As is now the new normal, there were so many things happening in the political world this week it is hard to keep track of them all. But what is currently in the center ring is the vote happening in the Senate on the continuing resolution to fund the government for the rest of this fiscal year.

Senate Democrats were put on the spot because the House Republicans actually managed to pass a bill on their own. Few expected that this would happen, since House Republicans have a terrible track record for being able to pass much of anything -- especially budget bills. So the Senate was caught kind of flat-footed on this one. They had expected to hammer out some sort of agreement between Senate Democrats and Republicans, pass it, and then jam it down the GOP House's throat (which is the usual way these things work out). Instead, they were jammed by the House (who, immediately after passing their bill, adjourned -- thus making it hard to call them back for any necessary vote, should the Senate pass their own version of the bill).

This put Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and his Democrats between a rock and a hard place. The C.R. bill needed 60 votes to advance, and with Senator Rand Paul voting no it meant a total of eight Democratic votes would be necessary. Senator John Fetterman made it known that he was a "Yes" vote, and then yesterday Schumer himself decided to join him. This makes it likely that the vote will succeed (which happened as we wrote this -- the bill did advance, as expected) and the government will avoid shutting down.

As the price for Democrats to back the bill, there will be votes on a handful of amendments, designed to allow Democrats to save some face. All of these amendments will fail (as will a separate one from Rand Paul).

Many Democrats are disappointed (which is charitable, since "enraged" might be a better word) at how this all played out. They do have a point -- this will be the last must-pass bill where the filibuster is in play for a long time to come, so it was really their only chance to register Democratic disapproval of what President Elon Musk has been doing to the federal government. The bill that passed will not only fund the government through the rest of the fiscal year, it will also put a stamp of approval on Musk (and his sidekick Donald Trump) slashing funding for any program they don't like. It essentially hands all the budget decisions over to the executive branch, which is an abdication of the constitutional power of Congress. Which is why many Democrats are so enraged (more on that in a moment).

The problem with being pro-shutdown, however, is the same as it always has been: what would the endgame look like? Republicans -- the ones who normally cause government shutdowns -- have learned over the years that there really is no good outcome at the end of a shutdown. This time around, the Democrats have such limited leverage (since they control neither house of Congress) that it is laughable to even envision a scenario where they forced Republicans to accept their priorities or agenda (which mostly consists of changing the C.R. to include language reining in Musk). Even if through some miracle they could get it through the Senate, does anyone believe it would pass the GOP House? Or be signed by the president?

While Democrats were figuring all this out, in the meantime Trump and Musk would be having an absolute field day with a government shutdown. That has to be taken into account as well. They'd be able to decide what employees were "essential" and "non-essential" and furlough anyone they chose to (meaning "whole departments" and worse). This would make it even easier for them to get rid of employees and departments, which is not exactly the desired outcome for Democrats. But if they had shut the government down, that's exactly what would have happened.

So they went instead with the "least bad" option, and the government will not shut down at midnight. As Schumer pointed out, on the Senate floor: "For sure the Republican bill is a terrible option. But I believe allowing Donald Trump to take... much more power via a government shutdown is a far worse option."

Outside of the congressional drama, Trump continued his rather schizophrenic application of tariffs ("now you see them, now you don't"), both levying and then backing off multiple tariffs on multiple countries. But this week, the stock market had had enough. Wall Street hates uncertainty, and that's all they've been getting from Trump. Unless you want to call it "complete chaos" instead, that is. So a sell-off began on Monday and continued throughout the week, until at least one index (S&P) entered into "correction" territory (down ten percent from recent highs). Fears of higher prices and plummeting consumer confidence have increased everyone's prediction that a recession is imminent, and the markets are reacting accordingly.

Just to remind everyone -- this is not what Trump ran on. He promised lower prices, immediately ("on Day One"), and now that the opposite is happening -- as a direct result of his own actions -- he is shrugging off the prospect of a looming recession. He swears any pain will be temporary, and worth it in the end. He swears every American's pockets will soon be overflowing with money, too.

The public isn't exactly buying it. One poll this week put disapproval of Trump's handling of the economy higher than approval (by a wide margin -- 56 to 44 percent), which is something that never happened during his first term. People disapprove of his tariffs by an even wider margin as well (61 to 39 percent, including 20 percent of Trump voters). As time goes on and prices stay high (or go even higher), these negative poll numbers will most likely grow. Trump's voters are beginning to realize that he conned them into believing fantastical things about the economy, and nobody's happy when they finally realize that they've been had.

This is going to hit some red states very hard, it bears mentioning. The tariffs, in particular, are going to hit rural areas in the Midwest and South very hard indeed. And Trump keeps on undermining farmers (by cancelling programs they use to sell their produce), without seeming to care about the consequences.

