Something has got to give — something that will put an emphatic end to Republicans' congressional power of free-ranging insanity. And 2022 is unquestionably the most feasible year yet to accomplish that urgent objective.
Before voters are three issues on which public opinion is extraordinarily favorable to Democratic positions and robustly opposed to Republicans': fair elections, women's reproductive rights, and gun control. Democratic politicians are "pro" on all three and Republicans are "anti." The combined issues present a political trifecta of legislative sanity. If Democrats are unable to capitalize on them, then either their party is irretrievably inept or the American electorate is simply resigned to perpetual madness.
The past 24 hours have once again thrown political divisions into un-grayed relief. The assault-rifle killings of 19 children and two adults at a Texas elementary school were Sandy Hook déjà vu. Parents are scared and the public is outraged. America keeps demonstrating that a school or grocery store can be a lethal venue. Only in America.
Also replayed are the two political parties' worlds-apart incantations. The Democrats demand that gun control, or, if you prefer, gun safety be legislated immediately. The country has had enough, now is the time (again). We all know the drill. On the other side are gun-loving Republicans who offer useless thoughts and prayers to disconsolate families while accusing Dems of doing what they instantly do: politicize the grief. Ted Cruz yesterday: "[Democrats are] try[ing] to restrict the constitutional rights of law abiding citizens." (NYT)
Sandy Hook's excellent senator, Chris Murphy, is taking his traditional lead on gun control, believing that compromise can be found. "I know I have Republican partners," says Murphy (Politico). "I know there’s 10 Republicans that will vote for something under the right circumstances, with the right leadership." Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is preparing for emergency votes on two legislative initiatives.
Both are rock-bottom no-brainers. One bill would expand criminal background checks on internet and gun show purchases. Another would expand the time allowed for the FBI to investigate a gun buyer who was flagged by an instant background check. Both measures have twice been passed by the Democratic House, only to mosey to the graveyard Senate, where the gun-happy minority rules.
Still, Senate Democrats have internal problems. "It makes no sense why we can’t do common sense things to try to prevent some of this from happening," said Sen. Joe Manchin after the inexpressible horror of murdered first graders. Then came his customary, soulless contradiction: "The filibuster is the only thing that prevents us from total insanity." So the Senate would need Murphy's 10 Republicans — a rather improbable proposition.
The Democratic Senate may also falter on confirming Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives nominee Steven Dettelbach, who holds to "common sense things" such as keeping deadly weapons out of the hands of violent criminals. That, in Sen. Manchin's opinion, is far less important than keeping a hold on an undemocratic Senate procedure. Also undecided on Dettelbach's confirmation are Sens. Jon Tester and Angus King — all three from gun-enthralled states. (NYT)
As the FBI acknowledged in a report Monday, the occurrence of mass shootings in the U.S. is epidemic. "The bureau identified 61 'active shooter' attacks in 2021 that killed 103 people" (NYT). "That was the highest annual total since 2017 when 143 people were killed.... The 2021 total represented a 52 percent increase from the tally of such shootings in 2020, and a 97 percent increase from 2017," Missing from the FBI report is the corresponding epidemic of Republican insanity.
Getting back to this post's introductory observation, Democratic politicians possess an unprecedented electoral advantage in three enormously salient realms: fair elections, women's reproductive rights, and gun control. Their advantage is more of a chasm than an edge; indeed their political positions are so advantageous, even a half-hapless pol would have to doggedly labor at undoing the electoral opportunities.
We know the voting public is on Democrats' side on all three, immensely critical issues. Hence the midterms are Democrats to lose, really, notwithstanding the widely anticipated outcome. It's been said before and many times, but the cliché is arrestingly true: If Democrats can't win an election in which voters are so asymmetrically supportive of their policies, then Democratic politicians should find other work.