Instead of
panic regarding Trump’s remarks to the right wing “Christian” Turning Point Conference, we
might step back and take a more comprehensive view. Trump has difficulty with
nuance; his approach is inherently bombastic and hyperbolic. So, his statement about
abolishing elections is likely an exaggeration, as most of his claims are. Reactions
turn toward Trump aspirations as dictator in the executive branch. However, the substance behind the claim is perhaps more
dangerous than Trump’s blatant bumbling claim. The president as dictator is
perhaps the lesser evil in the scheme.
The GOP concerted
mission of changing and “rigging” the electoral process to remove democratic
safeguards surfaced during the Reagan years. The primary front has been processes
of gerrymandering, voter dilution, and voter suppression. In gerrymandering, for
example, a region in which 70% of voters favor a democrat is surgically divided
into 3 voting districts so that at least 55% of those democrat leaning voters
are concentrated in one voting district, and the other 45% are split between the
other 2 districts. This systematic carving is often piggybacked on
discriminatory housing patterns. The unavoidable result is that the democrat
leaning voter majority will never be able to prevail – the 30% GOP voters will
control 2 of 3 districts.
Voter dilution
is more insidious, and typically focuses upon race as an indicator of voter
preference. As in Jackson, MS, with a predominantly Black population, control over
traditionally “local” issues such as police and education was shifted to “statewide”
authority and effectively neutering the voices of the local community. Shifting
control to “statewide” offices is just one dilution tool.
Voter
suppression is a more aggressive form of anti-democratic shift. Imposing more
stringent and more onerous conditions to “qualify” to cast a ballot, and obstacles
to access to polls are primary examples. One such strategy is to reduce the
number of polling locations in communities of color, so that long lines and
long waits discourage voter participation in targeted precincts.
The secondary
front is the judiciary. Politically appointed and biased judges are installed
to make sure that the above strategies are not deemed “unlawful” or “unconstitutional.”
Such rulings are a strained interpretation of the 14th Amendment. In
addition, measures such as the Voting Rights Act have been gutted by these GOP
appointed judges so that options to challenge antidemocratic processes are
limited.
The point here
is that when Trump, in his clumsy way, was probably referring to the Project
2025, the substance of the promise to the right-wing group was that, if he is
elected, the “fix” of assuring dominance of GOP control would be fully
institutionalized during his term in office. The concept of democracy as “majority
rule” will no longer exist in US elections. As an historical note, Bush and
Trump assumed office as president despite failure to receive a majority of
votes in those elections. So, this strategy and scenario is far more than just “hypothetical.”
No comments:
Post a Comment