The only bit of good news in all this economic catastrophe (in a schadenfreude sort of way) is that Tesla stocks are down -- way down. Tesla sank 15 percent in a single day this week, and the stock is down 50 percent since the high it hit after the election. Protests -- some of them violent, some including vandalism -- have been occurring at Tesla dealerships and charging stations. So Trump decided to turn the White House into a Tesla lot in an appearance with Elon Musk, and Trump then proudly claimed he was buying one of them (after mispronouncing the company's name as "Tesler"). He urged all his followers to go out and do the same. Democratic senator Mark Kelly responded by announcing he was getting rid of his own Tesla, in protest.

This might not be the best business model for the company, it bears mentioning. Trump has long railed against and heaped scorn on electric cars (and boats, for good measure), and MAGA folks are known for sneering at electric cars and trucks too, so it's highly doubtful how many of them are going to rush right out and buy a few Teslas any time soon. People who buy electric cars generally hail from the left, so making the brand a partisan loyalty test is just going to drive consumers who are considering going electric to other brands. What we wonder is how much longer the Tesla board of directors is going to wait before they decide that the biggest problem with their company and their brand is Elon Musk, and that chucking him overboard could indeed save the company. Stay tuned!

To add insult to injury, the A.I. portion (named "Grok") of Musk's social media company will cheerfully admit that Democrats are much better for the economy, when they are in charge in Washington. That's gotta hurt!

Trump continues to do the opposite of what he promised in other regards as well. He has launched a frontal attack on free speech, by "disappearing" a permanent resident (green card holder) and locking him up without offering up a scintilla of evidence of any crime or wrongdoing. Trump bragged about it all, promising: "This is the first arrest of many to come," which is a chilling statement for any president to make. Here's the story, in case you missed it (emphasis in original):

On Saturday, immigration agents showed up at the apartment building of Mahmoud Khalil, a leader of last year's pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia University, and told him his student visa had been revoked and that he was being detained. Khalil is married to an American, and his lawyer, speaking to the agents by phone, informed them that he had a green card, but they said that had been revoked as well. He was taken away, and as of this writing appears to be in a detention facility in Louisiana.

. . .

But the fact that it was easy to see this ideological crackdown coming shouldn't obscure how serious Khalil's detention is. If someone legally in the United States can be grabbed from his home for engaging in constitutionally protected political activity, we are in a drastically different country from the one we inhabited before Trump's inauguration.

"This seems like one of the biggest threats, if not the biggest threats to First Amendment freedoms in 50 years," said Brian Hauss, a senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union. "It's a direct attempt to punish speech because of the viewpoint it espouses."

Khalil, who grew up in a Palestinian refugee camp in Syria, hasn't been charged with any crime. A dossier on him compiled by Canary Mission, a right-wing group that tracks anti-Zionist campus activists, includes no examples of threatening or violent speech, just demands for divestment from Israel. Last year Khalil was suspended from his graduate program for his role in the campus demonstrations, but the suspension was reversed soon after, apparently for lack of evidence, and he completed his degree. The Department of Homeland Security claimed he "led activities aligned to Hamas," but that's an impossibly vague, legally meaningless charge.

Khalil was arrested for exercising his right to free speech, plain and simple. Marco Rubio just decided to chuck him out of the country. No actual evidence against him has been presented, either to a court or to the American people. Just that he said things that Trump didn't like.

In other First Amendment news, a judge ruled against the Trump administration's attempt to destroy a law firm it didn't like as well. The firm had represented people Trump didn't like, so he decided to use the full weight of the federal government to punish them. Luckily, a judge halted these actions, but the fact that Trump even tried to do so is alarming:

The judge said Trump's executive order appeared to violate the First Amendment rights of Perkins Coie [the law firm that was Trump's target] and noted that the firm was not granted any due process. She said the Trump administration wrote the order in such a broad manner that it was hard to determine any goal beyond retaliation.

"It sends little chills down my spine," Howell said, describing the executive order as the president punishing a company he believes is not acting in the president's interest. “Why shouldn't we be chilled by this?"

Why indeed.

Before we begin, we have to note the passing of Representative Raúl Grijalva, a staunch progressive much beloved by the left. His presence and leadership will be sorely missed in the House of Representatives, and we mourn his passing. Requiescat In Pace.

Before we get to the main award, we have a group Honorable Mention award to hand out first, to all the Democrats in the Maryland legislature (and the governor) who are trying out a rather radical idea -- creating a state-level drug pricing board that will force drug companies to lower their prices on prescription drugs for residents of the state. Federal efforts in this area have begun, but are extremely limited so far, so Maryland decided to get out in front of the idea. This week, they beefed up the powers of this board to provide reductions in price for all residents. This experiment will be well worth watching, to see how effective it turns out to be.

Our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week is also a group award. Democrats have struggled in deciding how to fight back against Republicans in the second age of Trump, and at first glance this seems like a rather minor effort, but it could be one that winds up paying off in a big way.

A coalition of Democratic groups has seen what is happening at many town hall meetings held by Republicans of late -- where GOP politicians get an earful from their constituents about all the chaos Musk and Trump have been causing. Things have gotten so bad that Republicans are now telling each other not to hold live town halls and instead do them virtually (where access can be controlled, to avoid angry questions). This cowardice needs calling out, so the group of Democrats decided to hold their own town hall meetings in districts where Republicans are too chicken to do so. Here's the story:

The tour is being organized by the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Association of State Democratic Committees. It is set to start Friday in Iowa's 3rd Congressional District -- home to Rep. Zach Nunn (R) -- and continue in at least eight more GOP-held districts. The groups aim to hold town halls in all 50 states.

The tour comes as some individual politicians have launched their own travels across the country to rally opposition to Trump, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D), who will be part of the first stop in Iowa. But the involvement of the national committees shows the more institutional side of the party is responding to their voters' desire for a more aggressive posture toward Trump and his allies in Congress.

. . .

"Instead of facing their constituents, they're running scared and hiding from the people they were elected to represent," Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin said in a statement. "If they won't talk to their own voters, then Democrats will."

Sanders has been drawing large crowds on his "Fighting Oligarchy" tour, which has visited competitive Republican-controlled House districts in Nebraska, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa. Walz, who was the 2024 Democratic nominee for vice president, said Wednesday he would embark on his own tour of GOP-held districts, which will include the Iowa event and another overlapping stop with the tour put on by DNC, DCCC and ASDC.

Once again, Bernie Sanders is showing the way for Democrats to tap into economic anxieties. So it is good to see that at least some Democrats have decided to follow in his footsteps.

Holding "empty chair" town halls in competitive Republican districts is a very local tactic to use in fighting back, but it is one that could help flip enough districts to the Democratic side of the aisle in the midterms, so it should be applauded.

People's feelings about the economy is a large reason why Trump won the last election, and it could be key to a Democratic revival. The more time goes on and the more prices stay high, the less patience even right-leaning voters are going to have with Trump's chaos (especially on his tariffs). And once you lose voters who throw up their hands on the economy, it is very hard to get them back.

So this week's Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week goes to the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and the Association of State Democratic Committees -- as well as Bernie Sanders -- for deciding to actually do something to fight back in the political arena. Most of these efforts won't make the front pages of national newspapers (the media, as usual, has barely lifted a finger to cover Bernie's rallies, even though they are drawing huge crowds), but they might just be headline news in the local districts, which is far more important. Pushing the message "Republicans are too chicken to face their voters" is a good idea just in general, and presenting an alternate economic message is going to be crucial for Democratic chances in the midterm elections.

[Congratulate the Democratic National Committee via their contact page, to let them know you appreciate their efforts.]

We were considering giving the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award to Representative Jared Golden of Maine, for being the sole House Democrat to vote for the continuing resolution to fund the government for the rest of the year, but that was before Chuck Schumer entered the fray.

Schumer's announcement that he would also be voting for the C.R. has stoked a lot of rage against him. Some are even calling it the "Schumer surrender." Others are calling for Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to launch a primary challenge to Schumer. House Democrats were mostly (with the exception of Golden) united in voting against the C.R., and they urged their Senate counterparts to hold the line.

However, as we mentioned before, there wasn't really a viable endgame to all of this. Anyone who thought shutting the government down would provide enough leverage to allow Democrats to rewrite the C.R. is fairly delusional, and that doesn't even take into account what Musk and Trump would do if handed the opportunity of a government shutdown to get even more extreme in dismantling the government.

Which Schumer pointed out, in a piece he wrote for the New York Times:

For sure, the Republican bill is a terrible option. It is deeply partisan. It doesn't address this country's needs. But even if the White House says differently, Mr. Trump and Elon Musk want a shutdown. We should not give them one. The risk of allowing the president to take even more power via a government shutdown is a much worse path.

. . .

First, a shutdown would give Mr. Trump and Mr. Musk permission to destroy vital government services at a significantly faster rate than they can right now. Under a shutdown, the Trump administration would have wide-ranging authority to deem whole agencies, programs and personnel nonessential, furloughing staff members with no promise they would ever be rehired.

The decisions about what is essential would, in practice, be largely up to the executive branch, with few left at agencies to check it.

Mr. Musk has reportedly said that he wants a shutdown and may already be planning how to use one to his advantage.

You've got to admit, he's got a point. But this didn't quell the rage many Democrats felt after his announcement. Democrats wanted to be seen as fighting back, even if they didn't have an endgame plotted out. This is the same motivation Republicans have always used when they have shut the government down, and it rarely ends well for them (and they didn't even have to worry about a president who would gleefully welcome a government shutdown).

So while we personally do find it understandable that Schumer decided to choose the least-bad option available, we also recognize that him doing so sparked a whole lot of disappointment (and rage) among a whole bunch of Democrats. Which is why he's the obvious choice for the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week this week.

[Contact Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on his Senate contact page, to let him know what you think of his actions.]

Volume 787 (3/14/25)

We've got another mixed bunch of talking points this week. Keep hitting Trump on the economy, on his broken promises, and while you're at it, hit Elon Musk too (since so few people like him).

   Checked your 401K?

Democrats need to continue pointing out the vast difference between what Trump promised and what he's done with the economy.

"Remember when Donald Trump said he'd create an economic boom immediately after he took office? Remember when he actually cared what the stock market was doing? Well, I don't know about you but I've been too scared to check my 401K this week, since the stock market is tanking and Trump just keeps right on making things worse. It's one thing to lay a big fat Trump Tax on everything by slapping tariffs on our closest allies, but the whole 'now you see them, now you don't' tactic Trump uses does nothing more than sow confusion and doubts about the future. So I would ask all those Trump voters out there -- are you happy when you go to the supermarket these days? Have you checked your 401K recently? Because no matter what he promised you, that is what Trump is doing to you."

   It's all a game to him

A good metaphor to use, really.

"To Donald Trump, chaos and confusion and tanking stock markets is all just a fun game to play with the world economy. He doesn't care if a Trump Recession happens -- he's telling everyone it'll all be fine and they'll find their pockets stuffed with money afterwards. This is lunacy, folks. Tariffs are nothing short of a tax -- on you. Aluminum tariffs mean that you will pay more for a six-pack of beer. Is that what you voted for? It's all just a game to Trump, and anyone who claims he is playing some sort of three-dimensional chess is nothing short of delusional. I doubt Trump could play a game of two-dimensional chess, personally. No, it's not 3D chess Trump is playing -- it's nothing more than a game of 52-Card Pickup."

   Good luck with that, Elon

Seriously, we should be taking bets on how long the Tesla board will put up with this.

"Elon Musk has seen his car company lose 50 percent of its stock value in the past few months. Tesla sales are way down all over the world, in fact. So his sidekick Donald Trump decided to use the White House as a car dealership lot and film a commercial for Tesla on the South Lawn. This is the last straw for many Tesla owners and for people in the market to buy a new electric car. Who wants to be a pariah just because of what you drive? So I would say to Elon Musk: 'Good luck convincing all those MAGA voters to rush right out and buy a Tesla!' Somehow I seriously doubt it's going to catch on as the new rightwing thing to drive, personally. From what I hear from Trump voters, they absolutely hate electric vehicles. So good luck with that business plan, Elon!"

   Disappearing data

Of all the things Trump is doing, this is one of the most frightening.

"Donald Trump has an answer for any scientific data he doesn't like: just 'disappear' it all. Just erase it. Got documents that might say something you don't like? Burn them or shred them. Climate change data? Just cancel the program. This has started slow, but it could lead to a very dark place. What if economic data comes in as negative? Will Trump just delete it all? Or hire some toadies to come up with some fantasy numbers instead? Donald Trump is waging a war on data already, so it's easy to see him doing exactly that. Sending any data you don't like down the memory hole is the mark of a totalitarian government, folks."

   Trump's for the birds? Hardly...

A minor point, but one worth making.

"Remember when Trump campaigned on how much he cared about birds? Remember that? Whenever he talked about wind turbines, he'd always darkly point out how many birds the windmills kill. But Trump just hates windmills, ever since they built some right offshore of one of his golf courses. He doesn't care about birds at all, in fact. His administration just ended the legal position that energy companies who kill birds with their activities should be held accountable. This gives not just wind producers but also the oil and gas industry a big green light to kill as many migrating birds as they feel like, without consequence. It's just one more thing Trump lied his face off about on the campaign trail, folks."

   Chicken!

Speaking of birds....

"Republicans are increasingly becoming too chicken to face their own voters. They're too scared to hold town halls, because when they do they get to hear what their constituents think about President Elon Musk and Donald Trump and all their economic chaos. And they've been getting an earful! So they've decided to just stop holding town halls where people can confront them to their faces. It's a real sign of how unpopular the Trump agenda truly has been for millions of people. When politicians are too chicken to face their own voters, then it is time to vote them out of office, plain and simple."

   Putin's laughing

This is going to become more and more evident.

"Vladimir Putin must just be laughing at Donald Trump right now. Trump is doing all his dirty work for him! All Putin needs to do is sit back and watch as Trump forces Ukraine to do exactly what Putin wants. Putin gets to call all the shots, and won't have to give up anything to bring an end to his invasion of Ukraine. Trump's never going to sanction Russia, and Putin knows this full well. Which is why Putin must be rolling on the floor laughing at his minion Donald Trump right about now."

-- Chris Weigant

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground