General Motors just announced several plant closures and over ten thousand layoffs, in a bid to restructure their operations for the future. Americans aren't buying so many sedans any more, so GM is shuttering some plants that make these cars. This includes a plant in Ohio, after President Trump personally promised workers that no factories would be shutting down there. Trump even went further, by personally advising Ohio workers not to sell their houses and move since manufacturing jobs would be such solid future prospects. So the GM announcement came as a rather personal blow to the president.

Trump, being Trump, reacted as he usually does to bad news -- by throwing a petulant tantrum and rage-tweeting dire (but ultimately meaningless) threats. Trump also apparently called up the C.E.O. and tried to talk her into changing her mind. This was noticeably unsuccessful, since that is not how gigantic corporations do business in the real world. Trump, channelling his inner strongman, then began threatening to take away "all subsidies" the federal government gives to GM, in retaliation. This is a paper tiger of a threat, however, since Congress passes tax law and is constitutionally barred from "bills of attainder" that target one individual (or one corporation -- as Mitt Romney would say: "corporations are people, too"). The executive branch can't just unilaterally threaten an American company, and the legislative branch is likewise prohibited from such targeted punishment.

Continue Reading »

Another challenge has emerged for Nancy Pelosi to deal with, in her bid to become speaker of the House again. The so-called "Problem Solvers Caucus" (which includes nine Democrats) is demanding changes to the House's rules, and they have drawn a metaphorical line in the sand over three provisions they want to force Pelosi to adopt. In other words, the Problem Solvers are creating problems for Pelosi.

Continue Reading »

That headline represents a distinction with a difference, as it could determine the next speaker of the House of Representatives. Is not voting for Nancy Pelosi for the speaker's chair the political equivalent of voting against Nancy Pelosi? Because, politics aside, there is an enormous difference between the two in terms of the rules of the House.

Continue Reading »

This was already going to be a sparse week for columns, what with the holiday and all, but I regret to inform you that it's about to get even sparser. There will be no column today, because I have to deal with the auto repair shop (fuel pump is getting replaced), and some desperately-needed site maintenance. There will also be no new columns on Thursday or Friday this week, although I may find the energy to post a re-run (no promises). So tomorrow, look for a new column, but then there won't be another new column until next Monday. I apologize in advance for the bumpy service this week, and wish everyone safe travels and a happy Thanksgiving!

-- Chris Weigant

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

It is rare that I leave myself open to being accused of being too Pollyannaish or otherwise sticking my head in the sand, but today I feel there's definitely a risk of this. Because I am not all that concerned about our new Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker -- although I do realize there are plenty of others who are. But I think that while the pushback against his appointment is necessary and should be pursued by Democrats as vigorously as possible, in the end the real fight is going to be over the next actual attorney general, not the acting one we have now.

If the Whitaker appointment had not been controversial -- if it hadn't followed the forced resignation of Jeff Sessions, in other words -- then perhaps I would be more worried about him. If Washington as a whole had taken a ho-hum attitude towards his appointment, then there would probably be lots to worry about. To put this another way: Who knows what he would have gotten up to if he hadn't felt the heat of public opinion?

But so far the pushback has been so strong and so relentless that this is simply no longer an option. For every minute that Whitaker sits in the big chair at the Department of Justice, he is going to be living life under a very powerful microscope. Every single thing he does is going to be critically examined either now or in a very short time, when Democrats regain control of the House of Representatives in January. Whitaker now knows this. He is fully aware that his every move will be critically examined by Democrats, whether in real time or in retrospect, before House investigative committees. This should serve to put severe limits on the amount of mischief he even attempts to get up to.

Continue Reading »

Most Americans, not being political wonks, have largely moved on from the midterm election results. The mainstream media has also largely been ignoring the still-developing story, for two reasons: (1) they really kind of blew it on Election Night, uniformly coming to the wrong conclusion very early in the evening ("the blue wave is not appearing") and so they're now avoiding having to correct their misinterpretation; and (2) there's a recount in Florida again! Woo hoo! Break out the video clips of that poor myopic cross-eyed guy with the magnifying glass -- that's always fun to run, right?

Sigh.

However, one notable person hasn't exactly been ignoring the still-increasing blue wave. From an extraordinary article (titled: "Five Days Of Fury: Inside Trump's Paris Temper, Election Woes And Staff Upheaval") comes the following behind-the-scenes news from President Trump last weekend:

Continue Reading »

You'll have to forgive me for writing yet another column on the midterm elections, but Maine has just made a bit of electoral history, and judging from conversations I've had recently with friends, their new voting system is not yet fully understood by all. Which is a shame, because it certainly is an innovation in the way people cast their votes. The jury's still really out on whether it is a good innovation or not, but it certainly is a different way of doing the business of counting votes.

Continue Reading »

We're over a week from Election Day, and the vote-counting still ongoing. Currently, three races are commanding the media's attention, but there are plenty of other interesting things happening out there if you look beyond just Florida and Georgia. Because while the Election Day news for Democrats was good, it has only grown better and better since then -- even if few in the media are still paying attention. Today I thought it'd be worth it to take a look at all the other late election returns, which might be classified not so much as a blue tsunami (crashing ashore quickly) but rather as a sort of blue high tide -- a slow rise over time that eventually hits a high-water mark. Because that's exactly what is happening out there.

Continue Reading »

While most of the Washington political press continues an obsession that had little (or nothing) to do with the Democrats' midterm election successes -- merely by changing their stock question: "So, if elected, will you immediately move to impeach Trump?" to: "So, now that you've been elected, will your first act be to impeach Trump?" -- the actual journalists over at NPR took the more obvious step of just asking the incoming House Democratic leadership what they were going to do first (without any preconceived and/or obsessive assumptions). The answer they got back was ambitious, if not downright breathtaking. Their scoop has so far been mostly ignored by the rest of the inside-the-Beltway crowd, but will likely grow in importance over time.

The answer NPR got back was that Democrats are going to begin by directly attacking some of the worst aspects of the way American elections are run, as well as some of the worst ethical lapses that Trump has normalized. Here is what the first bill of the incoming House -- or "H.R. 1" -- will aim to accomplish:

Continue Reading »

Today, I am reprinting an old column about World War I, since yesterday was the centenary of the armistice which ended the war, on the eleventh day of the eleventh month of 1918. Over the years I've been blogging, I have written about "The Great War" twice (both of which were actually written for Memorial Day rather than Armistice Day). In 2009, I wrote of honoring all the war dead, most certainly including the tens of thousands of soldiers who died of the Spanish Influenza after being called up.

But a year earlier I wrote a column to honor the soldiers who fought in this most brutal of wars. In it, I quoted another article about the battle of the Meuse-Argonne which generally pointed out Americans' lack of interest in World War I (compared to World War II and the Civil War). My article ends with a plug for a French organization which is dedicated to laying flowers on American soldiers' graves in Normandy. The level of dedication the French give to the slain of both world wars should impress every American. This is the column I've chosen to run again today.

But I have to add at least a short note of condemnation for President Donald Trump before we get to that. Trump's actions over the weekend were (to use a word he loves throwing around with abandon) nothing short of disgraceful. He only went to the centenary because the Pentagon essentially denied him his own military parade, and his boredom with the entire process was evident to all. And yet, for some reason, prominent ex-military voices are silent here at home. Just imagine what they would have said if a Democrat had put in a similar performance on the world's stage at a solemn event to honor our war dead.

Continue Reading »