Lots of Fallout from Lots of Bombs

More on the fallout of yesterday’s House budget resolution vote: My representative, Republican Mike Lawler, put out a statement:

Rep. Mike Lawler (R-New York) said Trump has promised he would not allow Medicaid to be cut.

“The president was clear about that. I was clear about that,” Lawler said. “We will work through this, but the objective today is to begin the process.”

Trump promises a lot of things. Then he changes his mind, or finds out the promised things are really hard to accomplish, and then he un-promises them. From the same news story linked above:

GOP leaders insist Medicaid is not specifically listed in the initial 60-page budget framework, which is true; the proposal directs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which oversees Medicaid, to cut $880 billion in spending over the next decade.

And apparently there is no way to achieve the $880 billion in spending cuts without slashing Medicaid and other programs, such as food assistance, that people really need to survive.

The more extremist elements among the House Republicans will want to hold to that $880 billion figure. Trump probably will also, because he promised rich donors that he would extend their tax cuts in exchange for their support. So that’s his priority. But then you’ve got House Republicans in swing districts — which would include Mike Lawler — who believe they will be toast in 2026 if Medicaid and other social services are cut to benefit billionaires. They know they’re handing the Democrats a talking point even the Dems can’t screw up. Maybe.

A U.S. Dem representative from a neighboring district, George Latimer, also put out a statement:

“Like many House Democrats, I am extremely concerned about the House Republican budget plan that just passed the House, and how it would affect families in my district. The cuts needed for these tax breaks will mean over 196,000 residents in my district are at risk of losing Medicaid coverage. This includes 73,000 children and 27,000 seniors. This budget plan also threatens 74,000 people who count on SNAP to put food on the table. Republicans have promised to lower costs, but this budget won’t do that at all. Instead, it will make life harder and more expensive for my constituents and Americans across the country. As the budget process moves forward in the House, Democrats are going to fight for fairness and opportunity for every American.”

A bit wordy, but informative. Latimer’s district includes parts of southern Westchester County and the Bronx. I wrote about him last year when he defeated a Democratic incumbent in the primary.

Another Dem representative, from a district just north of Westchester, is Patrick Ryan, who said,

“Every single day, I am fighting to make the Hudson Valley more affordable, more safe, and more free – this budget proposal does the exact opposite. The wealthiest 0.1% of Americans would each get a tax cut of over $300,000 and Trump wants to pay for it by gutting health care and food assistance for over 150,000 Hudson Valley residents. It’s not just the immediate harm of gutting healthcare access, but also the long-term impact of adding more than $4 trillion to the national debt. I’m doing everything I can to block these harmful cuts, protect our community, and make sure tax cuts go to the middle-class, not the ultra-wealthy.”

Better. Make sure to say why people are getting their healthcare cut.

It potentially gets worse. At The American Prospect, David Dayen writes that there are plans afoot to cut 50 percent of the workforce at Social Security. The SSA’s statutory civil rights and equal opportunity division has already been abolished. The Regime isn’t yet publicly discussing a benefit cut. But already there are reports of employees at field offices being terminated. Dayen suggests they’re trying to avoid firing a lot of people at once, which might make alarming headlines. I don’t know if Musk/Trump realize the conflagration that would follow if benefits don’t arrive in people’s bank accounts on schedule. Musk probably has no clue. Trump doesn’t seem to be entirely present any more.

There’s also continuing fallout from Musk’s weekend troll email to all federal employees. Be sure to read Josh Marshall’s backgrounder on this. And Marcy Wheeler wrote about it also. Very basically, the catch is about the Government-Wide Email System (GWES) that DOGE set up after taking over the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). As briefly as I can explain it, back in January a lawyer named Kel McClanahan filed a lawsuit on behalf of some civil servants challenging the legality of the GWES. It appeared to be in violation of several laws. In order to allow GWES to go forward, lawyers working for Musk assured the court that any emails sent out via the GWES would be entirely voluntary. Employees could read them or ignore them, respond to them or not. In other words, no one is supposed to be able to use the GWES to issue binding orders to all government employees.

But then Musk sent out his five-bullet-point list request and then tweeted that a non-response would be interpreted as a resignation. Josh Marshall:

Now let’s leave the world of lawyers and step into Elon World. On Saturday, Musk went on Twitter and said, you have to answer this or be fired. The next day, Sunday, McClanahan contacted the DOJ lawyers and told them he was filing a motion in the case to seek sanctions against them for making false representations to the court. I guess you have to give opposing counsel 21 days to respond to these things. But here’s the further filing from yesterday in which he asks for that period to be shortened. McClanahan is asking the judge to compel the lawyers to say what they knew about GWES and whether they knew these claims were false.

This probably explains why so many agency heads told their employees it was okay to ignore the email. There were also some directives from the OPM on Monday that said it was up to agency heads whether employees had to respond.

This, apparently, pissed off Elon. At a cabinet meeting today he came up with a new excuse for the emails. They were, he said, a “pulse check” to be sure there were real people doing those jobs.” The Hill:

He said the email was not a personnel review “but a pulse review” and that anyone who was not dead could answer it.

“There are fictional individuals collecting paychecks,” Musk said of the government, though he did not offer specific evidence that people are fraudulently getting paychecks. “Are they alive, and can they write an email?”

Musk seriously argued that there could be millions of dead or otherwise nonexistent people collecting government paychecks. They must also be able to receive email, note. Musk still wants the non-responders fired, and Trump backed him up on this. Raw Story:

“I’d like to add that those million people that haven’t responded, though, Elon, they are on the bubble,” the president warned. “They haven’t responded. Now, maybe they don’t exist. Maybe we’re paying people that don’t exist.”

“But those people are on the bubble, as they say,” he continued. “Maybe they’re going to be gone. Maybe they’re not around. Maybe they have other jobs. Maybe they moved, and they’re not where they’re supposed to be.”

We haven’t heard the last of this.

4 thoughts on “Lots of Fallout from Lots of Bombs

  1. "Paranoia strikes deep. Into your life it will creep.

    It starts when you're always afraid.

    Step out of line, the man come and take you away"

    I've lost a lot of sleep in the last month, too often waking up from a nightmare related to "current events." Had one about a lynching of tolerant white woke people by white supremacists in a red state. They finally felt they could live the Confederate dream. I rely on Social Security – speaking out as I do with my full name carries risk. I think Musk-rats will strike out illegally against vocal progressives with whatever levers in the federal government they can reach. I don't think they have the people to do it effectively.

    I believe they will bring false criminal charges against Trump enemies that (I hope) will be dismissed without a trial, the prosecutors admonished and warned that abusing their position as prosecutors may be grounds for disbarment. Federal judges will not easily be intimidated – the founders made it that way with lifetime appointments and a high hurdle for impeachment. I  expect police violence against peaceful protesters when we approach "critical mass", a movement large and vocal enough to make Trump look vulnerable. It won't be the Capitol Police – my experience with them (one arrest fairly recently) says they are disciplined. 

    MLK was here. He knew they would come after peaceful protesters, as they did with clubs, dogs, and fire hoses. The presence of news cameras prevented outright slaughter. I don't think Trump has those inhibitions – neither do his selections for major law enforcement positions. The camera will be there again – everyone is a potential witness to atrocities. I know voters who (today) can't see the difference between Trump and Biden. I've seen this before. It happened with Nixon and Watergate – forced Nixon's. Kent State helped end the war in Vietnam. People saw the Truth.

    People turned out for MLK, knowing there would be trouble. They turned out sometimes in such large numbers, there was no place to hold them, no way to feed them. And cameras were rolling. Now everyone has a camera. Truth will out. The question is whether people believe in democracy enough to show up. Show up even after Trump has used violence against voices of dissent.  

     If you think Trump polices will drive inflation up, and drive unemployment up, you can bet Trump's popularity will go down. I think the democracies of the world will strike back. If Trump violates Mexico's sovereignty with military strikes against "cartels", Mexico may close the border. If Trump tries to pressure Canada to surrender to the US, they will retaliate forcefully. If Trump makes a move on Greenland, Europe will organize, possibly globally, with some type of embargo. I think if Trump uses US troops to clear out Gaza, the Middle East will unite against the US. (Middle-east counties will yield to pressure from their people.) As far as I can tell, nobody in Trump's orbit has the smarts or the balls to tell Trump the consequences of a dumb idea. 

    Those of us "woke" people are traumatized now. A lot of ignorant low-info voters will not wake up until they feel the pain personally. Fortunately, Trump's plans will spread the pain around – only the ultra rich will be untouched. When no Republican member of Congress dares attend a town hall and GOP voters demand a return to democracy and an end to havoc Musk-rats are wreaking, Trump can be impeached. Only his overwhelming popularity has protected him. That will end. 

    We're gonna have to show up, or at least speak out as Barbara is. I'm scared too. Trump is wielding fear and chaos quite expertly. When citizens pay the price, Trump will use the levers of power to intimidate – make us hide. If we do, we lose. If we resist, we will prevail and we MIGHT inspire a respect for self-government, free and fair elections, and compromise as a way for all to be represented. I don't think anyone else will save us without the people showing the good guys and the bad guys that we still want democracy enough to bleed for it.

  2. Yeah, I'm scared too. And a funny coincidence:  When I read your intro quote from Buffalo Springfield, I had that small world moment. Just this week I have been talking with members of my college band about maybe playing some tunes for an upcoming college reunion, and I suggested we include "For What It's Worth" on the set list.  [I was in college when Kent State happened.]
    In WWII, in occupied France (Vichy France), the French people were faced by a situation they didn't choose. That condition forced individuals to make a choice: hide or resist.  Resisting was largely in the shadows, because there were Nazi military groups trying to root out the resistance. Most of the people just kept their heads down. But others made the choice to resist. It wasn't fun. It was just the reality they were in.
    I'm looking to cultivate a friendly private network, mostly just to establish some camaraderie (emotional support).  I'm planning to focus more on local and state level for networking, while making contributions to dems for upcoming national elections. My goal in the networking is to promote mutual encouragement to not fall prey to despair… by doing something positive, even if on the smallest level. We need to be clear on the value of democratic institutions, and that can be accomplished by getting together in small groups of people who share a vision, and then building that up level by level.

    There's more but I have too many things for one post. 

  3. I recommend viewing all 7+ minutes of this, which I saw on Ari Melber's show a couple of days ago…  The boomerang effect thing was a concept that I didn't previously have.  And it kind of helped me put together a lot of different pieces that have been running around in my brain for 20 years.  More on that in future posts.
    (You might have to copy/paste the URL)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_kkxok9i8I&list=PLDIVi-vBsOEy-g6NYL8UomwTwpOCuQSvQ&index=5

     

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *