Looking Up At Freezing From Below

     It's presently two degrees Fahrenheit in Indianapolis, up from zero when I woke up.  Tam and I shoveled the walks a couple of times yesterday but they've got a thin coating of snow.  There's over five inches of the stuff on the ground where it wasn't shoveled.

     We'll be in single digits all day today and might reach the teens tomorrow.  I'm off this week and I'm not going anywhere until it warms up. 

Is He Dumb, Or Does He Think We Are?

     I admit it: my views on health insurance/health care have changed.  Coming up with a system that ensures all citizens get adequate health care is apparently so incredibly difficult that every industrialized democracy (and larger autocracies) except the U.S. has figured it out, in several different ways.

     Rand Paul, talking about the expiring Obamacare subsidies on Meet The Press this morning, first complained, "It's the artificial demand  that has driven prices up," by which he apparently means the weakly-enforced requirement (not to mention general individual desire) that everyone buys insurance.  How is that an artificial demand?  Was the point to have more health care for more people, or to encourage the weak and poor to die off?  Because the second is what we had before ACA, and what we have a little less of now.

     But that logical glitch was noting compared to what followed: asked what he would do, the Senator from Kentucky explained that his plan would "...let Americans buy their healthcare at CVS, at [list of large retailers], at Amazon, and when you have a million or more individuals, that's bigger than any corporation," quite sensibly implying that per-person costs would fall; a sufficiently large pool of people is statistically predictable, allowing the insurer to manage risk, and the more of them you've got in the pool, the better that's going to work.  It's a great idea -- and works even better as it is scaled up.  It'd be a real hum-dinger if the insured consisted of, oh, the entire population.

     Don't hold your breath.  Not for an insure-everyone plan, or even for bopping over to Walmart to pick up their nationally-sold health-insurance package during the post-Thanksgiving sale.  If you take a look at Open Secrets, the majority of the top five political contributors are insurance companies, hospital corporations, and pharmaceutical companies; healthcare and HMO's are in the top twelve.  They know who to schmooze in Washington, and exactly how.  Every part of healthcare has an ownership/administrative layer taking a cut, and they'd all like a bigger slice of the pie.  It forms a kind of financial ratchet, and an increase at any point results in every part of the network turning the dial up.  It's a mess because its a mess; the ACA legislation tried to make it less messy without asking any part of it to accept a smaller slice and, unsurprisingly, all that did was bake the messiness in. 

     Maybe Rand Paul is right; maybe it'll take a "Category Killer" to do to the insurance/medical complex what they did to the office-supply store, the corner grocer, the independent drugstore and the five and dime.  But while those little enterprises got squashed like bugs, Here Be Dragons, and it may have to all fall apart before it can be remedied.

     I'm not holding my breath for that, either.

     Pie in the sky is lovely to look at, but it's not nutritious. 

Count All You Like But They Ain't Hatched Yet

     I'll repeat that headline to Democrats and Republicans alike: the chickens of 2025 have barely come home to roost, and while there's plenty of frantic shuffling around of the prospective eggs of U. S. House seats, those eggs have barely been laid, yet alone hatched.

     Long-time Indiana Democrat political figure Ann Delaney, speaking about the failed GOP redistricting push this morning on Indiana Week In Review, suggested the Republicans are looking at a 50-seat loss in the House; elsewhere, the Republican national party chairman is warning his state parties that victory in 2026 is crucial.

     Well, okay, but we haven't even seen primaries yet -- and meanwhile, it looks very much as if time has run out for the Federal subsidies that kept ACA health insurance affordable for many Americans.  What I'm hearing is that House and Senate Republicans are of the opinion that most of the people who benefited were Democrats, if they bothered to vote at all, so why worry?  It's a gamble; a lot self-employed people and workers at small businesses rely on buying their own lower-cost insurance, and I'd be surprised if they were a solid block for the Dems.

     Nor can we be sure where the economy is headed.  I'm not going to rehash all the competing claims, or try to sort out which are fantasy and which have some basis in fact.  "Indications Are Unclear" is what my Magic 8-Ball keeps turning up; what's going to matter is how things are going right before the primaries and in the run-up to the general election.

     Anyone chortling "We've got him now" or that MAGA is a lock-in should be gently discouraged from putting any money down.  It's too soon to even make a good guess, and much too soon for helmet fires.  The trend among pollsters and pundits at present leaves the House and Senate balanced on a knife edge after the 2026 elections -- and those bodies haven't shown any great talent for the Sabre Dance so far.  It is a difficult piece, but they keep sawing the basses in half before the thing is even over....

A New System

     When I form my own country, we're going to vote in the legislature via some conventional way, but they'll have to live in military barracks, wear plain fatigue-type uniforms and eat regular military food in a chow hall.  They won't be allowed (?) to drill or march together, nor touch weapons.

     But we'll pick the Chief Executive by means of The Sandwich: At a location randomly selected by lot, a low table will be placed, with a ham sandwich wrapped in waxed paper on it, under a large wooden crate propped up at an angle by a stick.  Heavy twine will be tied around the stick, leading off to a concealed blind.  The two highest vote-getters from the legislature will wait in the blind, but they will not have known in advance where the crate will be, nor will they be allowed to communicate until some poor fool has picked up the sandwich and been trapped by the crate.  He or she will be the new Chief Executive.

     If it takes days and the legislators doze off, missing a sandwich-grabber?  Tough.  Somebody got a free sandwich!  Otherwise, sandwiches are swapped out every four hours, and the concealed Executive-trappers can split the old one.

     Is it a terrible system?  Sure.  But I've been looking at how the various countries of the world pick their person for the worry seat, and I've got to tell you, none of them filter for wisdom or for success at the job.  Might as well pick someone who knows free food when they see it, and who we can all recognize as the sap who fell for it.  Here's your uniform, Chiefie!  You get the bunk in the corner.  Workday starts at six a.m., and if you're not out of the sack promptly, the Sergeant-at-Arms dumps you on the floor and frog-marches you to the showers.

     They can quit the job any time.  Hell, we've got lots of sandwiches, and there's a sucker born every minute.

Indiana Says No

     Indiana's where I live, and it's a pretty conservative place.  It's full of stubborn people, and if you want them to change how they do things -- anything -- you'd better be filling a genuine need.  Hamilton County's road system has more roundabouts than anywhere in the U.S., but it only happened after decades of explosive population growth and four-way-stop gridlock that made getting anywhere at rush hour a crawlingly slow and frustrating experience.

    Indiana, like many other GOP-dominated states, has been under pressure from the Trump administration to redraw U. S. House districts and help retain the GOP trifecta in Washington, DC in the 2026 general election.  We've got nine districts; all but two of them are easy wins for Republicans.  Those two -- Marion County/Indianapolis/Seventh District, and the Chicago-adjacent  First District -- are about as strongly Democratic.  The proposed map split the Democrat strongholds; Marion county got it worse than Caesar's Gaul, hacked between four districts that extended deep into rural areas, most running all the way to the state boundaries.

     This wasn't a secret effort; the intention was well known and the maps were published.  Indiana doesn't have any rules against partisan gerrymandering.  But it didn't sit well with voters.

     I think there were two main issues.  One was that the changes were sweeping.  Your old, familiar House district would be gone, possibly taking your old, familiar U. S. Congresscritter with it.  In central Indiana, there was concern that "four millionaires from Indianapolis" would be speaking for primarily agricultural, rural areas, whose concerns would be underrepresented.  And the move was petty: with the GOP holding seven of the nine districts, they've already got a commanding lead; two more wouldn't make a big difference.

     For all those reasons, and plenty more, our state Senate rejected the effort, 31 to 19.  There are fifty seats; Republicans hold forty of them, so it doesn't take a math whiz to work out that 21 of the No votes came from Republicans.  When you can't sell a majority of your own party's state Senators on it, maybe redrawing the Congressional map isn't such a great idea.

     The legislature doesn't get another bite at the apple until Spring, too late to redistrict ahead of the mid-term elections.

Discontinuity

     Ever bend a hard plastic rod?  Many plastics will go quite a ways, and then, all of a sudden--  They break. 

     Mr. Trump's Republican party is courting chaos like a lovestruck teenager.

     In Missouri, both sides were playing chess -- until one side pulled out a baseball bat.  The legislature passed a bill to rearrange Federal House districts, with a map that will flip one of the two usually-Democratic districts in favor of Republicans.  Opponents fought back, with a ballot-initiative petition drive to put the new map up for a statewide vote.  You can do that in Missouri, but it takes a pile of signatures, and they've got to come from at least six of the state's eight House districts. 

     In fact, it takes a tick over 100,000 signatures.  The petitioners have collected well over 300,000, from all eight districts.  So it'll almost certainly go on the ballot, and per established precedent, the law is frozen once enough signatures have been turned in, while Missourians wait until it is determined if the signature requirements have officially been met, and until they've had a chance to vote on it if the number beat the minimum.

     The Republican Secretary of State says no; even if there are enough signatures, he can just declare the referendum unconstitutional all by himself.  And if so, the whole thing goes off the courts to work out.  It's not how the Show Me state has dealt with similar referenda in the past.  The power to shout, "Allee, allee, oxen-free," and dump the process has never been asserted by the Missouri Secretary of State before.  It seems, well, not the way a proper Republic goes about such things.  It's high-handed.  Authoritarian.

     In a state whose citizens are nationally famous for mulishness, it might not be the course of action that a sober, cautious politician should choose.

     I guess we'll find out.  Bending, bending--  Whattaya think?  Snap, or will it stay bent?  And what gets that treatment next?

     It feels like the lights are about to start going out, like the walls are closing in.  There's a lot of ruin in a big, well-established country, but there's no damn requirement to test that proposition to destruction.

Nostalgia In A Lab Coat

      Hey, remember when "consensus reality" and "objective reality" were pretty nearly congruent and widely shared?  Me too!  And now you can revisit those halcyon days with this handy list of ten things that are still true, despite fads and popular delusions!  (Many people will balk at #1 and yet -- there it is.)

Living In A Fantasy

      Indiana's diminutive Lieutenant Governor Micah Beckwith is at it again, this time with as fractured a historical analogy as you're ever likely to encounter: he says the Indiana Senate Republican holdouts against redistricting are "Neville Chamberlain types," attempting to "appease" Democrats.

     Precisely what state or Federal level Democrats have the power to do that merits appeasement is unclear; in Indiana, the GOP holds a commanding trifecta, and while their margins at the Federal level are far narrower, they've got majorities in the House and Senate and, of course, are firmly ensconced in the two-thirds of the White House still standing.  The Dems are nowhere near positioning to take the Sudetenland and the GOP hasn't sat down with them for a Munich Conference. 

     The John Birchers of my youth had a clearer grasp of history than young Beckwith (despite their spin), and their most fevered fantasies fell far short of the notions he so confidently spews.  He's all over the more-unmoored parts of the online Right chat-show circuit, a self-identified Christian Nationalist with, apparently, plenty of free time.

     Indiana's Governor, Mike Braun, comes across as a gruff paterfamilias type; he's absolutely on board with President Trump's agenda, 110%, but does so in a low-drama way, focused on the nuts and bolts of politics.  I think his number two, not the Governor's own choice, shows a decided preference for the nuts alone.

Indiana Redistricting

     Indiana's in the middle of a redistricting fight.  The measure passed the House 57-41; not coincidentally, Indiana's Presidential votes typically run near a 60/40 split.*

     The state Senate vote will probably begin in the Elections Committee today and it's looking interesting, with a 3-3-3 split, pro, con and undecided.  If the bill reaches the floor, the GOP needs 26 votes to pass; they hold 40 of the 50 seats -- but 14 Republican Senators say they're against the measure.

     Five Republican Senators aren't saying where they stand.  The bill has a lot of moving parts besides the new map, among them language meant to control how and in what courts suits challenging the legislation may be filed, complexity that gives Senators room to say they're still studying

     Twelve legislators, most of them Republicans, have publicly stated they have had swatting attempts, bomb threats and so on over this bill.  Meanwhile, President Trump has called out nine Indiana state Senators by name, telling supporters, "Let your voice be heard loud and clear."  You can parse that however you like; in context, the statement allows Eddie Haskell levels of ambiguity.

     Local advertising, on TV, and via direct mail, email and text messages, has been intense, mostly warning me about the terrible, terrible things the Democrats are going to do if they retake control of the House in 2026.  The list includes everything from bumper sticker level fantasy about the horrors of wokeness to threatening exactly what I'd like to see: a series of impeachments, convictions and removals from office.  Based on past performance, none of them are things the Dems are really likely to do, and more's the pity.  But it's keeping the lights on at the TV stations and penny-rate electronic and bulk-mail companies, so thanks for that, and for the ongoing, mortifying soap opera that is the collapse of the American system of government.  Mr. Putin and Mr. Xi must be so happy about that last item, and isn't happiness what it's really all about?
____________________
* You'd think, in a polity of sturdy, politically-active Jeffersonian yoemen (and woemen), this would point to a 60/40 split in our U.S. House delegation.  Perish the thought, say redistricting proponents; they're aiming for a nice 60/40 division in each and every district, sending a winner-take-all wall of House Republicans off to Washington DC and the 40% will just have to take their lumps.

Subjective Reality

     Watching the Sunday morning political shows was an especially pointed example of "One screen, two movies."

     Especially when it came to the issue of military response to alleged drug-runners at sea.  Such facts as both sides agree on are sketchy at best: a fast, small boat, almost certainly a smuggler and very likely running drugs,* destination unknown, was fired on by U.S, forces are badly damaged.  When the smoke cleared, some portion of the vessel remained afloat, either the overturned hull or a large piece of it.  On that floating object were two individuals, moving around in a purposeful manner.  One of them removed his shirt.  After some time had passed, the U.S. forced stuck again, obliterating the people and whatever they were floating on.  And there's video if it.

     Several members of the United States Congress have seen that video, and their reports disagree significantly.  Some (mostly Democrats) saw two survivors, possibly trying to right the vessel or portion of a vessel, possibly trying to signal for help by gesturing.  Others (mostly Republicans) saw two individuals, trying to right the vessel, recover the cargo, and radio for assistance from other smugglers.

     They all saw the same video, probably on a large screen, probably in as high a resolution as authorized  Department of Defense personnel saw it when it was happening in real time.  And they took away different narratives.

     Stepping back, on the one hand, we have a small, fast, heavily-laden vessel, not as large as a WW II PT boat, with powerful engines and armed with rifles at best.  On the other, we have good-sized ships of the U. S. Navy; the outcome of battle between them is not in doubt.

     Is it appropriate or legal for a nation's Navy to fire on smuggling vessels in the open sea?

     Having done so, is it appropriate or legal for a nation's Navy to fire on any crew of that vessel who survived the initial attack?

     It is well established that vessels suspected of unlawful activity can be "pulled over" -- commanded to heave to, with a shot over the bows if they don't comply, illegal freight seized, crew arrested.  It is well established that if a small (or large) vessel makes aggressive moves towards a Navy ship -- say, a shipload of Houthi militants with an eye on eternity -- shots across the bow can become shots on target.  It is eminently lawful under international agreements to resist and hunt down pirates.

     There's no precedent for hunting down dope-runners and blowing them out of the water.  There's precedent against killing survivors after an attack.  When German and Imperial Japanese naval vessels did so to Allied crews in wartime, they were reviled for it.

     DoD may release the video.  We're not going to get the same resolution their guys saw.  We're not going to get the same image quality elected politicians saw, and there's good reason for that: DoD doesn't want any foe to know just how well they can be seen.  But if we get to see it, whatever we get, from fuzzy proxies to 720p, we're going to look at the same screen and see two films.

     History will only see one.  I wonder which it will be?
_______________________
* The administration keeps saying it's fentanyl.  Experts say it's most likely cocaine, and not headed directly to the U.S.  It's very likely drugs, though even that is not certain.  It is smuggling of some kind. 

History Grinds On

     It's painful to watch: some of my friends and former friends, lifelong Republicans, or conservatives, or l/Libertarians, are starting to wonder if they might have some very unsavory bedfellows, as the Trump administration departs farther and farther from norms of civilized, decent behavior and the rule of law.

     They're in an awkward position, among their own friends, many of whom are very much on board with wherever the current version of the GOP is headed; others are suppressing their own doubts, struggling to come up with reasons why the Democrats could only be worse, or why no moderate or even traditional Republican should try sailing into the blowhard winds coming from the White House.

     Some of them may bail out, eventually, and at no small short-term personal cost; ask Liz Cheney.  Others will ride it all the way down until it augers in, as it inevitably must, "good Germans," patriots who "had no idea what all was going on."

     The perpetrators will some day come to justice, or at least flee from it, by death or jet plane, red-handed and reviled, but the people who stood idly by and let it happen, the cheering throngs who never looked too closely, the passive fellow-travelers who figured it would all blow over if they looked the other way, they'll all get a pass, just like always.

     We're going to be stuck with the hard work of rebuilding a society that values science and sanity, that believes in the inherent worth of people, that all men -- and all women -- are equal before the law, and many of our fellows will still be drifting along with the current, ignoring that scintilla of guilt sizzling away in the back of their minds: they could have been against the current mess sooner; they could have helped nip it in the bud.  They didn't, and the blood is already on everyone's hands.

     There will come a day when they shake their heads sadly, and mutter, "We didn't know.  We couldn't have stopped it."  What they'll mean is, "We didn't want to know.  It was too much effort to stop it," but history says we'll let them hang on to their self-protecting illusions, and work to do better next time.

     The march of human progress is not a smooth, simple upward curve.  It never has been.

Aghast At Dinner?

     A recipe popped up on my New Page screen that gave me pause.  I don't know; maybe it's delicious.  Maybe it's just calling it "pizza beans skillet" that strikes me oddly, for all that I love beans, pizza, and things made with tomato sauce and plenty of spices.

     Maybe I'd just rather wonder about thinner-than-usual pizza sauce, the Usual Ingredients,* cooked cannellini beans and a nice cheese topping than about the state of politics.  It's certainly a lot nicer to look over at the other guy's plate -- and see that he has a plate, and dinner on it -- and think, "That looks great," or, "Oh, no thanks," instead of you both thinking, "That weirdo needs to leave."
_______________________
* But not pineapple.