Why All Elections Matter: Republican County Supervisor in Arizona Defends Corporate Agricultural Business Against the Local Farmers and Ranchers

A Mega Dairy and a Sinking Aquifer

Sierra Vista Herald link (paywall for individual stories)

A major dairy and agriculture producer, relocating to Arizona's Sulphur Springs Valley, near the town of Willcox, is drilling for water in an underground aquifer that supplies other farmers and ranchers in this eastern part of Cochise County, as well as several towns, including Willcox, the largest in the area, with a population of 3,500.  Unlike ground water supplies in other parts of the county, refilled by rivers and streams, the aquifer under the Sulphur Springs Valley is in a basin, refillable only by precipitation that falls locally.  It is a deep aquifer, however, the deeper farmers and ranchers must go to pump water, the more expensive it gets. 

There's been a reasonable balance up to this point between water taken from the aquifer and its recharge by precipitation, though the extended drought that has affected much of the Southwest has caused water levels here to drop as well.  But in 2014, a company known as Riverview LLP began buying large tracts of land in the Willcox basin, and opened two huge dairy farms, growing feed for approximately 100,000 cows and, of course, providing them with the 20-40 gallons of water a day that each cow needs to be productive.  Since then, many local farmers have had their wells go dry, and have been forced to pay exorbitant prices to dig the wells deeper to get water.  One farmer reported having to haul water to his house, mostly 5 gallon jugs, for several years before he could raise the $45,000 necessary to deepen his well.  

And even that was a temporary solution.  The aquifer is dropping six feet per year, which means that before this particular farmer retires, wanting to hand his property off to his children, he will likely have to go deeper to get water.  

"At some point," he said, "it will no longer be cost effective to do that."  

The Willcox basin is like a giant bathtub, according to local agriculture producers.  Rainwater and other precipitation is the only source of water going into the aquifer.  Even before the current levels began dropping so fast, the amount of water being pumped out was still greater than the amount going in, though reduction in the aquifer levels was small.  Then Riverview built its two huge dairy operations.  Now, there are warning signs on local roads and highways, because the aquifer is being depleted so fast, that fissures are opening up randomly around the area.  

Riverview, according to the state registry, has added 667 wells to the aquifer since 2015.  It now pumps out more water than the rest of the area combined, including the town of Willcox.  It has the money to sink wells as far down as 2,000 feet.  As a result, surrounding farms and ranches are waking up to dry water taps, having to endure the cost of hauling water until, or unless, they can come up with the thousands of dollars they need to deepen their wells, or drill new ones.  

The Politics, Local and State, of Getting Water in the Desert

According to the article in the Sierra Vista Herald, Riverview came to Arizona because of its lax, almost non-existent groundwater regulation.  It should not be surprising that a state which has had a Republican controlled legislature for as long as Arizona has had one would attract exploitative corporate businesses after cheap natural resources which have taken advantage of tax exemptions required by the state and local taxing entities.  What that means is that the cost of infrastructure improvements getting water to the city of Willcox will have to be covered by local taxpayers, since the corporations aren't paying any taxes. Local farmers will have to bear the cost themselves. 

And one of their fears is that Riverview will pump the aquifer dry, then pull up and leave the area with no water supply and the economic consequences of that, while making millions on its dairy operation .  While they would not speak with the Herald, their spokesperson denied this was the case, though the company is based in Minnesota, and raises heifers in Arizona for dairy production there because it is less expensive in a desert state where there is little corporate regulation, no restrictions on groundwater use and where they pay no taxes.  

State legislators were silent on this issue, predictably.  But of course, it is hard for Republican politicians to resist corporate tax breaks for the wealthy and corporations, lack of regulation or restrictions on the use of natural resources, and favoring big money interests over those who work hard for a living. And predictably, a local Republican who should be defending the small farmers and small businessmen who are the backbone of Willcox and the agricultural basin of the Sulphur Springs Valley, has stepped forward to support Riverview, defend what they are doing and help blind people to the reality of what's going on.  

Republican county supervisor Peggy Judd, of Willcox, says that she doesn't believe Riverview will just pick up and leave after investing millions of dollars in their two dairy operations in Cochise County.  And of course, the good that they do for the local economy outweighs the fact that they could pump the aquifer dry and put every farmer and rancher in the Sulphur Springs Valley out of business and out of a home with water.  Judd claims that they've invested millions in their operation, so leaving would be counterproductive, though if the water supply is depleted, they couldn't operate their business.  And apparently, local residents are not seeing, or feeling, any effects of their presence on the local economy.  

"I haven't seen it," says local farmer Mark Spencer, who lives near one of the Riverview dairy operations.  What Spencer has seen, and experienced, is a large bill for having to drill his well deeper, down to almost 700 feet, with the aquifer dropping six feet per year.  

While there's not really a whole lot that a county supervisor can do about a situation like this, she could stand with her neighbors and fellow members of the community she represents, and who elected her in the first place, and show some understanding of their plight.  She could, at the very least, become an advocate for them against an out-of-state corporation that employs no locals, does very little business with local merchants and providers and pays no taxes to help with the problems they cause to other local farmers.  She could speak up and use the influence of her position as a means through which the local farmers and ranchers could get their message to the attention of politicians who need to hear what they have to say. 

But, it is too much to expect of Republican politicians, even on the local level, to stand up for the common people who have to work for a living against corporate exploitation.  They just can't bring themselves to do it, even if they are members of the same community.  And to save the water in the shrinking aquifer in the Willcox basin, local farmers and ranchers are going to have to set aside the conspiracy theories, the phony social agenda, and all of the lies and falsehoods and cast ballots for politicians who represent their own interests and will support their own community.  And those politicians, even down at the county supervisor level, are likely to be members of the Democratic party.  

Local farmer Mark Spencer says he hasn't seen any economic benefit, certainly nothing like Judd is claiming.  Riverview's presence has created, according to her, about 50 good paying local jobs.  It is unknown what it has actually added to the local economy, since it does not pay any taxes.  And on a tour of Coronado Dairy, one of the two in the basin operated by Riverview, Spencer said he asked what percentage of the dairy's employers were citizens.  The response, 5%, was defended by Judd, who said that they have to bring in what they need because the area doesn't have enough skilled labor to hire locally.  

What kind of skilled workers does it take to operate a dairy, that can't be found in an area where 80% of the jobs are in agriculture?  And why would it be hard to find local workers in an area of the state that has relatively high unemployment compared to the rest of the state and country, and is also one of the poorer areas of Arizona?  Of course, Mexican labor keeps the corporate dairy company from having to pay living wages to their workers, and you can bet that's exactly why 95% of their employees come from Mexico.  So of course we have a local, Republican county supervisor supporting the practice. 

I guess she's missed the connection that the availability of these kinds of jobs so close to Mexico, for Mexican workers, might be contributing to the problems along the border that those of her ilk are whining about?  

"Rank and file Arizonans' property rights are being ignored as out of state and even foreign entities swoop in to take advantage of Arizona's ground water free-for-all, sinking wells twice as deep as second and third generation farmers, placing at risk these farmers' property rights while taking a nearly instant toll on residents' wells in these areas, not to mention the collapsing of state highways and county roads due to earth fissures caused by over-pumping," said Spencer.  Countless acres of private land will become worthless, robbing these property owners of their land values if we continue on the same path." 

I'd suggest, Mr. Spencer, with all due respect, that you go to the ballot box whenever there is an election, whether for supervisor or state senator or representative, or governor for that matter, find out which politicians will stand up and defend you, and cast your ballot for them.  Your water and your property rights have been put at risk by Republicans.  It's time to vote for change.

 

     

I'm Trying to Figure Out How Lauren Boebert Ever Got Elected to Congress

A close examination of Lauren Boebert's background may give some insight into a politician who doesn't seem to have the ability to settle on an identity.  From the perspective of a Democrat, it is difficult to avoid the temptation to just write her off as a kook, the product of a deep red congressional district in a blue state where almost 70% of the population lives within a 90 minute drive of the state capital building in Denver.  So she can easily be fodder for the mocking of her as an extremist.  I'm guilty of doing that kind of writing her off myself.  

One of my best friends from high school moved with his family to a farm outside of Grand Junction, Colorado shortly after graduation.  We shared a lot in common,  Our Dads both worked for the same government contractor, were both union advocates and members, and were both working class Democrats.  In our high school civics class, we worked together on a project assigned by the teacher, requiring us to define our politics in terms of the two major parties, and support our definition.  He's been a business franchise owner for more than three decades now, and of course, as a resident of Boebert's district, has a much better position for perspective on her than I do.  

Single Issue Politics

Though Boebert claims to be an Evangelical Christian, an experience she says occurred in 2009, there are not a lot of Evangelicals in her district.  The highest percentage of Evangelical voters in Colorado are found in District 5, around Colorado Springs, which is the headquarters of several large ministries with national membership and scope.  My high school friend, who attends an Evangelical church by the way, says that the key to Boebert's support is the fear of government interference in gun ownership.  The conspiracy theories flow like water out of the mountain glaciers in the rural areas of this part of the state, fed by money from gun lobbyists and manufacturers.  In the local daily newspaper, still a big deliverer of news around Grand Junction, and on local radio and television, perceived threats against gun owners are exaggerated to the point of ridiculousness.  But who checks facts?  

Everything about Boebert focused on this issue, down to her ownership of a restaurant called "Shooter's Grill" in the town of Rifle, a few miles from where she lives.  When she's campaigning behind the microphone in a small, Evangelical church, she's giving her incorrect interpretation of the first amendment's guarantee of religious liberty and separation of church and state.  She's been a loud opponent of Roe v. Wade, a position that, according to most pundits, 55% of the people in her district don't share with her. But most of her campaign focused on the non-existent, nationwide conspiracy to grab everyone's guns.  

Through the lens of someone else's perspective, that of my high school friend, there are some things about her that aren't issues for a lot of the people in the area.  The culture being what it is, her lack of education, and her having obtained a GED only recently, isn't really a negative.  There are a lot of high school dropouts in western Colorado.  My friend owns four hotel franchises and three fast food franchises and with the exception of his management personnel, few of his employees have a college degree, and almost half don't have a high school diploma.  So someone with a GED, who poses for most photo ops with high powered rifles, who spreads the gun restriction conspiracy theories, sounds like a big chunk of the people who live in the small towns and rural enclaves of her district.  

Inconsistent and Erratic Behavior is a Factor 

What has cut into her support, again according to my friend's perspective, is her erratic, inconsistent and often rude and aggressive behavior.  They see a lot more of this from her than we do.  Courtesy, respect and manners are community expectations.  This is a place where neighbors help neighbors without regard for their religious or political affiliation and in most cases, without regard for their ethnicity or racial background.  Many people, even some of her conservative supporters, have been embarassed by the profile and image of herself that she has created.  

There is also some doubt about whether the public image that is being shown is actually the real Lauren Boebert, or whether, because she was inexperienced in politics, once she won her seat in Congress, Republican party insiders convinced her to do some playacting and create the image of a loud mouthed, Trumpie supporter who waves her fist and points her finger like he does, even using many of his limited expressions.  It comes off as fake, and it's more for the benefit of the Republican establishment, rather than her.  The fact that the rest of the country sees her as representing all people who live in rural, western Colorado has been an embarassment to the people who live there, including some of her own supporters and fellow Republicans.  

And from my own perspective, the lack of consistency she has recently displayed regarding her Evangelical faith also has to be troublesome to at least some of her supporters in that constituency in her district.  The casual manner in which she handled the news that her teenage son had impregnated his younger girlfriend was way outside the rhetoric she had previously used, on the record, when it came to Roe v. Wade and abortion.  Those women who get pregnant out of wedlock were, in her opinion, degenerate sinners, criminals and victims of "liberal politics."  And while the manner in which she handled it should be a private matter between her, her son and his girlfriend, passing over it by saying she wasn't going to get "biblical" and well, at least they were keeping it, made it a very inappropriate political issue. 

Likewise, her separation and divorce from her husband, is also well outside the bounds of the kind of example Christians who are public figures and leaders are expected to set.  Trump and his sons have made a mockery of marriage vows, torrmenting and publicly humiliating the women to whom they once spoke commitment vows.  Jesus himself is the main source for Christian doctrine regarding the sanctity of marriage, a deliberate reversal of the practice of polygamy, and declaring the old law permitting divorce among the Israelites the product of hard-heartedness, equating the remarriage of one divorced without cause with the commandment about adultery.  

And that's the backdrop for the latest photographs of Boebert, from a live theater production in Denver, making out with her date as if no one else is in the room, casually vaping and not really being very careful about what's being seen.  Clearly, on the Republican side of the aisle, the moral and ethical standards of behavior for members of Congress have deteriorated down to nothing since Trump set the example for the party and they went ahead and nominated him anyway.  It's quite an assumption that such a public display won't matter to her supporters.  The closeness of her re-election bid is a clear indication that if this offended even a small fraction of those who voted for her, it will make the difference in the next election.  But it doesn't appear that this is going over well at all, and if the apology now was kind of weak, I think the regrets on November 6th will be very powerful.  

Character Speaks

How does one go from spouting hard core Evangelical faith blended with extremist right wing politics to making out in a public theater with a date, on camera?  

Well, there are plenty of examples of people who built a career around their Evangelical identity, preaching on television, holding crusades, building huge churches and revelling in the fame who let temptation get the better of them, insulated by fantastic prosperity inside their earthly mansion built with the dollars of trusted followers.  I often wonder, without ever really knowing, whether the prosperity was the trigger, or whether their image was a carefully constructed means of gathering fame and fortune they couldn't get any other way, and once they arrived, their true character came out.  

This most recent faux paus makes me wonder if the Lauren Boebert who initially got elected to Congress on a gun rights platform as a conservative Evangelical was an image created for her, by Trump campaign interests, to get elected.  Now that she's been there for a while, she's having trouble covering up her true identity and she's grown weary of keeping up appearances.  Both political parties recruit candidates to run for office, and a lot of that is based on the image they think they can project.  It's hard to keep true character bottled up and out of sight all the time.  

Or are we seeing Lauren Boebert in the process of being corrupted by her success within the extremist right wing, the pressure of politics and the association with some of the most incredibly immoral, machiavellian, corrupt politicians we've seen in our long history wearing her down and causing a public performance far worse than any drag queen entertainment.  

Acknowledging her apology, considering it sincere, and extending her the benefit of the doubt in forgiveness still does not require one to vote for her or consider her qualified or fit for office.  

w

Mitt Romney Stepping Down Represents the End of a Political Era

The fact that Senator Mitt Romney, the GOP nominee for President in 2012, and a strong candidate in the Republican primaries in 2008 could not, at this point, get elected to a minor officer position in the GOP now is perhaps, along with the late Senator John McCain, who was the GOP nominee in 2008, the best example of just how much the Republican party has departed from its traditional, core values in just a short decade.  Within the GOP, Romney had to overcome, or perhaps at the time he ran, capitalize on his bi-partisanship, a necessity for him to even be considered as a viable candidate for the senate from a liberal state like Massachussetts, and then, to successfully be elected and serve as its governor.  

Personally, my own opinion of Mitt Romney as a politician got a huge boost on March 3, 2016.  Driving on the Pennsylvania Turnpike, I heard his speech at the Hinckley Institute of Politics at the University of Utah warning the GOP about the danger of nominating Donald Trump as their candidate for President.  Romney correctly, and with cited evidence, gave a credible attack on Trump's character and behavior, his business dealings and most of his political positions which were all over the place.  

Romney said Trump was a "phony, a fraud.  He's playing members of the American public for suckers.  If we Republicans choose Donald Trump as our nominee, the prospects for a safe and prosperous future are greatly diminished."  

I honked my horn when he was finished.  That still stands as one of the most truthful, and courageous, statements ever made by a Republican about Donald Trump.  When he decided to run for the seat being vacated by Orrin Hatch in 2018, I though that speech might be the thing that kept him from being elected.  But politics in Utah, while intensely partisan on some level, as the Mormons are mostly Republican, weigh much more heavily on Mormon influence and thinking.  And while they are intensely Republican when it comes to a social and political agenda, there were enough of them who were also disgusted by Trump's worldly, anti-Christian behavior to render his influence a non-factor in Utah elections.  

But Romney's time in the senate was, in my opinion, disappointing when it came to the former failed President.  He wants to be respected for his integrity, which rests on his Mormon faith and identity, and the position which he holds in the priesthood of the LDS church.  It was missing in action most of the time, though I give him lots of credit in that it did make an appearance both times removal votes were taken after Trump impeachments.  And he has paid a political price for that, one which has ultimately led to his decision not to run for re-election.  As governor of Massachusetts, his success depended on bi-partisan cooperation with the legislature.  As Senator from Utah, he reverted to his traditional, conservative Republicanism and when he had the chance to do some real good for the American people, at the beginning of Biden's first term, he shrank back into the safety of his traditional Republican partisanship.  

At this point, having made his decision not to run again, I hope he catches on to the fact that his legacy as a United States Senator might rest on turning to his example as governor of Massachusetts, rather than on most of his Utah senate term.  I don't expect him to vote for everything the Democrats pass through, but I do expect him to use his remaining time to set an example of the kind of bi-partisan cooperation in Congress that the American people expect, and want to see happen.  He would be the most likely of Republicans to move in that direction.  

Unfortunately, I don't believe we can expect that to be the case.  

He has nothing to lose, at this point.  He never got the kind of Evangelical support that Trump, the adulterer and liar, has enjoyed, because most Evangelicals consider Mormonism as a cult which denies the Christian gospel, robs Christ of his role as savior, believes the Bible to be incorrectly translated, requiring interpretation by a latter day "prophet," Joseph Smith.  He doesn't owe anyone anything.  If he is a principled opponent of Trump, then he could help the American people and assist in efforts to preserve democracy and keep Trump out.  But in the polarized political atmosphere of Congress now, any move that isn't aimed at complete loyalty to the "cause" of the party is disloyalty. 

So his legacy up to this point is one of coming to the verge of bipartisan cooperation, of being at the very pointof getting past the partisan gridlock and division that is slowly strangling American constitutional democracy, dipping a toe into the water to try it out, only to shrink back into a more personally comfortable partisan position, continuing to think of self and of what it takes to keep his job rather than thinking of the American people and what it takes to be a great leader.  He had a chance to rise to the occasion, to set aside partisan division and set a new example, if not of bipartisan greatness and political innovation, at least to help get it started.  He was one of very few who spoke out early and  while the whole issue of party loyalty spoiled his chances to be recognized for great leadership, will be known for his persistence and consistency when the two votes that counted the most were taken.   

I had hoped for more from him.   

One Post on the Impeachment Hearings, and This is It

Talking about something we knew was coming, even with the thin majority Republicans eked out in Congress in the midterms, this discussion has already become boring.  Since they've been in power, the GOP has turned looking for evidence to bring impeachment against President Biden into their primary party platform.  They have nothing to offer the American people, the part of their party that intended to break government and then point to how government doesn't work has run out of ideas.  That tends to happen when there isn't any reason to have good ideas in the first place.    

That's understandable, in this era of Republican politics gone of the rails.  They are seething with rage over all of the charges, all credible, all with mountains of evidence reviewed by grand juries and virtually unanimously affirmed, with which their political inamorata has been charged.  So far, only a handful of the craziest, most out of touch Republicans have publicly stated they think he's innocent and will get off.  It's hard to keep secrets in politics, so we know that Republican party leaders are in panic mode, alarmed over the damage to their chances in 2024 which they see coming.  

But that's why the term "impeachment" is getting dragged out.  They're running out of time.  Looks like the constutitional guarantee of a "speedy trial" is actually going to have some meaning, and even if there are delays, the publicity isn't having the effect that some Republicans thought it would.  It's just making more people hate Trump.  Anyone who is paying any attention to this at all, even through the smoke and mirrors way that Fox and Newsmax report things, it's tough to deny the evidence that is public knowledge at this point.  That's why impeachment has come up.  

Tining is everything.  Without evidence, and let's be really clear here, there's no evidence for the approach that has now been publicly identified as the reason for an impeachment "inquiry," an impeachement against Joe Biden that fails will be a political disaster.  It's not that Republicans think there's a legitimate reason to impeach the President, it's that they want to set up an inquity to have media opportunities to use the term and create appearances before the election.  There will be political consequences when this fails, the trick is to get those to occur after an election, rather than prior to it.  But even this isn't going their way.  

Somewhere around two dozen Republican members of the house, given one or two either way, have been absolutely dreading this moment.  Increasingly underwater in polls within their districts, the reality of an impeachment being discussed, even an inquiry, means they will very likely lose their seat the next time there's an election.  There are at least another 8 or 9 in swing districts who will also find themselves in electoral difficulty if this continues.  

As if Republicans need something else to send voters to the other side, or keep their own supporters at home on election day, launching an impeachment inquiry, without actually having any specific, credible evidence on which to support it, like every other impeachment inquiry in history has had prior to now, will do the trick.  An MSN poll that popped up yesterday shows that 57% of those in the poll think that launching this inquiry, without evidence, will lead to a Democratic sweep of elections in Congress and the Presidency in 2024.  

While some people will have difficulty distinguishing the fact that there is no actual evidence prompting an impeachment inquiry, just because of the terminology that will be used to try and make it sound as if there is, most voters aren't going to be misled on this.  If anyone among the GOP thinks they may have gained some ground in the charges against Trump by making that look "political," this will erase what little advantage, if any, that may have brought about.  This becomes public when they decide to hold hearings.  And you can bet that, with the exception of the extremist media outlets, the focus will find its way to the chaos and confusion that lacking solid evidence will bring about.  

It took time for the committees looking into Trump's impeachment inquiries to narrow down the list of corrupt, illegal activities he committed which fit the constitutional definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors" to avoid overwhelming the senate hearings.  The first, public, televised session of his first impeachment made note of the fact that from among 16 or 17 different possible charges, the house would focus on just four specific incidents that were clearly breaking the law.  I will never forget the second impeachment, when they simply read the list of charges and evidence, before focusing on their settled charges.  

I'm just waiting to see what specific charges they are even able to come up with, lacking any evidence to point them to a real violation of the law.  

In some ways, I think the best thing they can do for Democrats trying to get elected or re-elected is to simply move ahead with this waste of time and money.  I would prefer that President Biden's time in office, two terms as it appears to be at this point, not be marred by the historical asterisk indicating an impeachment.  But then, I wonder if, with this Limbaughesque-style of anti-government hostility and political atmosphere, whether impeachment hearings are aleady a part of the GOP platform.  Good for us if that's the case.  

But pursuing an impeachment after what will be happening to the orange headed buffoon will be a huge drag on the voter support for the GOP, which is already at a visibly lower point than it was in 2020, especially in battleground states.  I'm all in favor of anything which helps Democrats win, and this will definitely fit the bill.  

It also is a convincing way for Republican leadership to sever all ties with the principles on which their party was once built.  Government waste once used to be the major theme of the guy they used to consider their best politician of the modern age, Ronald Reagan.  So much for that.  But all of that "family values" talk, claiming honesty to flatter Evangelical Christian leaders who thought they were getting something out of their sycophantic idolatry was just talk.  Republicans now stand to defend criminals and their corruption, right down to rape, sexual abuse, pornography, adultery and treason.  Trying to impeach Joe Biden, while standing up for a narcissistic, corrupt, adulterous, treasonous, worldly demagogue is the height of hypocrisy.  Some Americans will continue to be blind to this but most already see through the deception, and propaganda.

Honestly, I have serious doubts about whether a vote to impeach the President will ever actually take place.  If McCarthy does continue his spineless lack of leadership, and there is a vote, there will be at least 10 GOP defectors.  I'm not expecting, even with a hard push, that this will ever get to the senate. I don't see Republicans like Juan Ciscomani, for example, who represents Arizona district 6, which was once Gabby Giffords district, risking re-election to vote for nonsense.  He won the seat against another political newcomer in a mid-term year by just a couple hundred votes even after gerrymandering cut out two heavily Democratic border towns out in a district that almost always goes Democratic in presidential election years.  Ciscomani, who emigrated from Mexico, already has a position on abortion rights that defies his party's stance, and has been friendly to the LGBTQ community.  

And the President's approach to this is brilliant.  He's ignoring it, as the rest of us should.  Oh, I'm not saying don't keep an eye on it and confront propaganda with evidence supporting the truth when it needs to be done.  But the President is giving this the attention it deserves, and the media should take the hint and give it that same level of attention.  

Kudos, also, to Stephanie Miller, whose handling of the issue on her talk show this morning was also brilliant.  She's one of the best when it comes to communicating how insignificant and unimportant the other side's conspiracy theories look to the general public.  If there's a recording of the early part of her show for September 14, I'd suggest you set aside some time to listen.  If you're a Democrat, it will have you ROFL.  

The Signal Press will now use its time and cyberspace for more realistic, productive pursuits.

Why Isn't This Economic News Part of the Daily News Cycle?

It's the economy, stupid.  

The economy was a big part of politics during all of the time I was growing up.  I can remember in most of the social studies classes I had in high school and college, discussions about deficit spending, the national debt, unemployment, the value of the dollar, inflation, and all of those things and the almost immediate effect economic news had on polling data for political candidates.  Inflation was the problem that brought the Carter administration to a close, and unemployment and a recession brought the George H.W. Bush administration to an end.  

But, toward the end of the 1990's, a social agenda focused on using politics for culture wars instead of for what government under our constitution is supposed to do, has replaced the economy. I'm not surprised, since all of the measurements that conservatives once considered marks of success, including reducing the deficit, lowering taxes, using interest rates to regulate economic trends, and creating jobs in the private sector, are all Democratic Presidential achievements.  Among their own, not so much.  

The Most Economically Beneficial Presidency in Five Decades

I found this editorial by Edwin Eisendrath on the website of WCPT radio in Chicago, and I guess the media doesn't pay much attention to this stuff any more, either that, or their audience isn't interested.  The Biden Administration has been hugely successful from an economic perspective, as much or more than any prior administration in five decades or more.  About six paragraphs down is this list of economic achievements under Joe Biden's Presidency.  It's quite a contrast to the two prior Republican Presidents whose laissez-faire approach to the economy produced recessions, unemployment and soaring debt.  

Here's the list: 

• GDP growth at 5.7% in 2021 is the best since 1984.  (And this explains, in part, the inflation we are experiencing.) 
• Unemployment fell to its lowest level in 50 years. 
• 13 million private sector jobs have been created since 2020. 
• Average hourly earnings have increased 5.2% through May of this year.  
• The American rescue plan was incredibly successful in getting the US out of the pandemic and in jump-starting the economy.  This is what government is supposed to do.  
• The Infrastructure and Jobs act has created the biggest boost in building trades in decades, and will make tech infrastructure what it should be in the wealthiest country on earth. 
• The Inflation Reduction Act and Chips and Science Act resulted in massive investments in green technology and created thousands of jobs in high tech manufacturing.
• The deficit is coming down because of economic growth!  

And Republicans don't want you to know that Biden's record on border enforcement is twice as good as Trump's, or Dubya's, both of whom let more illegals into the United States during their terms, by far, than Clinton, Obama or Biden.  And after all those promises to coal miners in 2016, under Trump, coal production dropped 27% and the number of coal-related jobs dropped a whopping 17%, the biggest decline since the depression.  That sector of the energy economy isn't coming back, but the Biden administration has put resources into helping those employed in that industry find other jobs with livable wages.

Economically, all we got from Trump was nothing as far as I'm concerned.  The wealthiest of us got tax cuts to shield them from the effects of the pandemic and insulate them from any economic difficulties.  The average American wage earner's taxes went up under Trump, just enough to cut into any benefit their wages might have provided against inflation that was only moderated by the effects of the COVID pandemic on business.

So if I'm a conservative Republican, claiming that the economy is the most pressing issue on my ballot, and I looked at this list, it would be a straight arrow to the ballot box to re-elect the politician whose administration led Congress to pass the legislation that brought all of this about.  There is not anything here that, if I were of that perspective, I could not support.  Letting control issues centered on controlling personal morality and limiting individual freedom should be the last thing I'd want to do.  

Is that too simplified?  Because that's really the bottom line here.  We have, in the Presidency, an experienced politician who has gathered together the best of the best when it comes to advisors, having had a front seat in the previous Democratic President's administration to see the talent, intelligence and experience he could have in his own.  No wonder Republicans make no sense and offer nothing of substance to the American people.  They aren't thinking straight.  They've done exactly what George Washington warned us not to do, in letting their political bias over-ride common sense and their own principles.  They're all about the power, and not about the people and that's why they must be given the kind of political beating that will knock them back into their senses. 

Gifts From the Last Three Republican Presidents 

A little online searching brought me to the results of the economic policies of the last three Republican Presidents: 

• Between the three of them, they are responsible for 80% of the tax increases levied since 1988. 
• They are responsible for more than 90% of the increase in the national debt.  The most recent Republican President, Trump, can account for more than three fourths of that.  If you count all of the money spend on the Afghanistan war, even through the Obama administration, that percentage goes up by 5% more.  
• All of them were in office when unemployment soared, with two of the three seeing levels exceed 10%.  All of them experienced a net loss of private sector jobs during their administration, the largest drop being under Dubya, with Trump in second place.  
• Collectively, their economic growth is in negative numbers, Dubya's at -6% being the worst but Trump at -3.7%.  
• Of course, with those dismal figures, inflation should be under control, right?  But some segments of the economy, including prices for things like utilities and home prices soared under Trump.                                                                            

 I'm putting this out there because we need to see more of this now.  It will get some comments, of course, and I can't wait to see reactions on social media.  If it really is about the economy, then Republicans are big losers.  That's why their narrative has shifted to controlling other people's lives.  They are better suited for that, anyway.   

No Dilemma for Christians who Support President Joe Biden

David Gushee: Protecting Democracy from its Christian Enemies

A comment from "anonymous" on August 29, on a post entitled There's an Exodus From Evangelical Churches Because of Donald Trump's Politics, said, "Your statement, 'Nothing Biden has said or done would be contrary to someone's Christian convictions...' says everything I need to know about your qualifications to judge and or evaluate Christians and Christianity.  in that you are totally unqualified and don't have a clue of what Christ represents.  Have you every [sic] read any of the new covenant [sic]?  Just askin' and this is not a rhetorical question."  

Normally, I would not respond to an anonymous comment like that.  The fact that it was left anonymously speaks for itself, and nullifies  

First of all, yes, I have read the "New Covenant."  I was raised in an Evangelical church, became a Christian through a conversion experience defined in conservative, Evangelical terms, earned a minor in Biblical studies in college and have about 30 hours of Biblical studies, including languages and theology, in graduate school.  I understand exactly what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is, and it is on that basis that I will reiterate the statement I made, that there is nothing President Biden has said or done that would be contrary to someone's Christian convictions."  Since the commenter determined to make a personal criticism without providing one single statement to contradict what I said, and back it up with evidence, I'll take that as an admission that my statement is correct.  

Let's Cut to the Chase

Most white, Evangelical Christians vote Republican because the Republican party has discerned, in their fundamentalist approach to Christian faith, a strong, single-mindedness when it comes to political issues.  They've blindly elevated opposition to abortion rights as the single most important political issue with which they are concerned.  That, and the extension of the constitutionally guaranteed rights to all people, whether they are Christian and Caucasian or not, seem to be the biggest problems.  

Of course, the President has not made his support for the pro-choice position a secret.  But I tend to look at it this way.  If politicians and legislators who favor a pro-choice position are labelled as "baby killers" and are directly responsible for all abortions, then politicians and legislators who favor unlimited gun ownership are child-killers and murderers, directly responsible for all shootings.  

In a democratic republic, where the constitution guarantees individual rights to all citizens, Evangelical Christians are free to practice their faith unhindered.  They're free because everyone else is, too.  Be happy with that.  

Why This Christian Supports Joe Biden

I said it before, and I will say it again.  There's nothing Biden has said or done as President of the United States that is contrary to Christian convictions.  Not one thing has resulted from the multiple legislative achievements of the Biden Administration that is contrary to any Christian principle or value.  From his management of the COVID pandemic recovery, which was an achievement that will go down in history as one of the most effective government health initiatives in history, to his economic policy that has benefitted all segments of the economy, the Biden Administration has earned the title of one of the single most effective Presidencies of the Post-War era.  

Inflation is a problem, one that his administration noted would follow the COVID period, as jobs came back and the economy flourished.  They took all of the steps that government can take in attempting to avoid a recession and help drop the inflation percentage, and it's working, slowly, as they said it would. 

My Christian faith incorporates the gospel value of peacemaking, and of peace, as an identifying characteristic of Christianity and of Christians.  It's an essential, core teaching of the gospel.  Quoting Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, the gospel writer and apostle Matthew says, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God."  Joe Biden is a peacemaker, in the most powerful political position in the world.  His decision to end the war in Afghanistan, an incredibly wasteful operation that became increasingly pointless after Osama Bin Laden was captured, in neighboring Pakistan, was a good one, and while his political opponents tried to make the point that the withdrawal, which succeeded in getting more than 100,000 people out, including all Americans that followed instructions and didn't delay, was a failure, the facts do not support that contention.  

Ukraine is a different matter.  It's a sovereign country, a fledgling democracy whose people are modeling their government after ours, who have been under the oppression of imperialism for a good part of their modern history.  The President understands America's moral obligation to support democracy, especially one as critically located and important to our own democracy now, at a time when our own values need to be strengthened and renewed as a result of the challenge to them from within.  

It is, in fact, Joe Biden's stance for American democracy that is the main reason I voted for him in 2020, and will vote for him again in 2024.  Christians who have more than just a cultural, surface understanding of their faith, and Americans who understand their constitution, its guarantees of individual freedom, and are true patriots loyal to country, not political candidates, will also see the need to support President Biden.  

There is also the question of character, moral values and the compatibility of political candidates to the Christian gospel.  The common excuse of politically motivated Evangelicals is to say, "We're not voting for a pastor in chief..."  That's a cop out.  When the Bible was written, the common people had no voice in their government, nor choice of who their leaders were.  In the United States, we do.  And even though our constitution guarantees complete separation of church and state, has no religious requirement for being elected to office and does not favor one religion over another, it says something about what people value when they vote.  

The contrast between a womanizing, narcissistic, misogynistic, adulterous, pathologically lying, con artist, fraudster who labels himself as worldly and deliberately denies the need for religion at all,  and Joe Biden, a man who isn't perfect, but who is humble, not demanding personal worship of himself, a devout Catholic who lives according to his values, is obvious.  It is not possible, from my perspective, for a convert to Christianity to cast a ballot for the former candidate's worldliness and keep a clear conscience or a good testimony.  

And that's not a personal judgment, it is a Biblically supported conviction. See Ephesians 5:3-14, in any English translation.  

Awareness is Happening

It's becoming clear that there are consequences for the departure from Biblical, orthodox Christianity that is occurring among the extremist political right of Evangelicalism.  People are leaving churches that are substituting the preaching of the Christian gospel with the counterfeit "Maga" gospel.  Criticism from far right wingers aimed at labelling the very core teachings of Jesus as "liberal talking points" are being documented, along with deliberate attempts to change the interpretation of such things as "turning the other cheek," something Donald Trump, Jr. has emphasized through the "Turning Point" rallies operated by their campaign.  

I will also note here that the impression is being left that most Christians generally vote Republican.  That's not true.  Most white, Evangelical Christians vote Republican.  Most African American and Latino Christians vote Democratic.  Mainline Christians tend to vote more Democratic, and Catholics appear to be fairly evenly split.  The Evangelicals make a lot of noise, and tend to get a lot of attention, and a cocky, arrogant doctrinal and theological posture, in which they put themselves above others, seems to interest the media.  They are a segment of the church almost completely dependent on their pastors and church leadership to interpret and understand what they think they believe, which makes them susceptible to being invaded by political cults that their leaders have been lured into accepting by flattery.  Or money.  

So ultimately, we are free to vote our political conscience.  From my perspective, voting for Joe Biden again will be the best choice, if my conscience is tempered by my Christian faith.  I could not, in good conscience, vote Republican, favoring draconian politics and government aimed at disenfranchisement, injustice and endorsement of cruelty, regardless of who is their Presidential nominee.  

Aligning with Cruelty, and "Worldliness" is a Hazard for Christianity in America

 Kris Aaron, Baptist News Global: There's Just No Excuse

"When love isn't what guides us, when our primary values are indifference, or fear, or having to support a political candidate or toe a party line no matter what the cost, well then we're doing more than putting our faith at crisis.  We're doing more than risking harm to our Christian witness and to the witness of others.  Instead, we're actively engaging in idolatry, and we're running the risk of being an asshole.  Idolatry is sinful, no matter what we try to replace God with.  Kris Aaron, Pastor, First Baptist Church of Bristol, Virginia

It's encouraging to see a Baptist pastor recognize that American Christianity, including his own denominational tradition, is in a crisis because of the influence of right wing politics.  I'm sick, and I mean physically and literally sick, of hearing people who label themselves as good, "conservative," Christians display an ignorance of what they claim to be essential theology and doctrine by setting aside their convictions when they cast their ballot. 

I'm sick of hearing and seeing people who claim to be "conservative, Bible-believing" Christians, two catch words which mean they think their faith is superior to those they disagree with whom they label "liberal," and "who don't believe the Bible," say that they're not voting for a pastor-in-chief, they are voting for a commander-in-chief.  I'd like to know where their inerrant, infallible Bible says that it is OK to choose political leaders whose lifestyle is deliberately sinful and worldly and who deny the basic soteriological doctrine of the Christian gospel.  The Christians who lived in the days when the New Testament was being written could not imagine a civil government in which they got to have a say in who became head of state.  Those who now push Christian nationalism and the idea that America's founders intended to start a "Christian nation" completely deny everything they say about it, along with the scripture, when they make that claim.  

If the founders intended for the United States to be a "Christian nation," then why would electing a womanizing, adulterous, lying, cheating, narcissistic, vulgar, crooked, arrogant, Christ-denying, draft dodger as President be acceptable?  

Idolatry

Last winter, Donald Trump Jr. told an Evangelical audience that they've spent half a century "turning the other cheek," and it hasn't worked out for them.  At a Turning Point rally in Phoenix, Junior said, "We've turned the other cheek, and I understand, sort of, the Biblical reference--I understand the mentality--but it's gotten us nothing.  OK?  It's gotten us nothing while we've ceded ground in every major institution in our country."  Emphasis mine.  

Following the Christian gospel has gotten us nothing?  Really?  

So what's the solution?  Abandon the Christian gospel, from which this particular point is a core teaching of Jesus?  

And let's get back on the ground of solid, Biblical theology and doctrine, which is something Don Jr. and his father know nothing about.  What is the "nothing" that turning the other cheek has produced?  Worldly political power?  When has that ever been the goal of the Christian gospel?  If Christianity, American Evangelical Christianity in particular, has "ceded ground," it's because it has become disconnected from the things that keep it connected to God.  And that's exactly what Mr. Trump Junior is offering to those Christians who would follow Trump's political ambition, which is built on his worldly image and rests on his worldliness for which he denies needing forgiveness. 

Aaron points to a recent example of idolatry intruding into the church on the coat-tails of right wing politics related by Russell Moore, current editor of Christianity Today.  Moore concurs with Aaron's assessment of American Evangelical Christianity being in crisis by relating examples in which a church member comes up to a particular pastor after a sermon that was based on Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, and asks him, "Where did you get those liberal talking points?"  

Moore expresses alarm when the church member's response to the pastor's answer, "I'm literally quoting Jesus Christ," is not "I'm sorry," but "Yes, but that doesn't work anymore.  That's weak."  

"And when we get to the point where the teachings of Jesus are seen as subversive to us," says Moore, "Then we're in a crisis." 

"For certain intruders have stolen in among you, people who long ago were designated for this condemnation as ungodly, who pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ."  Jude, v. 4

These words from Jude are not a specific prophecy, but they are prophetic in the manner in which they address what far right Trumpian politics is doing to the church.  Denying having done anything requiring God's forgiveness, claiming that the core principles of Jesus' gospel "aren't getting us anywhere in this world," and calling the gospel "liberal talking points" is a sign of how much ignorance there is in the church about its theology and doctrine by its members, and how much ungodly, perverted licentiousness has already intruded into it.  

Ownership of the Philosophy and Practice of Politics

Calling Jesus' Sermon on the Mount "liberal talking points" and claiming that turning the other cheek is getting nowhere in the world both constitute what Jude calls "denying or only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ."  So is anyone making the claim that they have not done anything requiring God's forgiveness.  There it is, right in plain sight.  Christians who know the theology and doctrine of their faith should be able to see this without being prompted.  The fact that they can't, or won't, says a lot about who they are and what they really believe. 

Aligning with secular politicians was never the intention of Jesus.  He established his church based on a demonstration of faith as a spiritual kingdom, something he and the apostles all made very clear.  It was to conduct itself with respect toward the civil government, righteous obedience to civil law, as a testimony of its faith in Christ, but it was not to adopt its politics as doctrine, nor align itself with political power to achieve its mission and purpose.  

Had the church in Jesus' and Jude's day aligned itself with the civil government, it would have corrupted itself with the brutality and murder that were used to keep people in line and make them submissive.  It would have accepted idolatry and denied not only the principles of the gospel, but the characteristics it produces in those who live by it.  Things like being humble, poor in spirit, and peacemakers, were not valued by the civil government of the time.  And it is clear, from the words of those who promote right wing politics in our culture, that turning the other cheek and loving your neighbor, which are core practices expected of Christians, are not valued at all.  

So accepting those who are leaders of that political philosophy mean owning the worldliness that comes with it, and that turns a Christian testimony on its ear, causing its death.  It has opened the door to all kinds of scandal and evil that is becoming identified with Evangelical Christianity, including clergy sexual abuse scandals, financial corruption and subversion of the true gospel message of Jesus in favor of the warmed over worldliness they have placed at the center of their philosophy.  Leaders who live as if they are above the law are not a rarity among Evangelicals.  Their ownership of corruption from politics is behind all of that. 

Would Jesus do This? 

The governor of Texas has ordered spherical orange objects with sharp metal spikes placed in the Rio Grande River, where people sometimes cross from Mexico into the United States.  Is this issue so bad that such cruelty and inhumane treatment of those desperate to get out of their circumstances and have a chance in the US is justified, even if Christian support for those politicians wasn't an issue?  What does that say about the sincerity of anyone's Christian faith, if they can be aware of that happening and not be moved by the cruelty of it?  

For that matter, those who follow trails through the Arizona desert, removing the water containers placed there by people concerned about those who have been taken there by the "Coyotes" who guide them into the United States are also just as cruel.  There is no circumstance in which a Christian is permitted to be cruel or inhumane to a fellow human being, no matter what they have done.  

If the church in the United States is ever going to see the revival that it claims it is crying out to God to see, it has to repent from the evil into which it has fallen, as a result of its association with far right wing politics.  Those who have immersed themselves in right wing politics have pulled the plug on their own spirituality and that's why membership and attendance is tanking, churches are empty and getting emptier, and people are turning elsewhere for answers because the church no longer provides them.  

"For truly I tell you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you bear the name of Christ will by no means lose the reward."  Mark 9:41, NRSV 

If a revival is the desire, then the politics of worldliness and cruelty must be set aside.