Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi made some news today, by tentatively signalling she is now more open to the idea of banning members of Congress from making individual stock trades while they serve in office. The easiest way to do this, of course, would be to require all members to turn over all their holdings to a blind trust before they are sworn in. That would solve the problem entirely, but there are currently multiple proposals floating around Capitol Hill with various ideas as to how best achieve a trading ban. Pelosi's previous position had been to reject the idea entirely, saying back in December (when asked about banning members from individual trades): "We're a free-market economy. They should be able to participate in that." She got a lot of blowback for this, while the idea has continued to gain steam among not only Democrats but also some Republicans as well. Today on the Senate floor, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer got behind the idea wholeheartedly, addressing the Senate: "I believe this is an important issue that Congress should address, and it is something that has clearly raised interest on both sides of the aisle over the last few weeks." He urged senators to act sooner rather than later, as well. Pelosi, when asked about Schumer's comments, had a more-nuanced response: "I do believe in the integrity of people in public service. I want the public to have that understanding. We have to do this to deter something that we see as a problem.... And if that's what the members want to do, then that's what we will do."

Read Complete Article »

It was an eventful week in Washington, with a holiday and an anniversary thrown in for good measure, so we're going to try to be a little more succinct in this week's rundown. Well... try to, at any rate.

The week began with Martin Luther King Junior Day, saw a historic (but failed) vote in the Senate on voting rights, contained a marathon of a presidential press conference, and marked the first year President Joe Biden has spent in office. Plus a whole lot of other notable developments along the way.

Read Complete Article »

Every so often I see a political ad that really catches my eye. Even rarer are those that bowl me over for being particularly effective or powerful. But the rarest of all is seeing an ad that makes me want to move to that state just so I could vote for the guy. Today was one of those days.

Read Complete Article »

For the first time, the Justice Department has brought charges of sedition against those who allegedly plotted to stop the constitutional process of Congress counting the Electoral College votes to officially determine who will be the next president. Eleven members of the Oath Keepers were charged with seditious conspiracy today, which seems entirely fitting for what took place at the United States Capitol on January 6th last year. In fact, many have been wondering what took the Department of Justice so long to bring such charges.

Read Complete Article »

Welcome back to the second part of our year-end awards column! If you missed it, please feel free to check out [Part 1], too.

Read Complete Article »

Welcome to the first installment of our year-end awards!

We do have to warn readers, right up front, that this is an insanely long article. If you're one of those "tl;dr" types of people, we would strongly advise you to go find a short listicle somewhere else, to read instead. Because this will be a marathon, not a sprint (as always).

Read Complete Article »

California Governor Gavin Newsom has decided that the way to fight fire is with some fire of his own. This can be a valuable political tactic at times, to show the opposition party that their own schemes can be used by the other side in unforeseen ways. But doing so always runs the risk of sparking a conflagration that burns everything down. And this could be one of those times.

It's understandable what Newsom is trying to do and the message he is trying to send. It's an important message, and its intended targets are the six conservative justices on the United States Supreme Court. Plainly stated, this message is: "Be very careful what legal tactics you decide are constitutional, because they will be used in ways you do not like or approve of."

Read Complete Article »

Democrats, as a whole, are pretty bad about messaging. Every so often a brilliant orator breaks this mold (Bill Clinton, Barack Obama) by displaying an ease of communicating with average Americans on a relatable level while still clearly getting their point across. But for the most part, Democratic politicians struggle to master what should be a basic political artform. This problem shows up in an acute way when the subject is the economy. Democrats perpetually shy away from touting economic gains because they fear sounding "out of touch" with the people out there who are still struggling. Republicans, on the other hand, never worry about this at all -- they tout their own successes as a never-before-seen golden age of economic bliss, no matter what is actually going on around kitchen tables across the country. The GOP hammers home this "things are great!" message so effectively that a lot of people start thinking positively about the future even if their own circumstances haven't changed (or have actually gotten worse). Democrats never tap into this inherent optimism because they're always worried that someone somewhere is going to react negatively to hearing some positive news.

Read Complete Article »

The Supreme Court has put America on notice. Once again, it is about to roll back a basic constitutional right for a major part of the country's population. They did so previously on voting rights when they gutted the Voting Rights Act, and they're about to do so again on the right to an abortion. The clock is now ticking on Roe v. Wade, and time will run out whenever they issue their opinion on the Mississippi case before them, which is expected to happen next June (at the end of their yearly term).

Read Complete Article »

Today the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case involving a new law in Mississippi which bans abortions after the first 15 weeks of pregnancy (more technically: 15 weeks from the woman's last menstrual cycle). This law was enacted as a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court case which legalized abortion in this country. And after the arguments were heard the only real question most observers had was whether the court will overturn Roe outright, or just gut it so completely that it will become all but meaningless (as they did earlier to the Voting Rights Act). Either way, it seems we need to start contemplating what a post-Roe country will look like.

Read Complete Article »