Ya gotta love the closing arguments made as Election Day approaches …
Remember in 2008, when Norm Coleman was being portrayed as a moderate Republican gatekeeper, suggesting that he would be positioned to provide “a check on Democratic excesses and pull policy to the center”.
Of course that was when the Democrats were in charge of the Senate.
And in 2016, when the polls projected a Hillary Clinton victory, had candidate Donald J. Trump saying “What the hell do you have to lose?”
Of course, voters also heard candidate Trump reject the Trans-Pacific Partnership repeatedly calling it “a continuing rape of our country” and that NAFTA has “choked American jobs”; vowed to walk away from the Paris climate accord; opposed the Iran deal; questioned whether the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is still relevant; pledged to build a wall across the entire southern U.S. border (paid by Mexico); triple the number of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents; fully repeal Obamacare and replaces it with Health Savings Accounts; create 25 million new American jobs in the next decade; enact new ethics reforms to drain the swamp and reduce the corrupting influence of special interests on our politics; and to appoint conservative judges.
Well, there is no doubt that President Trump has advanced many of his goals … America is now in a tariff trade war; America is out of the Paris climate accord and the Iran nuclear deal (even though the rest of the world remains in); reportedly slams NATO while playing up to Russia; the border wall is still a goal meanwhile refugee families are being held apart; signed an Executive Order providing for the hiring of more ICE agents (but due to attrition, the agency actually lost 76 employees in 2017); has signed legislation ending the individual mandate in 2019 but ObamaCare has not fully been repealed; about three million jobs have been added since Trump took office but considering that 2.1 million jobs were added to the economy in 2017 which marks the seventh consecutive year that two million or more jobs were added — meaning that Trump is just following Obama’s path; drain-the-swamp became employ-the-swamp lead by Price, Pruitt and Zinke; and he has appointed conservative judges (Obama had 55 judges approved in eight years – thus far, Trump has had 51 approved).
Yep, “What the hell do you have to lose?” has pleased many Trump supporters with the most recent illustration being the Supreme Court ruling in Janus -v- AFSCME .
It’s one that Republican endorsed Senate candidate Karin Housley tweeted about
Public unions wield unbelievable political power, bankrolling radical politicians like @TinaSmithMN and forcing her to vote whichever way national Dems want. In the US Senate, I will reject business-as-usual from the political machines and will instead be a leader for all MNs
— Karin Housley (@KarinHousley) June 27, 2018
Without getting into the guts of the case, a little history on the issue.
First no one should have been surprised by its outcome. For years Republicans have tried to confuse voters with support for “Right to work” laws … you might remember Norm Coleman discussing it in his 2008 campaign after the House had approved The Employee Free Choice Act in a bipartisan 241-185 only to have Republicans in the Senate use the filibuster procedure to block a final vote.
Fast forward to 2016 … and a right-leaning Supreme Court being asked the question whether every worker had to pay “agency fees” which support basic union activities.
In essence the 2016 case pitted the Christian Educators Association versus the California Teachers Association in a case that could eliminate public employee unions’ right to collect fees from all workers. Current state law provides union members to opt out of paying for the union’s “political” activities, but they still had to pay for basic union collective bargaining responsibilities, such as negotiating wages, benefits, and layoff rules.
The 2016 case was heard but then Justice Antonin Scalia died before a final ruling was issued leaving the court deadlocked at 4–4.
Now comes a new case with Mark Janus, an Illinois government worker, being backed by The National Right to Work Foundation, as the lead plaintiff role against his union.
Trump’s selection of Neil Gorsuch as a replacement for Justice Scalia was not the only change.
Trump also changed the Solicitor General who would weigh in on the case. While President Obama’s Solicitor General sided with the union, President Trump’s appointed Solicitor General Noel Francisco filed a brief in support of The National Right to Work cause.
This change produced a “Thank You” tweet
Mark Mix: (cont'd) "By backing voluntary union dues, the Trump Administration stands with the eighty percent of Americans who agree that it is wrong to force a worker to pay union dues as a condition of employment." (2/2)
— Right To Work (@RightToWork) December 7, 2017
It has taken a long time for Republicans to get their people in positions of power … asking voters “What the hell do you have to lose?” … and now seeing the consequences of unified power through gerrymandering and the Electoral College system.
Ya gotta ask yourself … Does Minnesota need a Senator (paraphrasing Norm Coleman) who will be a check on Republican excesses and pull policy to the center more today with President Trump in charge and Republicans in fear of being Twitter-attacked ?
The Minnesota Republican primary elections were a resounding endorsement of the new Republican Eleventh Commandment as stated by Ronna Romney McDaniel, Chair, Republican National Committee, “We are the party of President Donald J. Trump”.
Yep, the Tina Smith -vs. – Karin Housley contest is really a contest between a woman with who has focused on building an economy that works for all Minnesotans versus one who will be a Trump puppet.
Maybe the question isn’t “What the hell do you have to lose?” but instead “What does Donald J. Trump gain?”
The answer is obvious.