Impeachment of Donald Trump

While we are only partially through the House of Representatives impeachment process, a number of judgments present themselves clearly. As a starting point, we take the principled position announced by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi eight months ago, i.e., “Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there is something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country, And he’s just not worth it.” One need not take a position on whether President Trump is “worth it” to acknowledge and validate the assertion that the issue giving rise to impeachment of a President should be compelling and overwhelming. It arguably needs bipartisan support to warrant the risks it may pose to an already frayed national political and social psyche. Those whose hair is sufficiently gray to recall the Congressional hearings that led to Richard Nixon’s resignation have a strong point of reference with which to make judgments using Speaker Pelosi’s criteria. Sadly, today the House is split, overwhelmingly on partisan lines. Thus far the hearings have not moved the public opinion needle any great distance and can hardly be termed bipartisan. Those who favor impeachment have had to go considerable lengths to explain to the American public why the “offenses” with which Donald Trump is charged possess the inherent gravitas to warrant the nullification of a national election. To a considerable degree, the hearings to date have fallen short of mark because of five factors: ... Read More

The Green New Deal and the Poor

No area of policy is more prone to panaceas than energy policy. President Jimmy Carter thought if Congress passed his energy program, it would not only solve America’s energy problems, but its economic and moral ones as well. Yet even Carter never thought of a panacea like the Green New Deal (GND). Its main promoter Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), known popularly by her initials (just like her program) as AOC, has said the multi-trillion-dollar GND would: forestall looming climate catastrophe; forcibly transition the entire $20 trillion U.S. economy from one largely based on the utilization of morally suspect fossil fuels to one using only (100 percent) immaculate carbon-dioxide-free renewables; lead to full employment (which the US has anyway); and “promote justice and equity… repairing historic oppression of indigenous peoples, communities of color, migrant communities, deindustrialized communities, depopulated rural communities, the poor, low-income workers, women, the elderly, the unhoused, people with disabilities, and youth.” And it would be largely accomplished in ten years—completely finished in 30.... Read More