Sunday Mailbag

Did anything happen in the world of politics this week?

Politics: Hear, Hear!

D.E. in Lancaster, PA, writes: Earlier this week, Senator John Thune (R-SD) gave an interview about the government shutdown. Prior to his interview, several Republican representatives had publicly expressed qualms about Director of the Office of Budget and Management, Russell Vought, author of Project 2025, threatening to savagely slash the roster of Federal workers during the government shutdown. Thune said, as a warning to the Democrats, "This is the risk of shutting down the government and handing the keys to Russ Vought... we don't control what he's going to do." Thune, Thune, Thune, that name seems familiar. Let me Google that. Ah, it says that Thune is the Majority Leader in the Senate. Although the Majority Leader only ranks #22 in matter of protocol due to that not being a named position in the Constitution, it is still one of the three most powerful offices outside the presidency, so please spare me the bit about how you can't control him. Vought's not the frigging Hulk. If you sincerely think he is going to do things that you don't approve of, then you have a lot of power. While you can't start impeachment proceedings, you do have control oversight and investigation over Vought. If you really don't approve of what he might do, you could inform the President that since you control the agenda in the Senate you will not advance the President's agenda or approve his nominees until he does something about Vought's possible out-of-control actions. So spare me the "poor, poor pitiful me" routine.

When I think on this, it brings another matter to mind. There are many things about the Trump era that just completely baffle me, but this is one of the big ones: Why do so many powerful and influential people cower in fear before Trump? It is common wisdom that every morning when a senator looks in the mirror they see themselves as the president. Has there ever been a president who was a lickspittle to a prior president? I can't think of any. The fact is Americans don't vote for people who cower in another's shadow. They want leaders and heroes. Thune is not without power and one has to assume he's not stupid. Putting ideology aside, he has to recognize that Trump is a bully and that you can score wins over bullies, but yet he deliberately decides to abdicate his power and influence. He is the poster boy for weakness.

Senators, being human, all want to be remembered. People don't generally remember failed candidates for President but people remember Barry Goldwater, not because he got crushed by Lyndon B. Johnson, but because he was the person to stand up to the test of time by successfully convincing President Nixon that it was in the country's best interest for him to resign. People don't generally remember vice presidents unless they ascend to the Oval Office. Possibly the most obsequious Vice President in our history is Mike Pence. We often forgot who he was during the years he served as VP, but he will more than likely be remembered far after his time on Earth based solely on his decision to stand up to Trump as Trump tried to overturn the 2020 election. The vast majority of lawyers fade into obscurity, yet the name of Joseph Welch lives on for saying to the, at that time, very powerful Senator Joseph McCarthy during his Communist witch-hunts, "Until this moment, Senator, I think I have never really gauged your cruelty and recklessness," and "Have you no sense of decency, Sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?" That one moment stopped McCarthyism in its tracks. That is an American hero.

The reason why I bring those incidents up is, at the same time I was reading Thune's cowardly words, I had also been looking at that photo of the U.S. generals assembled at Quantico for junior bully and drunkard Pete Hegseth to act the tough guy at their expense. After Hegseth's harangue, they had to listen to Trump drone on like a demented fool, but still acknowledge that if they didn't follow his illegal orders, he would ruin their careers. I look at those implacable generals' faces and realize that like senators, each of them is only human. That each of them longs to be remembered for standing up in defense of this country. There were over 800 general officers assembled at Quantico. Most will be forever forgotten. Yet most of them see themselves as the hero. The person who stands up for what is right, as the person who defended our country even at great cost to themselves. This is a moment in U.S. history that cries out for a hero to stand up. A hero who will have books written about them long after they're gone. We need another Washington, Henry, Jefferson, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Welch, Goldwater, McCain, Obama and even a Pence. The position of American hero is open and waiting for one of those generals to step into. Not more than a few pundits think that hero will come from one of those stoic faces. I would like to hope so, but sadly I am much more pessimistic. I fear the majority, if not all, will be more than willing to rely on that old military chestnut, "I was only following orders."

Nothing would make me happier than to be proven wrong about this, but I just don't see a hero arising from those generals' faces. Chief Justice John Roberts might just as well fasten a pink leather collar and leash around his neck and bark for attention than provide any leadership or moral fortitude. The Republicans in Congress are so spineless that they make amoebas seem firm and resolute in comparison. Trump's Cabinet is filled with nothing but sycophants, toadies and butt kissers, who might only speak up after Trump has used them and tossed them casually aside. J.D. Vance as a hero? Don't make me laugh. Captain Guyliner is not coming to anyone's rescue except his own. Even among the Democratic opposition, I sometimes despair. I will see glimpses of a leader and hero sometimes in Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) or Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA), but the latter might just be opportunism in disguise. It certainly is not coming from Kamala "Let me throw everyone within reach under the bus for my lack of campaigning skills" Harris, who truly deserves to vanish into that list of unsuccessful vice presidents and never be heard from again. There do not seem to be leaders among our political "leaders," only mediocrity. The only hero I've seen this year has been Jimmy Kimmel, and the American people who made their voices heard in support of him and our right to free speech. Kimmel did more than anyone to show the Traitor-in-Chief has no clothes on. For the first time, I feel a glimmer of hope that we will survive these trying perilous times. In the words of Andy Dufresne, "Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies." And that's coming from the most banned author in our public schools!

I would also like to let everyone know that we all have another chance to be a bit of a hero with the next No Kings events, which are scheduled for Saturday, October 18. I have never been much of a joiner and as I've gotten older my introvert nature is more front and center, but even I have signed up to participate in the Lancaster event. In fact, I timed my vacation to sync up with this date so that I had no excuse not to attend. I have received updates from No Kings, which announce that new events are being organized in the neighboring townships and that as of last week they have already had more people sign up than attended last time. Let's give Donnie Two Dolls a real reason to sh** his pants. We are the heroes we are waiting for.

---

J.W. in North Canton, OH, writes: I really appreciate your greeting to Jewish readers! I never thought I'd live in a world where I was scared to be Jewish and fearful for what my children will encounter as they go forth. Sadly, as we approached the holidays, I was praying there wouldn't be any incidents. Trying to spiritually focus on the holiest day of the year is nearly impossible when you fear for your safety and that of those around you. Manchester was a tragedy, but so is the emotional toll thrust upon every Jew around the world that their shul may one day become another Manchester or Tree of Life Synagogue. If I had one wish for the coming year, it would be for less hate in the world. So many other problems would disappear if we were all nicer to each other.

Politics: The Shutdown

G.R. in Carol Stream, IL, writes: I think the current government shutdown is different from the previous ones in that it's not a negotiation tactic, but a breakdown of the system. The abuse of recission by the Republicans created a situation in which the Democrats cannot trust them with any budget. Even if Republicans would agree, for example, to continue the Obamacare health subsidies, they could immediately cancel that with a party-line vote. Under these circumstances, there is no point in having a negotiated budget.

Add to this the fact that Donald Trump wants this shutdown and is steering things very well for it to happen. Under a lawless government, a shutdown is not really a shutdown, but an excuse to turn off the pieces they don't like anyway.

Because of those two facts, the shutdown will be painful to people outside MAGA, and may be prolonged.

---

F.S. in Cologne, Germany, writes: Finally I understand that budget bills and CRs can be filibustered, but reconciliation bills and recission bills can't be. This is totally insane, a crime against logic. Hopefully this will change after the current shutdown. If a party has the trifecta, it should be able to pass its own budget like in every other democracy on this planet.

---

C.R. in Schrollbach, Germany, writes: You wrote: "We've been trying to figure out how [the shutdown] might end and, for what it's worth, we can conceive of three basic possibilities."

There is a fourth possibility—some national or global emergency that requires the full weight of the government to respond. It could be a land-falling hurricane or a stock market crash or a conflict in Europe, the Middle East, or South America. I think both sides would gladly take the free offramp and claim to be putting "America First!" After all, 2 weeks in politics is an eternity!

---

M.S. in Canton, NY, writes: In discussing the shutdown, and the Democratic effort to continue health care subsidies, you wrote, "Republicans absolutely do not want to increase the deficit." It would be more accurate to add: "...except by giving tax breaks to rich people."

---

R.L.D. in Sundance, WY, writes: I am so sick and tired of people painting the Republicans as anti-deficit. Nothing could be further from the truth. They specifically, out loud, in front of God and Everybody, told the American people that a budget surplus (the only way they could ever possibly reduce the national debt they'd been kvetching about since the '80s) was a bad thing and cut taxes to destroy it. In 2017, they had no such plausible excuse and cut taxes again. When they say, "absolutely no" to deficits, what they're thinking is "absolutely no spending that benefits somebody other than giant corporations and the fabulously wealthy." I really wish we would stop letting them get away with this patently false narrative.

---

J.L. in Mountain View, CA, writes: In discussing the shutdown, (Z) wrote: "[W]e would guess the reason that Democrats aren't talking about [rescission] more is that it's kind of wonky and inside baseball." Then, on Saturday, he elaborated, explaining that first, you need to be able to explain that the idea that Trump would use rescission isn't just some extreme straw man, and second that you need to avoid muddying the message by adding a second thing to their main issue.

It seems to me that a message could be crafted that takes care of both problems by pointing out that the Republicans already cut healthcare funding after the Democrats voted for the last CR. Something like this, maybe: "In March, we made a bipartisan deal with the Republicans that maintained healthcare funding. Three months later, they cut healthcare so they could fund tax cuts for billionaires. Now they are holding the government hostage to get us to vote to keep their health care cuts and tax cuts for billionaires for another year. They need to restore health care funding and give us assurances that they will not simply cut it again."

Sure, that glosses over some technicalities, but it seems easy to understand and the Republicans presumably aren't dying to go out and explain that the cuts they voted for in July aren't the same ones they are voting on now.

---

N.S. in Lafayette, CO, writes: I am writing this Friday morning, at which time my (federal worker) wife is furloughed, but still employed. We expect reductions in force (RIF's) soon. The shutdown has provided The Convicted Felon (TCF) with convenient cover. He blames Democrats: "Because you shut the government down, I have no choice but to terminate federal workers." What bulls**t. The reason for the imminent RIF's is this: The deferred resignation payments offered earlier this year ended September 30. Any remaining federal worker who did not accept the buyout is now subject to being RIF'd. My wife predicted this in April.

Blaming the Democrats for the RIF's ("you made me do it") is cowardly. But the Blue Öyster Cult memes, taking crass pleasure in destroying the careers, pensions and health benefits of devoted civil servants? An adjective fails me.

---

P.K. in Marshalltown, IA, writes: Ashley Hinston is not my Congresswoman, but she posted on Facebook a piece about the "Schumer shutdown." There are nearly 500 responses so far (and a quick review of respondents seems to indicate most are Iowans) but, let me tell you, she is getting blistered. Epstein comments. References to Trump's 2013 comments about presidential responsibility for shutdowns. The proposed bailout for Argentina. You name it, she's getting torched. I obviously have no idea how this is going down in other social media and for other people, but this amuses me. As I think I noted before, once you cross the line with a Hawkeye and lose that Iowa Nice, you will never get it back.

---

K.H. in Maryville, TN, writes: Looks like Canada is going to bail us out again with being the headliner at the Pacific Air show... I guess our planes won't have gas money.

---

M.T. in St. Paul, MN, writes: Your reference to the movie The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly regarding the shutdown is interesting. One thing about the ending in that movie is that if Clint Eastwood (Blondie) had lost and been killed, Tuco would most certainly have also been shot by Angel Eyes. Eastwood, however, not only let Tuco live but cut him in on the reward, albeit after stringing him out for a while (pun intended). The reason I bring this up is that Trump is most certainly The Bad, and if he wins, The Ugly (the Republican Party) will likely also lose, eventually.

---

R.J. in Pasco, WA, writes: Three-way standoff? More like this kind of standoff...

Politics: The Quantico Show...

G.W. in Oxnard, CA, writes: Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's presentation to the senior military was an embarrassment. I have been in the Combat Information Center (CIC) of some Navy ships, and I have seen sailors sitting at their consoles doing their jobs, and yes, some were women. The Navy was in the lead in bringing women into combat roles, and there are many jobs that could be done by a big, beefy man, a small woman, or an unathletic average guy like myself. There are so many women in combat roles now in the Navy that the rules Hegseth proposed would severely impede readiness. If implemented as stated, this would be a disaster for the national security.

It has been written here before that for a fascist takeover to work, the military must be all-in. I occasionally had to fly across the nation to attend a meeting that could have been a video conference. I have attended meetings at my office that could have been an e-mail. I did not appreciate these meetings one bit, and the person calling said meetings did not earn one iota of loyalty from me for doing so. I can't see how this stunt earned any loyalty. It could have been an e-mail with a link to a video of the presentation. Also, it seemed to me that Hegseth and Trump had some lines where they paused for applause or laughs but got crickets. Trump had some speeches with carefully selected enlisted personnel and low-ranking military who hooted, hollered, applauded and laughed. Senior military doesn't do that for a political speech. It's embarrassing that Hegseth and Trump didn't know that.

---

D.W. in Phoenix, AZ, writes: You wrote: "By virtue of his professional training, (Z) recoils at drawing Hitler comparisons. But when the shoe fits so well it might as well have been made by the finest cobbler in all of Christendom, what can you do?"

Godwin himself gives you license: "'Trump Knows What He's Doing': The Creator of Godwin's Law Says the Hitler Comparison Is Apt."

---

T.M.M. in Odessa, MO, writes: I was a young adult when the Tianamen Square protests occurred. We saw brave Chinese citizens standing up (unsuccessfully) when the Chinese governments sent armed forces from the rest of the country to crush the protests. At that time, we thought that could never happen here due to our military traditions and the Posse Comitatus Act restricting the use of the U.S. military in a police capacity.

Now we have a president who wants to use our major cities as training for our military. It was only a couple of years ago that we were identifying the overreliance on military-type tactics and equipment as a problem for law enforcement. As a prosecutor, I can state that such tactics are only appropriate in emergencies and neither solve crime nor reduce the crime problem. But we now have a president who apparently wants martial law everywhere, even though it will not solve a crime problem (that local police and prosecutors are already making progress solving).

It's a shameful day for our country and one that I never thought that I would see.

---

A.H. in Newberg, OR, writes: Our daughter is an E-9 Chief Master Sergeant. She called home after the Quantico meeting, distraught. "They talk like they don't want me, like they want to get rid of me." She was seriously upset, wondering if she should just quit and give up on her 23-year career.

I probably spent a half-hour on the phone trying to calm her down. I told her "They want you to quit; the way to defeat them is to stand up and say 'Hell no, you can't beat me into submission!'" I think and hope our conversation helped quell her fears and distress. I know there are others facing the same questions and fears. I can't talk to all of them but I can counsel our daughter and encourage her. I hope there are others who can/will speak to their sons and daughters to encourage them!

On a side note, just saw this earlier this morning, thought you might enjoy:

---

Z.S. in New York City, NY, writes: I can't tell if you know this or not since you refer to both sex and airplanes in your "balls to the wall" comment, but it has nothing to do with male anatomy. It has to do with aircraft throttles.

At any rate, a woman pilot would have no issue going balls to the wall.

---

D.M.A. in Riverdale, NY, writes: Has anyone noticed hypermasculine "Warrior Ethos" Hegseth had a $10,000 makeup studio constructed next to his office?

Asking for a friend.

Politics: ...and Beards...

M.B. in Washington, DC, writes: I was surprised that in your answer to I.R. in Zurich about Pete Hegseth's anti-beard rants, you did not mention the simplest and probably truest explanation (speaking as someone who spent 10 years on active duty): He's yet again doubling down on racism!

For the most part, the military services require shaven chins and limited, neatly trimmed mustaches (there are exceptions for combat and maybe submarines—I don't know about that). The only real exception is for service members who are prone to develop ingrown hairs which become infected if they shave, i.e. Black men whose beard hairs are very curly. They are given a medical waiver (the condition is called pseudofolliculitis barbae, PFB) which allows them to maintain a closely trimmed beard. This is one more instance of Hegseth making clear he wants the military white, male and mean. I knew a few Sergeants Major (of both sexes) who would have pinched his heavily gelled head off.

---

A.L. in San Diego, CA, writes: Beards are already mostly prohibited for those on active duty, but with three types of waiver. Two classes of waiver are being eliminated: religious waivers mostly granted to Sikhs and Muslims, and medical waivers for razor bumps mostly granted to Black men. The special forces beardo waiver remains.

Note that portraits of Confederate generals are not on active duty, and so don't need a waiver.

---

L.C. in Brookline, MA, writes: I will add another explanation for the new beard policy (that is in no way exclusive with the ones you gave): Pete Hogwash (like most other MAGA types) sees Islam as a major threat to Christian supremacy, and considers beards to be the Islamic expression of masculinity, and therefore part of the threat.

---

K.R. in Austin, TX, writes: Based on Pete Hegseth's desire for no women and thin, muscular men with no facial hair, he may enjoy looking at large swaths of men who fit the profile of a "twink." (There's nothing wrong with that being a desire of his. There is something wrong with him administering the military based on his fantasies, though.)

This video explains it better than I can.

Politics: ...and Salutes

Anonymous in the United Kingdom, writes: You wrote that Pete Hesgeth saluting sloppily might be a weird power-play that says "I can get away with this because I'm more important than you." That may have been a throwaway remark, but I concur. I've seen the same phenomenon in two other places:

1. The fancy private school I used to work in, where once upon a time parents would wear their best clothes for consultations and visits to the school. Now they tend to dress down because it says to the staff "you have to wear a suit, but since I pay you I can dress as I like."
   
   
2. Adolf Hitler, whose return of the Roman salute was usually more of a wave, with a vertical hand and a forearm bent at the elbow.

---

A.B. in Denver, CO, writes: I was surprised to see a typo in the Navy illustration of how to salute. Lower left corner, "hands and writs." Wonder how long that's been in there. The illustration's style looks pretty old.

---

J.I. in San Francisco, CA, writes: Saturday's posting included an apparently military-created diagram of how sailors should salute, but the very last caption states that "hand and writs" should be in a straight line. I've never been in the navy, so maybe each sailor really is supposed to hold a legal document in their hand when saluting, but I suspect it's actually just a typo.

Although typos in ephemeral things like e-mails or newspaper articles or even Electoral-Vote.com posts can be slightly embarrassing, it seems a lot more embarrassing for the military to expend effort being extremely precise about how to salute and yet have a typo in the procedure.

(V) & (Z) respond: (Z) was putting together his World War II lecture many years ago, and needed a base map that he could Photoshop 12-15 times, to show the troop movements in the European Theater. He looked around, found the U.S. Army's Historical Maps Archive, which is certainly on point, and used one of theirs.

He spent 8-10 hours making variants of the map, like this one:



It was not until the map was projected on a screen that he saw that it's full of egregious misspellings, like SWEEDEN, LATIVA and the SARAHA Desert. Clearly, the U.S. military has a spell-check problem.

---

A.G. in Scranton, PA, writes: When we Marines get all cocky, we are oftentimes reminded by sailors that the Marines are a department of the Navy.

We are.

The men's department.

It's odd, but now that I think about it, very soon (if not already) a good number of young people won't understand that joke, growing up in a post-department store, e-commerce era where more than a few won't have ever gone to a large brick-and-mortar store except maybe for groceries.

Politics: This Week in TrumpWorld

E.D. in Saddle Brook, NJ, writes: I saw the first few several questions in this week's Q&A were about Donald Trump's mental state, with people questioning what happens if he's not all there. These questions completely miss the appeal of Trump.

Trump's entire political career is based on the premise that he's completely crazy and doesn't understand anything that's going on. People were tired of the status quo and listening to the "experts." They wanted the guy who'd do the opposite of what everyone else said to do. The guy who wasn't afraid to say what you're not supposed to say. They're voting for him because he's willing to walk up in front of everyone and say the dumbest, most awful things. They were tired of all the smart people telling them things they don't want to hear. They weren't going to vote for the guy who's slipping a little mentally—they wanted the guy who completely lost his mind a long time ago and embraced it.

People voted for Trump knowing full well that he would make a horrible mess of everything. The system wasn't working for them, so they wanted the guy who would destroy it all. No one's changing their mind now that he's doing exactly what he promised he would do. The Republican Party is fully aware of that dynamic, and they're along for the ride, whether they agree with it or not.

---

D.R. in Phoenix, AZ, writes: Maybe it's being said quietly, or not at all, but I'm not hearing it. So, I'll say it: People in the so-called "Heartland" (Midwest farm belt, soybean country) voted for Donald Trump overwhelmingly in 2016. Midway through his first term, they required bailouts, because Trump insisted on poking China with tariffs. Then, in 2024, soybean country voted for Trump again. It seems an irresponsible choice in view of what happened in his first term, not to mention the full-blown insurrection in between, the one that Trump incited.

Soon, these same rural voters will demand and receive yet more bailouts, for the same reason as last time. I personally will have the mandatory opportunity to chip in, again, although my own business is in the tank right now, so I can't really afford to chip in. Plus, I know no one has or will bail out a microscopic professional services firm like the one I own, so the basic unfairness rankles. The farmers insist they'd rather be harvesting crops than cashing bailout checks. I'd like to believe them, salt-of-the-earth and all, but it wasn't that hard to predict they were going to need bailouts again. Besides, they'd been given fair warning, maybe they could have planted more crops for domestic consumption, instead of for export to China, strongly suspecting Trump was going to hit China with tariffs again?

At what point can we start to attribute intentionality to their votes? Is it as unseemly as it looks, a naked votes-for-bailouts scheme? Are they even aware of the appearance of a quid pro quo? Somebody, say it ain't so. Because we non-farmers are getting tired of doing the bailing.

---

T.V. in Kansas City, MO, writes: In response to P.V. in Portland and their concerns about people not perceiving that Donald Trump's obsession with Portland is "a giant smokescreen of distraction," fear not. Plenty of us see exactly that about everything Trump says and does.

That said, your city's response to the ICE invasion, the planned naked bike ride protest, is not only absolute genius but also possibly the most Portland thing in the history of Portland things. I will be visiting with my family next spring and if we rent bikes, we will be careful to wipe down the seats.

---

N.N. in Fremont, CA, writes: I don't understand why the Trump Administration doesn't release cleaned and doctored versions of the Epstein files. This would seem to be their best line of defense. MAGA and the Republicans in Congress would accept anything that lets them believe Trump was not implicated. The Democrats and media would yell loudly, but Trump would just declare "fake news." So why doesn't the Trump regime take this tack?

---

M.L. in Missoula, MT, writes: In "Judge Delivers Scorching Rebuke to Trump," it is interesting/horrifying that the anonymous note writer assumes, and appears OK with the fact, that Trump is directing his followers to behave illegally (or why note pardons?). It appears that he/she/it failed to terrify the judge.

---

S.B. in Winslow, ME, writes: I fully expect the Donald Jessica Tanner Presidential library be modeled after this:

(V) & (Z) respond: That's a Full House reference and a Back to the Future reference in the span of just 13 words. One suspects we might be dealing with a child of the '80s here.

---

D.J.M. in Salmon Arm, BC, Canada, writes: So, TCF wants to see his face on a dollar coin. He does know that in Canada we call that a "loonie," right?

Politics: Other Countries Do It Better?

A.P.B. in Ljubljana, Slovenia, writes: In your item "Other Countries Have Better Election Laws," you mentioned Slovenia as an example of, well, better electoral legislation in terms of having spending caps in place.

While I'm happy to see my home turf being held up as a civics example, I should note that although things might look good on paper, practice is, well... lacking.

Campaign finance is a particular sore spot, as noted by several international observing missions, most recently after the 2022 elections. The crux of the matter is that campaign financing legislation only applies during the official campaign period, which is 30 days before whatever vote is in play (parliamentary, presidential, local, referenda...). Outside of that period, parties and other political actors are pretty much left to do as they please.

And when it's not them, it's their deep-pocketed friends running billboard campaigns with a clear political agenda.

At least you guys have Super PACs who pretend not to be politically linked. We have (some) business people doing the politicians' bidding directly.

---

D.R. in Yellow Springs, OH, writes: In "Other Countries Have Better Election Laws," you note that 27 countries have mandatory voting. It's an intriguing idea, but I think we'd get better results by paying the people who do vote rather than fining the people who don't.

First of all, if you passed a law to fine non-voters, there would be lawsuits arguing the law is unconstitutional. One argument is that mandatory voting is compelled speech. Another is that it violates freedom of religion for Jehovah's Witnesses and followers of any other religion that prohibits voting. The counter-argument to both of these is that you're free to cast a blank ballot. I won't attempt to predict how courts will rule, but even if such a law is upheld, it would generate resentment from people who don't want to vote.

Now imagine if you were to pay the people who do vote instead. Set the payment at something that will adjust for inflation, such as 20% of the median weekly pay for all American workers. That would work out to $231.80 from the latest figures I found from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

You'd probably get better results because you'd have less resentment. It would also make fraud harder because there would be bank records—you'd provide bank information for direct deposit, or you'd create bank records by cashing a paper check. (We could require check-cashing places to fingerprint and/or photograph people who cash paper checks.) If anyone who voted didn't cash the check, that would trigger an investigation.

What's more, this would create an economic stimulus, especially in poor neighborhoods.

I don't know of any other country that pays people who do vote. But why shouldn't we be the first?

---

R.L.P. in Santa Cruz, CA, writes: You noted that many countries preclude corporate campaign donations. The U.S. should do this too, of course, despite the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United. TransparentElection.org has an idea that could ameliorate the effect of the Court's decision: Remove the right of corporations to spend money to influence elections. The Montana state government grants certain rights to corporations operating in Montana, can change those rights at any time, and did change them in the past to curtail the influence of mining interests when mining corporations were egregiously dominating Montana politics. All corporations operating in Montana, whether based in Montana or elsewhere, must operate entirely within the rights Montana grants to corporations, so any change in those rights would have nationwide effects.

Presently, Montana grants corporations operating in Montana the right to spend money to influence elections. As a pilot project, TransparentElection.org is proposing a Montana ballot initiative to amend the Montana constitution to revoke that right for corporations operating in Montana. TransparentElection.org is promoting this idea across the country. States with Democratic legislatures, such as California, could enact a law revoking the right of corporations to spend money to influence elections. No amendment to the California Constitution would be required. SCOTUS would have to stand on its head to declare unconstitutional the power of states to decide the rights of corporations, because states have been doing that from the outset. Not saying SCOTUS will not stand on its head. Corruption in the Roberts court is off the scale, maybe worse than ever before. Nevertheless, the TransparentElection.org approach is surely worth a try.

---

D.M. in Wimberley, TX, writes: In your item on the weaknesses of U.S. elections, (V) has this mic drop moment: "Americans tolerate the current system only because they can't imagine any other system. All they have to do is look beyond their border."

And how. This is applicable to so many of our failures. Gun laws and health care spring immediately to mind. Except apparently this is impossible because we are so fu**ing special.

Politics: Poor States

B.C. in Walpole, ME, writes: D.H. in Portland asked about addressing poverty in the five poorest states (Mississippi, West Virginia, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Kentucky). Note that 3 of 5 are former Confederate states, and 4 of 5 are former slave states. If we expand the list, using the 10 states/territories with the highest poverty rate, we have, in order: Puerto Rico, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, West Virginia, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Alabama. Four are former slaves states with large Black populations. Two have large Native American populations. One is a territory (acquired in imperial war) with a Latino population. This is not accidental or coincidental. It's intentional. Structural racism plays a major role here. Without addressing the problem of racism, it's impossible to address the problem of poverty in those areas.

Of the remaining three, two are part of Appalachia, an area of white poverty which the Johnson administration tried to ameliorate in the 1960s, and the tenth is New York. Poverty has many causal factors, but racism is a huge, long-term vector.

The article is accompanied by a map; if you look at the dark areas, you can easily identify the area dominated by the cotton plantations of the pre-Civil war South, the Indian reservations of the West, heavily Latino areas, and the worst of Appalachia.

---

M.S. in Canton, NY, writes: Your response to D.H. in Portland, about the possibility of improving life in poorer states, brought to mind a moment years ago, when star basketball player Charles Barkley suggested that he might run for governor of Alabama someday. In response to skepticism, he replied, "I can't screw up Alabama... We are number 48 in everything and Arkansas and Mississippi aren't going anywhere."

Politics: The Wide World of Sports

J.M. in Arvada, CO, writes: Following up on the idea of athletes refusing to play or wanting to be traded from teams in order to take a stance against the government or similar, Ken Griffey Jr. stated multiple times, both while he was playing and in retirement, that he would never play for the New York Yankees. There's video of him telling a Yankees fan he'd retire before he played for them. It stems from an incident in the '80's when his father was playing for the Yankees and Junior was visiting him in the dugout before a game. A Yankees official came over and told Senior that no kids were allowed on the field and Junior would have to leave. Senior said fine, but as they left he told Junior to look out to third base. Craig Nettles' son was playing catch with his father at the time. Junior said it felt like discrimination from the Yankees, presumably because Nettles and his son are white, and the Griffeys are Black, and he would never play for a team that was openly discriminating like that. So not a stance against the government, but certainly a stance on a "social issue."

Also, If there's anything that will get FIFA to move the World Cup, it's Donald Trump deciding to take an active role in who gets to come play and who doesn't. Given that the last two World Cups were held in Qatar (2022) and Russia (2018), FIFA cleary doesn't care about government corruption or subjugation of minorities and other people. What FIFA does care about, though, is the money from the World Cup and that it retains its spot as the pinnacle of world soccer. Trump unilaterally deciding that the years of World Cup Qualifiers (among other things, significant money makers for everyone involved) don't matter and that he will decide that Israel will qualify and Iran won't, or even more laughably excluding Brazil, will be a direct shot at the legitimacy of the World Cup and could very well lead to other teams boycotting an illegitimate competition. FIFA won't stand for that and will very quickly find new options for 2026. Now, if Trump just wants to rattle his saber and then eventually TACO, FIFA will allow him the headlines.

---

N.E. in San Mateo, CA, writes: In "Trump Wants to Ruin Sports, Part II: The World Cup." you wrote: "This weekend, he said he might just relocate games from "unsafe" cities. That, of course, means cities that are Black, or blue, or Black AND blue. He specifically mentioned Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles as potential targets for this."

I was unaware until you ran this item that San Francisco/the Bay Area would be hosting World Cup games, and to the Orange Dotard I ask, "Please don't take away our world cup games" because as a lib, that would be owning us, right?

Except since he can't read sites that use this many words, I'll spell it out by saying that the traffic, security arrangements, and likely increased costs for locals around big international sporting events sound like a nightmare, and he would be doing us a favor. Stopped clock with a date is right once a year, perhaps?

---

M.M. in El Paso, TX, writes: While I truly despise Trump and believe he is ruining the country, I think it is a stretch to blame the ugliness at the Ryder Cup on him, except maybe to the extent that his social media screeds have made childish personal attacks more acceptable.

The golf community has speculated about the reception the Europeans would receive since the announcement that Bethpage would host the event, even more over the past 2 yeas since the U.S. team lost in Rome. I suspect the vitriol escalated due to the poor performance of the U.S. team over the first 2 days of the tournament. We lost all four "team" sessions, a couple by wide margins. In my opinion, the combination of alcohol and nothing to cheer for along with the difficulty to reach the venue requiring early morning treks, led the "faithful" to resort to attacking the "enemy" because there was no other outlet (i.e., cheering our guys) for their frustrations. McIlroy, as the leader of the Euros, was the logical target, particularly since he was playing well and kicking U.S. butt. Golf fans will know, however, that McIlroy is generally well received by American golf fans, especially earlier in the year when he won the Masters and completed the career grand slam. In this instance, I think he was just the target of opportunity. While including his wife in the nasty verbiage is completely unacceptable, the Ryder Cup policy of putting the wives and girlfriends inside the ropes, dressed in their own "uniforms" undoubtedly exposes them to ridicule they would otherwise not have to endure.

---

E.D. in Chicago, IL, writes: I think you are maybe missing something on why the Donald-Trump-adjacent group wants to become the owner of EA Sports. The primary (exclusive?) market for these video games is young men (10 years old to... maybe 34?). This creates an avenue to salt games with pro-MAGA themes, sayings, concepts, etc. and to bring young men even more into their orbit.

This may seem a bit paranoid but I've seen my nephews become so obsessed with some of these games. All the new owners need to do is start to make these games with themes and storylines that are favorable to the MAGA world, and they would be essentially brainwashing a group of voters already leaning into MAGA as they live in their parents' basements with grievances against the world as to why they don't have a girlfriend or a life. They essentially "live" inside these video games. This is potentially a subtle, but insidious, and simple (and potentially very effective) method to move these young men further into the MAGA camp.

All Politics Is Local

C.L.C. in Petaluma, CA, writes: I just cast my ballot and voted "Yes" on California Proposition 50 and will put my ballot in a ballot box on my walk this evening. Please vote "Yes" to stop the fascists.

---

D.D. in Bucks County, PA writes: The $18 billion freeze on infrastructure projects in New York City is meant to punish that city and the state in which it resides. However, the largest and most publicized part is the Gateway Project, the new rail tunnel under the Hudson River connecting NYC to New Jersey. Who needs the tunnel? It will be primarily used by people who work in NYC. And where do those people live? New Jersey. So funding cuts and delays will upset more New Jersey residents than New York residents. And doesn't New Jersey have a race for governor this November? How will the Republican candidate explain who directly took credit for canceling the funding? And about a month before Election Day. Timing is everything.

---

S.A.K. in Karnataka, India, writes: (V) wrote, while addressing Eric Adams' decision to quit the mayoral race: "If [Zohran Mamdani] cuts out the Palestinian stuff and focuses exclusively on running New York City and is effective, he could potentially become popular with all New Yorkers. Then Trump's campaign to smear him could backfire."

I disagree with the part about Palestine:

1. That would be an incredibly cowardly thing for him to do, especially when there are so few of his party colleagues willing to call the genocide out and he has a platform to talk about it.
   
   
2. It would also be a betrayal of his supporters who, at least in part, are motivated by his stance on the issue. I don't know if there has been any polling around this but it feels like he will lose way more support than gain by stopping his talk about it. He will appear to be yet another opportunist and hypocrite.
   
   
3. Even if Mamdani stopped talking about Gaza, Trump and his acolytes (the lunatic Loomer and the rabidly Islamophobic Randy Fine, et al.) would find other ways to paint him as a villain.

Of course Mamdani's day job, were he to be elected, would not involve talking about Palestine. But he'd be the mayor of New York City, not an obscure town somewhere in the corner of the country. Leveraging that position to occasionally highlight what is happening in Gaza and the Palestinian cause would be the correct thing to do, both morally and politically. What he should actually stop harping on is threats to arrest Netanyahu on an ICC warrant, which is yet to be authorized. Even when it is, the fact that the U.S. isn't a signatory to the ICC makes such claims sound stupid.

---

S.C.-M. in Scottsdale, AZ, writes: I live in Rep. David Schweikert's (R-AZ) district, which is becoming very swingy. I believe Schweikert decided to run for Governor because his internal polling showed a very tight race and he was very likely to lose given the current political climate.

I also do not believe he will get the Republican nomination for Governor. I suspect that will go to Rep. Andy Biggs, given our first-past-the-post elections.

Schweikert claims to be a deficit hawk, but like almost all Republicans he is a consistent vote for deficit spending. He missed the vote on the BBB, claiming he fell asleep, which is not a really good excuse.

I wonder who will jump in to compete for Schweikert's place on the Republican side. I have little insight into that. Perhaps one of the current conservative Scottsdale City Councilmembers will see an opportunity. It does look like we will see two bruising primaries. Already the Democratic primary is filling up.

---

R.Y. in Knoxville, TN, writes: I know that I have a strong case of confirmation bias and wishful thinking, but in TN-07, vacated by the Guyana-bound Rep. Mark Green (R-TN), the Republicans are sending True Scotsman type notices: "You are not a real Republican if you do not vote."

Cook has the district as R+10. The Nashville/Davidson County portion has only gotten bluer and bigger since redistricting, and the rural Republican portion has been impacted by tariffs, farm policies, and hospital closures.

The GOP primary includes a pardoned 1/6 "family friendly" participant who is reminding everyone about the chaos and violence on that day. It will be bloody. It is a three-way tie right now. The four Democrats are serious candidates, and two of them can do a lot of self-funding. Just 5% of the eligible population has voted early, and so both the primary and the election could be wonky.

There is a chance for a flip.

Gallimaufry

R.R. in Pasadena, CA, writes: You had an answer yesterday about burner e-mail accounts and how to deal with spam and unwanted messages from slimy members of Congress. There's a feature you didn't mention: Now in macOS there's the ability to create your own extra e-mail addresses connected to your iCloud account. So, basically, on the fly it will generate an address that links to a website or subscription, so you know that any e-mails with that address are related to wherever you set it up. It takes the work out of trying to track where e-mails are coming from, and how some spambot got ahold of your address. The one thing I'm not sure of is if you can use your own generated address; I've only ever used whatever it gave me, but I suspect there's a way to do that, and you can probably use the same address for multiple subscriptions if you choose.

I don't know if Windows has a similar setup, it's part of the integration with macOS and iCloud and MSN may not have a similar setup. You can be sure that Gmail doesn't do this, they probably get some benefit from all the spam being thrown around.

---

C.M. in Raymond, N.H. (aka West West Epping), writes: The New England Stereotype Map might be made by a New Englander—labeling Connecticut as "on probation" and Fairfield County as "annexed territory" ring true.

However, labeling Boston "center of the universe" is straight-up wrong. We all know that Epping, N.H., is the Center of the Universe. Wikipedia even agrees, though one can read the real story from the Union Leader.

---

R.G.N., Seattle, WA, writes: Boston the center of the Universe? Don't make me laugh. Everyone knows that the Fremont neighborhood of Seattle, WA, is the center of the Universe. This fact was made official with a proclamation by the Metropolitan King County Council in 1994. A signpost at the intersection of North Fremont Avenue and North 35th Street helpfully gives directions to such locations as the Milky Way, the Louvre, Machu Picchu, Pluto, the Fremont Troll (a statue under a bridge), and "Waiting for the Interurban" (a statue of characters from a locally famous Children's TV show). I am not sure if the signpost also points out the difficult to miss, giant statue of Lenin that the neighborhood obtained after the fall of the USSR.

---

S.E.Z. in New Haven, CT, writes: When I was a child in Baltimore, I was told that of all the urban areas in the United States, Baltimore was the largest town. Any place larger was a city. Worked for me.

Now I live in a smaller town with a larger per-capita educational and intellectual footprint.

---

R.L.D. in Sundance, WY, writes: I got a hearty belly laugh from the letters last week. You have to first understand that I spent the first 28 years of my life in the Black Hills of South Dakota, a short drive from Deadwood, took a 25-year detour to Texas and have spent the last four years in the Cowboy State, Wyoming. So when I saw any place in New England described as "The Wild West" in the map provided by E.T. in Montpellier, I nearly busted a gut. Thanks to all involved!

---

K.R. in Austin, TX, writes: J.M. in Silver Spring offered a graph of global temperatures going up while the number of pirates globally went down. They concluded, "Clearly global warming is caused by humanity, but not by pollution, instead by the drop in the number of pirates."

This conclusion is hogwash. Clearly, it's the other way around, and the reduction in pirates is caused by global warming. This is yet another benefit of global warming that we should celebrate! Drill, baby, drill to rid our planet of the scourge of pirates!

Final Words

K.H. in Albuquerque, NM, writes: Based on reporting I've read, Dr. Jane Goodall recorded a final message released upon her death that concluded:

Think about our ecological footprint. I think the key thing is to realize that every day on this planet, you make a difference, and if you start thinking about the consequences of the small choices you make—What you buy? Where did it come from? How was it made? Was there child slave labor involved? Did it help the environment? Would you eat it if it didn't involve cruelty to animals?—you start thinking like that, and millions of people around the world thinking like that, then we start to get the kind of world that we cannot be too embarrassed to leave to our children.

If you have suggestions for this feature, please send them along.

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger