s important to compromise in order to win.”
There were obvious alternatives.
Schumer could have put Collins-Murkowski up for a vote and would have gotten a bipartisan majority.
He could have put Republicans on the defensive by forcing a vote on exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the mother.
He could have cast the GOP as extremists by proposing protections for the abortion rights of women with ectopic pregnancies.
Democrats could even have forced a vote on codifying Griswold, which protects the right to contraception.
But once again playing to the activist base rather than to his gettable colleagues, Schumer instead went ahead with a bill that was Mitch McConnell’s messaging dream.
In the end, the show vote left the GOP united and emboldened; and Democrats divided and, despite much fustian and many tweets, without a credible Plan B.
Even Republicans were gobsmacked by Schumer’s muddle.
The approach has perplexed Republicans, who have settled on a strategy of casting Democrats as the extremists. . . .
“They’re not even attempting to nuance this at all,” Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) said. “It’s all, you know, abortion up to the point of birth … which doesn’t even attempt to try and win over people who might be persuadable if they were a little less aggressive in their approach. They’ve decided they’re going full monty on this.”
The political malpractice, it burns.
Exit take: There may be more votes ahead, but yesterday was a lost opportunity, and a possible harbinger of botches yet to come.
Join us!
Warning: On Thursday night we’re going to try to have grown-up discussion on the livestream about Roe and Dobbs. I’m not confident that this is achievable: Abortion is the most divisive and fraught subject in politics, even under the best of circumstances; right now everyone is on a hair trigger. And no matter what you or I believe, there will be smart people of good faith on the show and in the chat who disagree with us.
But we will give it a go anyway, at 8:00 p.m. EDT on Thursday night.
If you’re inclined, I hope you’ll join us. It won’t be a happy show, but I’m hoping that we’ll be able to model for each other how to have these conversations in a way that’s respectful, empathetic, smart, and kind.
No dunking. No insults. No exaggerations. No hysteria. Just people trying to work through one of the hardest problems in good faith.
Obviously, only for members of Bulwark+.
GOP Fight Club
ICYMI, the former president took at shot at three GOP governors yesterday:
Today, the worst “election integrity” Governor in the country, Brian Kemp, loaded the great state of Georgia up with RINOs. That’s right, he had them all. Chris Christie, Doug Ducey from Arizona, and Pete Ricketts from Nebraska. That tells you all you need to know about what you are getting in Georgia—just a continuation of bad elections and a real RINO if you vote for Brian Kemp.
That drew a pointed reply from Chris Christie:
**
Part Deux
Rep. Dan Crenshaw mixing it up with Putin-apologist MTG. Shots fired.
Quick Hits
1. There’s Still More to Be Done to Help Afghans
Jim Swift, in today’s Bulwark:
Private charity is wonderful, and a great many Americans—including many people in our Bulwark audience—were very generous last year. But what is really most needed now is government action—like the Afghan Adjustment Act that, in various forms, is being considered in Congress. An attempt to attach it to a bill supporting Ukraine failed this week, but its backers say they intend to keep trying.
2. I had some thoughts
Cheap Shots
Don’t really need a translation here, do you?
We have a winner.
Chuck Schumer’s Political Malpractice
Two thousand or so years ago, a woman conceived and gave birth to a baby and no man was involved. Otherwise, conception has always required a male as well as a female. Based on the various descriptions of proposed anti-abortion laws and various trigger laws waiting for Roe to be overturned, the male's role seems to have been overlooked (gosh, could it be on purpose?).
If the goal is to criminalize abortion, why does the burden fall only on the woman? It takes two to make a baby and, if there are going to be laws penalizing the mother, they should also apply to the father. If such equal treatment was baked into the various proposed and triggered laws, I doubt any of them would see the light of day.
Greg Norman—STAY IN YOUR LANE