Main page    Aug. 19

Pres map
Previous | Next | Senate page | Menu

New polls: (None)
Dem pickups: NC
GOP pickups: GA NV
The map above gives a static picture of the race, but not a dynamic one. The tipping-point table does that better. For the candidate who is ahead, it shows the easiest way to expand the lead (and the easiest way to lose it). For the candidate who is behind, it shows the easiest way to catch up. Up until now, there was just one tipping-point page. There was no history. Now you can navigate to an old main page and click on the tipping-point link and get the table for that date (but only for Aug. 2 and later). This gives more insight into the dynamics of the race than the static map does.

Democratic National Convention Opens Today

For this week only, "DNC" has been redefined as "Democratic National Convention." Starting next week, it reverts to "Democratic National Committee." It's kind of the same thing. A convention is like a committee, only bigger. The last time the Democrats were in Chicago was 1996, when they renominated Bill Clinton in a big love fest. Will this one go as smoothly? We'll let you know on Friday. Or maybe earlier.

This DNC is different from all other recent ones because the expected nominee got swapped in less than a month ago. This changes everything. The convention has been planned for years. The platform, themes, and speakers were all chosen by Joe Biden and his staff. In less than a month, Harris and her staff had to remake the whole event in her image. It is crucial that Harris put her stamp on it, lest the Republicans accuse her of just being warmed-over Biden.

Some of the speakers haven't changed. Barack Obama and Bill Clinton will still get top billing. Obama will speak Tuesday, as will Michelle Obama. Clinton's turn comes Wednesday. Hillary Clinton will also get a prime slot. It may be bittersweet for her because although she may see a woman become president in her lifetime, it won't be her. Still, she was the first woman to get more votes than a male opponent in a presidential contest. Absent her 2016 run, there would have been far more people objecting to Harris as the nominee on the grounds that "no woman could ever get more votes than a man." Hillary showed what was possible, and if she had gotten 79,316 more votes in three states, she would have won. She paved the way for Harris.

All of the speakers now have to rewrite their speeches quickly. Simply praising all the laws Biden signed would have been fine until July 21, but now that won't work. They have to be focused on why Harris is the right person for the moment, not how well Biden governed. No doubt some speakers will get less time than planned and others will get more. In DNC v1.0, Jill Biden would have gotten a large and prominent speaking slot and Doug Emhoff a small and not so prominent one. That's not going to happen now, and their speeches have to be rewritten from scratch. Hopefully, the person in charge of the teleprompter loads the right versions of each person's speeches. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) learned about that problem the hard way at the RNC.

There are probably many speakers who are close to Biden who were told their presence is no longer required and others, people close to Harris, who were suddenly told: "Write a 15-minute speech for the whole country." Some planners are making the analogy: "Same plane, just new pilot." But realistically, it is the same plane, new destination and largely new crew.

One thing that Harris is obviously aware of is that while Biden is personally less than popular, his policies are still very popular, so Harris will emphasize them to show there is continuity. But she can't ignore Biden completely. It wouldn't be the right thing to do and she knows it. The first day will accordingly praise Biden and his policies to the moon. It will also emphasize that he did something personally very difficult for the benefit of the country, while her opponent, Donald Trump, does things only for the benefit of Donald Trump, and on those occasions the country benefits, it is just an accident. Kind of like a broken (analog) clock being right twice a day.

Biden will make the final speech tonight. He will talk about the achievements of their administration and especially about Harris' contributions to it. He will also emphasize the threat Trump presents to democracy and urge voters across the country to save it by voting for Harris. Biden spent the past weekend at Camp David tuning his speech, as it will probably be the one everyone remembers in 10 years. Quick: Which of George Washington's speeches have you even heard of? Most likely, it is his Farewell Address. When Biden's top speechwriters have a hand in his speeches, he can read them from the teleprompter, and he can usually do a good job, as he did at the State of the Union. At the end, he will hand the baton to Harris. From then on, it will be her show, not his. This evening, he is expected to leave Chicago and spend the rest of the week in Southern California so as not to get in her way. It is surely tough for him, but he knows if Harris wins, the history books will treat him very well.

It has been a whirlwind for Harris. She is not all that well known and this is her big chance to introduce herself to the country. Among other things, she has been back to Howard University and other places from her past to shoot footage for a biographical video to be shown at the convention. At the same time, she is doing debate prep and getting to know Coach Walz. She has a lot on her plate, down to small details, like choosing the music. Biden favored songs from Fleetwood Mac, a bunch of 1960s hippies. Harris is surely going to go for something a bit more recent. Music from a year starting in "2" might just make an appearance!

The guest lists also have changed radically. Harris' allies now get the lion's share of tickets. For example, Biden gave Donna Brazile, a Black woman who is a long-time Democratic consultant, five guest tickets. Harris upped that to 40 tickets. The 4,695 delegates chosen before Biden dropped out will be there, but the United Center can be configured to hold 23,500 seats. A few thousand will be elected Democratic officials and party leaders, but that still gives her a fair amount of leeway to invite her own people. Additionally, many people who didn't really want to attend a Bidenfest very much want to attend a Harrisfest. Expect a much more colorful convention than Biden would have had. Also, see below.

Harris very much wants union support and is likely to get it, at least from union leadership. Liz Schuler, president of the AFL-CIO, supports Harris. So do April Verret, president of the Service Employees International Union; Shawn Fain, president of the UAW; and many other union presidents. One holdout is Sean O'Brien, president of the Teamsters Union, who spoke at the RNC last month. But union leaders have only so much sway over their members. They can make the pitch that Harris will help get them better wages, benefits, and working conditions, but if all the members care about is abortion and stuffing gays back into the closet, their pitches may not help much.

Conventions are expensive. Think of all those balloons that will drop down at appropriate moments. Balloons aren't free, you know. The Democrats have raised $94 million for the convention. That can buy a substantial number of balloons.

Another thing the convention does is approve the platform. Donald Trump is mentioned so often in it (150 times) that you would be excused if you thought he was the Democratic candidate. Turns out, he is not. Who knew? Among other items, the platform calls for higher taxes on billionaires, lowering the cost of child care, investing in clean energy, and protecting abortion. It also calls for a two-state solution in the Middle East. It does not call for the United States to halt weapon deliveries to Israel, as many progressives wanted.

The platform is similar to the 2020 platform, but with a few notable changes. There is no reference to Black Lives Matter. There is a call for the president to pardon people with low-level federal convictions for possessing marijuana and support for wiping out some student loan debt. It also asks Congress to study the matter of reparations. That could be a fun topic, starting with whether it applies to Black people not descended from enslaved Americans (like Kamala Harris), how one might prove one's descent from enslaved Americans, and whether people who are 1/8 or 1/16 Black get any money. Such a bill would be a real windfall for genealogists, especially those studying Black family history.

During the primaries, 36 of the 4,695 delegates were elected as uncommitted, meaning they are not controlled by Biden. While the actual roll call vote has already happened, they could still cause trouble. Many of them are pro-Palestinian. Top Democrats have been talking to them for months in an effort to prevent them from disturbing the convention in any way. Some of them want Harris to commit to an arms embargo for Israel. There is no way she would ever do that as it would anger many times as many people. According to sources, the negotiations are currently at an impasse.

The 36 uncommitted delegates pose a risk inside the convention, but there is a much bigger one outside it: the scheduled pro-Palestinian protests. Will they get violent? Will they get much attention? One thing that is virtually certain is that there will not be a police riot, like in 1968. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson (D) has spent months negotiating with the leaders of the Little Palestine suburb near Chicago to try to make sure they can exercise their right to protest but also make them understand that doesn't give them the right to block traffic or disturb the convention. The police have said as long as the protesters stay in the 1.4-mile-long court-approved marching area, they will not only not interfere with them, they will protect the marchers from counter-demonstrators. The police even created a website explaining to the protesters what their rights and responsibilities are.

There are 264 pro-Palestinian groups expected to take part, some of which are believed to be linked to terrorist groups. The leaders of the demonstration have to make sure they can maintain control and not let people who want to create chaos do so. If things get out of control, not only will that hurt the Palestinians' image in the U.S., but it could help elect Trump, whose Middle East policy is basically "What Bibi wants, Bibi gets." The Palestinians Do. Not. Want. That.

Harris' promotion from #2 to #1 also changes the calculus for the demonstrators. With Biden on top, he was worried about losing the votes of the 210,000 Arab-American voters in Michigan, a key swing state. This is about 2% of the population in a state he won by 2.8%. However, the Black population of Michigan is 1.4 million, or 14%. This means Harris can probably give the Arab population a hard "No" on what they want and make up for the loss by campaigning vigorously in Detroit for Black votes. The leverage of the Arab community has been greatly reduced by the candidate swap. The leaders of the demonstrators probably know this and might not want to push their luck. Harris certainly knows this.

If the protests inside and outside the convention remain orderly and nonviolent, the rest of the convention will be smooth sailing for Harris. She might even get a polling bump from it, but we won't really know that until late next week. (V)

DNC Diary: Day Zero

We have a couple of readers who are delegates to the Democratic National Convention, and who have agreed to send in reports as time and energy allows. Today, A.S. in Fairfax, VA, has a report on the goings on this weekend:

Greetings from Chicago! I thought readers might like to know about the pre-Convention festivities. However, I first thought it necessary to provide recognition to the DNC and the amazing volunteers for this convention. There are volunteers at both airports, the train stations, and every hotel helping delegates get where they need to be. And the communication has been excellent. They've had to plan this event for 4 years, had to re-plan everything just a month ago, and had to manage a virtual nomination process in the meantime. And yet, I still know exactly where I need to go each day, how to dress, what to bring, etc. Just incredibly well organized.

I also wanted to address the questions raised on Saturday by P.J. in Quakertown and M.H. in Council Grove, because I've seen them come up a lot lately. Many of us in the Virginia delegation have kept in touch since we were all elected, and we were initially fired up to formally nominate President Biden. Then the debate happened. I personally received several calls and messages from friends—strong Democrats—asking if I had any alternative in my vote. Our local Democratic committee office received multiple calls a day from voters expressing the same sentiment. The delegates themselves started asking those questions, enough so that at a virtual information meeting, we were told that the rules state that we must vote for our pledged candidate "with all due conscience." Long before Biden withdrew, the delegates discussed what would happen if he did... and it did not take long for a clear consensus to emerge: There was one person who was specifically selected and elected to fill in for the president if he was not available, Vice President Kamala Harris.

For sure, not every delegate was entirely immediately on board, but there was a clear majority that was. When Biden announced his withdrawal, Harris was already very likely to receive the majority of delegates, but one thought did occur to some of us delegates, "if Biden doesn't endorse her, does that mean he doesn't think she can do the job?" So while I can understand that, from the outside, it looks like the party poohbahs just declared Biden out and Harris in, it was much more organic than that and the party's outward presentation matched the delegates' sentiment pretty well. And Biden's endorsement was crucial to confirming our consensus that Kamala is the best candidate to win in 2024 and to serve as our president for the next 4—or, hopefully, 8—years.

Anyhow, night zero is now in the books. The first thing I'm realizing is just how many events there are all around town and many do not require one to be a delegate. I started the day at the Progressive Democrats of America's "Progressive Central" conference. We heard from Congresspersons Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), Ro Khanna (D-CA), Danny Davis (D-IL) and Jonathan Jackson (D-IL), among other progressive policy experts and state and local elected officials. The difference in public speaking skills and techniques between experienced elected officials and other presenters was staggering.

From there, it was time for the welcome parties. Each state delegation appears to have had its own welcome reception. Our Virginia delegation took over the hotel bar, and from there we had to commute to the end of the Navy Pier for the DNC's welcome reception. Shuttles were provided from each of the eight delegate hotels; however, protesters made their mark, as several shuttles had to be diverted because of the disruption. A 10-minute shuttle ride instead became a half-hour walk for those of us willing to make the trek. The DNC welcome reception was a mini-concert with an open bar, lots of different Chicago delicacies (the hot dogs were a big hit), and a few surprises. After DNC Chair Jaime Harrison welcomed us, he brought out Luke Skywalker himself, Mark Hamill. Hamill gave a great speech supporting Vice President Harris and then offered to take selfies with every delegate in the room. One of the downsides about having so many events around town is that you feel the need to try to get to as many events as you can, and unfortunately for me, this meant sacrificing a selfie with my childhood Jedi hero to get to the Human Rights Campaign's welcome event in a different part of town. We ran into the protesters again as we tried to get from the reception venue to our rideshare, but police seemed to have things completely under control and things seemed relatively peaceful.

Overall it was a great night leaving many of us excited to get to work tomorrow, when we'll vote on the platform and affirm the nomination of our vice presidential candidate, Tim Walz.

Thanks, A.S.! We look forward to your subsequent reports. (Z)

Harris Goes Digital

Kamala Harris' campaign announced on Saturday that it has already reserved $370 million worth of ads in the swing states from Labor Day to Election Day. That was to be expected.

But the real news here is that slightly over half of it will be digital. Biden was planning to advertise on TV, but Harris belongs to a generation that is much more comfortable with the online world and she is planning to spend at least $200 million of that on platforms like YouTube, Hulu, Roku, Spotify, Pandora, and Paramount. She understands, probably as well, if not better, than any previous candidate, that many people, especially younger voters, watch little, if any actual television. Instead, they use on-demand streaming services, like the ones above.

One of us, (V), has noticed that when he has his VPN set to Atlanta, GA, and he goes to YouTube for any reason, he gets either an ad for some marijuana grower or a friendly, upbeat Harris ad, with her sitting at a table smiling and speaking directly to the camera and asking for a $10 donation. The $10 is nice, but the real purpose of the ad is to collect email addresses of Georgia voters, which (V) is not. Clearly Harris sees Georgia as in play and is running digital ads there in heavy rotation. Trump is also advertising heavily in Georgia, but more on television than digital. (V)

Vance: The Polls Are Fake

Poll after poll shows Kamala Harris surging and Donald Trump wilting. Look at our electoral-vote graphs to see the change in the past month. Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) went on Fox yesterday to discuss the situation. His explanation: The polls are fake. Oh. How does that look back on Planet Reality? Here are the 10 most recent head-to-head national polls from 538:

Pollster Harris Pct. Trump Pct. Net Dates
YouGov 51% 48% Harris +3 Aug. 14-16
Outward Intelligence 53% 47% Harris +6 Aug. 11-15
Emerson Coll. 52% 48% Harris +4 Aug. 12-14
Activote 52% 48% Harris +4 Aug. 7-14
Ipsos 51% 45% Harris +6 Aug. 9-13
Beacon + Shaw 49% 50% Trump +1 Aug. 9-12
Morning Consult 47% 44% Harris +3 Aug. 9-11
Quantus 47% 46% Harris +1 Aug. 7-8
Morning Consult 48% 44% Harris +4 Aug. 6-8
Cygnal 48% 47% Harris +1 Aug. 6-8

Harris is ahead in nine of them and the average over all 10 polls is Harris +3.1. The conventional wisdom is that a Democrat has to lead by 3 points nationally to overcome the Republicans' built-in advantage in the electoral college, with small red states overweighted.

How did Vance explain all these polls? He said: "Consistently, what you've seen in 2016 and 2020 is that the media uses fake polls to drive down Republican turnout and to create dissension and conflict with Republican voters." So he is effectively saying that nine different pollsters are all making up numbers and only Fox's poll (Beacon + Shaw) is right? Massive conspiracy? Guess so, in Vanceland.

In any event, Vance has learned well from his mentor. When faced with difficult facts, just lie and make up your own facts. He also contradicted himself within a minute. He said that Harris' surge was a "sugar high." That sort of implicitly admits that Harris is surging then, no? Either the polls are fake and Harris is not surging or the polls are real and her surge is a sugar high. It's hard to have it both ways.

What else did Vance say? This: "If you talk to insiders in the Kamala Harris campaign, they are very worried about where they are because the American people just don't buy the idea that Kamala Harris, who has been vice president for 3½ years, is somehow going to tackle the inflation crisis in a way tomorrow that she hasn't in the past 1,300 days." Umm. It is well known that presidents have very little impact on the economy. We always wondered why. Now we have the answer: It's vice presidents who control the economy. Who knew?

When host Shannon Bream showed Vance a WaPo-ABC News/Ipsos poll with Harris ahead 6 points nationally, he said Harris' numbers were "stagnating" and the poll was "wildly inaccurate." Of course he said this. What else could he say and not be fired? Is it going to convince the swing voters, especially those who may watch Fox, and so heard the interview, but also get their news from other sources? We have our doubts.

And it could get worse. Candidates often get a polling bump from their conventions, so Harris could go higher. That could energize her base even more. Then there will be the debate on Sept. 10 and Trump's sentencing on Sept. 18, unless he gets that postponed. Just as Biden needed the debate to change the momentum, now Trump needs something to change it.

And as long as we are on the subject, every day we get questions like this one from reader R.D. in Austin, TX:

I've noticed this year what seems to be a lack of polling in several states since Harris got the top spot on the Democratic ticket. I've also noticed a couple of new polling outfits being mentioned in the recent news articles about polling trends, such as something called Outward Intelligence. Are you concerned 2024 is going to be a bad year for polling accuracy, given some of the new players in the market and the fact that everyone is only able to guess as to what the model electorate will look like?

We wish would could say, with confidence, that the polls will be OK this year. But, of course, we cannot say that. Nobody, not even Ann Selzer, will know for sure until after the election is over.

Many people, and many, many readers, are concerned that because the polls missed on Donald Trump in 2016 and 2020, that the polls could miss by a similar margin again this year. If so, then that could mean that the small-but-steady lead that Kamala Harris has opened up is a mirage, and the race is tied (or, maybe, Trump is actually still ahead). This is certainly possible.

That said, let us put forward a few things for your consideration. First, take a look at our final posting before the 2020 election. We had a bunch of guesses, from ourselves and others, as to how the EV tally would shake out. From high to low, the guesses for Biden's EV total were 351 (Z), 350 (The Economist AND our map), 348 (FiveThirtyEight), 321 (Sabato), 293 (V), 290 (Cook), 279 (PredictIt AND Politico) and 278 (Election-Projection). That averages out to 313.9 EVs, let's round it to 314. Biden's actual total was 306. So, the wisdom of the crowds (which blended polling data with a little gut feel) was not far off.

And now, let's take a look at our final map for 2016, which had 317 EVs for Hillary Clinton. She actually got 227, of course. Oops. We did not think, back then, to aggregate other outlets' projections, or to make our own, independent-of-the-map, guesses. So, we can't do what we just did for 2020. That said, we did have an item that day on national preference polls, all of which had it close. We also had warnings that week, from us, and from others, that Trump might just pull out the victory. And the "miss" on the projections was not entirely because the polls were inaccurate. It was also because polling of the "blue wall" states had virtually ceased, which meant a late, post-James Comey break toward Donald Trump largely went undetected.

The point here is that polling was certainly imperfect in the last two presidential cycles, but the extent of the problem should not be overstated. On top of that, the pollsters are well aware of their misses, and are doing everything they can to correct for them. We do not know exactly what they are doing, since they keep their "secret sauce," well, secret. However, you can be certain that, to take one example, the "blue wall" states are going to be polled right up to the bitter end, and that error will be avoided. Other errors will be, too, as best as possible.

There has already been some evidence that pollsters have corrected, or even over-corrected, this cycle. A number of pollsters, most obviously Siena and Emerson, have had unusually GOP-friendly numbers this year as compared to past years. There have been cross-tabs that were a bit hard to swallow, in particular showing Trump with historic levels of support among Black voters. Why would they break in his direction in his third election?

R.D. also raises a good point about this year's electorate being hard to model. On the whole, pollsters have to work with what the electorate actually looked like in past elections, and then maybe tweak from there. And the tweaks are going to be on the conservative side (as in, "not going too far," not "in favor of Republicans"). Think about what groups might show up in unusually high numbers this year. Women, right? Young voters? Black voters? Asian/Indian voters? All of those groups can be expected to break Democratic. And so, if pollsters make errors in their models of the electorate, there's a fair chance they will err to the detriment of Kamala Harris' numbers by not fully accounting for unusual turnout among those groups.

We are not saying the pollsters will get Trump right this year—again, unknowable. What we are saying is that there are enough moving parts here that any of three outcomes are entirely plausible: (1) the polls understate Trump's support, (2) the polls basically get it right and (3) the polls understate Harris' support. And, if we had to guess, we'd say each of these three possibilities is about equally likely.

Oh, and as to new pollsters? There are new pollsters every cycle. We take a pretty close look at any new polling house, and we don't let them into our sample unless we have good reason to believe they know what they are doing, and that they are not a partisan house.

It is well known that the election administrator's prayer is: Lord, let it be a landslide. Pollsters may be adopting it this year, too. (V & Z)

Murphy Will Appoint George Helmy to Finish Bob Menendez' Term

After being convicted of being a crooked senator the second time around (the first time ended in a hung jury), Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) announced he was leaving the Senate in shame tomorrow—except for the shame part. Gov. Phil Murphy (D-NJ) could have appointed Rep. Andy Kim (D-NJ) to the seat to give him a head start on the full term he is virtually certain to win in November, but decided not to. We presume Murphy didn't choose Kim so that the candidate could campaign full-time, except when a very close House vote is expected. In that way, the people of New Jersey could get to know him better.

Instead of picking Kim, Murphy selected his former chief of staff, George Helmy, who will be a senator until Jan. 3, 2025. It is not likely the Senate will take up any serious legislation between now and then, but New Jersey is entitled to two senators, just in case. Helmy, of course, knows the gig is for only 4 months, but putting "United States Senator" on your C.V. is always nice. If you are Roland Burris, you can also put it on your tomb.

When announcing his pick, Murphy said "No elected official is above the law." Murphy was a banker, not a lawyer, before getting into politics, so he probably doesn't know that he should have said: "No elected official below the president is above the law."

Helmy is probably fine and, in 4 months, how much damage could he really do? The optics are, er, awkward though. Menendez was convicted of taking bribes from the Egyptian government. Who takes his seat? An Egyptian-American. Both of Helmy's parents immigrated to the U.S. from Egypt. Normally, that would be fine, but in this specific case, maybe appointing, say, a retired Latino judge would have looked better.

Helmy is not the first retired senior aide to be appointed as a placeholder senator. New Jersey Republican Jeffrey Chiesa, Massachusetts Democrat Mo Cowan, and West Virginia Democrat Carte Goodwin paved the way.

Note, incidentally, that Menendez quietly abandoned his independent bid for his seat over the weekend. Helmy will resign when the general election results are certified, so as to give Kim a head start on seniority. (V)

Three States Hold Primaries Tomorrow

Three states hold primaries tomorrow. One is in the North (Alaska), one is in the South (Florida), and one is kind of in the middle (Wyoming). Here is the lay of the land:

So, there will be a few fireworks, and then that will be it for the month of August. Delaware, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island go in September. Good thing they are holding their primaries before Election Day. Otherwise there would be no time for the general-election campaign. (V)

The Culture Wars Have Expanded to Include... Municipal Traffic Ordinances

Clearly there weren't enough issues dividing the country, so Congress has found another one: Democratic pedestrians vs. Republican motorists. Democrats live largely in cities and many of them don't have a car and don't want urban design to be all about optimizing the flow of cars. They prioritize pedestrians, bikes, and public transit. Many Republicans live in rural areas where a car is the only way to get around, unless you live in Intercourse, PA—where quadrupeds (specifically, Amish farm animals) rule the road.

One peculiarity of D.C. is that although it has a mayor and city council, Congress has a big say in how it is run and this has always provided members with wonderful opportunities to grandstand. Now the hot issue in Congress is municipal traffic policy. Republicans in Congress want to prevent the D.C. city council from banning right turns on red lights because they would be an inconvenience to those oh-so-important motorists. They also want to eliminate cameras that enforce laws that forbid barreling through red lights and stop signs. Cameras that catch speeders are also a bête noir for the Republicans. It is all about giving drivers the freedom to do whatever they want, without regard to other users of the streets and roads. The Car is King.

In blue cities all over the country, car lanes have been turned into bike lanes, speed limits have been lowered, right turns on red lights have been banned, and traffic enforcement has been prioritized, all to the dismay of motorists who don't like the thought that other forms of getting around exist and maybe should be encouraged, with driving discouraged. On the right, the "war on cars" is right up there with the "war on Christmas."

The idea of right turns on red lights has a, well, weird history. It began in the 1970s as an environmental measure. The idea was that making drivers in the right-most lane who wanted to turn right wait for the light to turn green, even when it was safe, caused the cars to idle, burn gasoline, and pollute the air. If it was safe to turn, why not let drivers do that after coming to a complete stop, instead of burning gas (and time) waiting? Now, city planners are trying to get people out of their cars and onto their bikes and feet. Turning right on red can result in an accident between a car and a bike or between a car and a pedestrian. Also, banning right on red makes driving a bit less attractive, and environmentalists actively want to make driving less attractive.

There are actually two issues here and they are mixed together. First, should traffic laws prioritize cars or pedestrians and cyclists? Second, should D.C.'s traffic and other laws be set by Congress or the elected city council? It is worth noting that the House committee with jurisdiction over D.C. is the Oversight Committee. Its chairman is Rep. James Comer (R-KY). He represents a badly gerrymandered district that covers all of western Kentucky. However, there are so few people there, it had to be extended north a bit to have the requisite number of residents. Here it is:

House district KY-01; it is as described

All those little bumps on the edge of the district are not artifacts on account of how JPEG encoding works. They were specifically included or excluded in the district to include or exclude very small neighborhoods the (Republican) mapmakers wanted in or out based on historical voting patterns there. Comer's district is 63% rural and 84% white. Whether he is the right person to be telling the residents of the District, which is 41% Black, 11% Latino and 0% rural, how they should manage their traffic and other things is a matter of some dispute. Other Republican members of the Committee include those noted urban planners Jim Jordan (OH), Andy Biggs (AZ), Paul Gosar (AZ), Marjorie Taylor Greene (GA), Lauren Boebert (CO), and Anna Paulina Luna. The ranking member is Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD). Other Democrats include Cori Bush (MO), Summer Lee (PA), Rashida Tlaib (MI), Ayanna Pressley (MA) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY). Sounds like a real recipe for collegial discussion and compromise. (V)


Previous | Next

Main page for smartphones

Main page for tablets and computers