Sen. Joe Manchin announced that he intends to vote to confirm Ketanji Brown Jackson to the U.S. Supreme Court. I supposed this should be regarded as “significant,” since the far-right majority on the court should be occasionally discomfited by contrary opinions that don’t flatter them. On the other hand, Manchin’s announcement hardly rectifies some others he’s made in the past year.
Most recently, Manchin weighed in on the “need” for the continued use of the CDC’s Title 42 restriction, which has been criticized by immigrant rights activists for not merely being deployed for its intended purpose, but as a convenient tool for nativists and xenophobes to curtail even legal immigration and asylum seekers from Mexico and Central America, even when public health is not at issue. While the rationalization for it is the usual “vermin” bringing in “disease” hyperbole, in reality it has been used as an excuse to expel everyone without even bothering to test anyone. Joe Biden had come under criticism allowing the Trump era policy to continue, but last week, in conjunction with a CDC decision, Title 42 was rescinded, and this decision came under immediate attack by the usual suspects.
Which of course included Sen. Joe Manchin, whose view on the subject is a lot like certain Fox News hosts. He called it a “frightening decision,” because Title 42 is “an essential tool in combatting the spread of COVID-19,” he exclaimed, as if not being vaccinated or refusing to wear masks or not doing social distancing (remember the Sturgis Motorcycle rallies?) isn’t the real problem. But for people like Manchin, the “real” purpose of the policy is “controlling the influx of migrants at our southern border. We are already facing an unprecedented increase in migrants this year, and that will only get worse if the Administration ends the Title 42 policy.”
Why doesn’t Manchin just say that having “brown” skin is a “disease”? So what we have here is the illegal use of Title 42 to close the border of any immigration regardless of status. Using Title 42 in this way, there is no “legal” way to immigrate to this country, unless through temporary work visas. The hypocrisy is simply mind boggling; Americans who are most adamant against immigration (at least from Latin America) are the same people who think that COVID-19 is a “deep state” hoax impinging on their “freedoms”—but conveniently becomes “real” when they need to “rationalize” racism.
Furthermore, there is no “unprecedented” increase in migrants, and the media mainly gets its “facts” from known anti-immigrant organizations or the “eye test.” The “influx” can hardly be said to be getting “worse” when everyone but unaccompanied children were being tossed back across the border, even those at legal crossing points requesting asylum. It’s amazing how all this border crossing business only seems to be a problem in the minds of nativists and xenophobes (in both parties) when over the past two decades the number of illegal immigrants in this country seems to have remained stagnant at the 11-12 million number—meaning that far from being an “unprecedented” invasion, each year as many migrants leave or are deported as come in. I mean how else to explain the same “estimate” every year?
Of course Manchin—like Republicans—is hoping that by directing attention away from their unpopular tax giveaways to the rich and threats of cutting social program policies for marginalized and vulnerable groups, their constituencies will overlook the lack of commitment to working people, and instead “working” to pad his own pocket book while in the pocket of the fossil fuel lobby. It is a fair question to ask if Manchin in moving to the far-right, because the alternative is that this is a very sick man.
As we recall, Manchin also opposed the Build Back Better plan, which many labor and public service organizations in West Virginia were outraged at. In The New Yorker this past December, Walt Auvil of the West Virginia Democrats’ executive committee—and frequent critic of Manchin—was quoted “no one who matters to Joe has been rescued from poverty by the childhood-tax credits that his stance will end. But it has cut child poverty here by about a third.” However, “If it does not personally benefit Joe, his major contributors, and/or his family, he is unmoved.”
In opposing an extension of the Child Tax Credit—a relative measly amount compared to the tax cuts for the rich and 40 percent cut in the corporate tax rate when many don’t pay taxes at all—Manchin claimed that “I don’t believe that we should turn our society into an entitlement society. I think we should still be a compassionate, rewarding society.” Of course words like “compassionate” and “rewarding” when used by the far-right simply mean being “compassionate” for those who are already entitled and privileged. But ultimately Manchin is only parroting the corporate line; he opposed the BBB plan because he has no moral grounding. His only concern is getting elected, and if he satisfies energy and corporate interests, that means more money goes to him as a good foot soldier—and like Kirsten Sinema, a dependable “lead blocker.”
Manchin also opposed the voting rights bill in a monument to Orwellian doublespeak:
I believe that partisan voting legislation will destroy the already weakening binds of our democracy, and for that reason, I will vote against the For the People Act. Furthermore, I will not vote to weaken or eliminate the filibuster. For as long as I have the privilege of being your U.S. senator, I will fight to represent the people of West Virginia, to seek bipartisan compromise no matter how difficult and to develop the political bonds that end divisions and help unite the country we love.
American democracy is something special, it is bigger than one party, or the tweet-filled partisan attack politics of the moment. It is my sincere hope that all of us, especially those who are privileged to serve, remember our responsibility to do more to unite this country before it is too late.
You read that right. Manchin thinks that protecting the voting rights of all citizens is a “partisan” issue. It is being reported that in Texas during the past primary vote, voters intending to vote Democratic were banned from voting in some precincts because the newly passed voting laws made it difficult to find Democratic “judges”—essentially poll workers—who didn’t feel under particular threat of criminal prosecution if they were accused of assisting voters with ballot forms or providing information to assist them in voting at all. Texas law forbids anonymous, nonpartisan voting sites; voters can only submit ballots on a partisan basis—to a Republican “judge” if voting Republican, and if a Democrat, they can submit a ballot only to a Democratic judge. If there is no Democratic “judge” present at a polling station, you can’t vote at all:
While there were shortages in Republican judges, we are told that Democratic staffers were more likely to assist in covering those shortages than vice-versa, as seen above. Should Manchin be worried if they passed voter suppression laws in West Virginia as they have in Texas, Florida and Georgia? How is this even legal? This is clearly a violation of the original Voting Rights Act, but the right-wing U.S. Supreme Court has allowed such violations. And this is just one small way that Republicans are “weakening the bonds of democracy,” to quote Manchin in all his massive hypocrisy. It is Republicans who apparently think they are “bigger” than the country.
Manchin is the kind of amoral and unethical politician who believes that trying to cover his far-right fundament with BS about “bi-partisanship” is fooling people. It fools no one, not even the Republicans who welcome him with wide-open arms.
No comments:
Post a Comment