Statements (March 22, 2024)
Welcome to Home & Away. It has been yet another busy week, packed with political news here at home, uncertainty as to what comes next in the Middle East, and an election in Russia. Here goes.
Dangerous State
There are several things to report on the domestic front. The first garnered little attention but merits a good deal of it. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO), one of the few remaining non- or bi-partisan public entities, published its long-term budget outlook, covering the years 2024 through 2054. It makes for worrisome reading.
The bottom line is that this country’s bottom line is deteriorating badly. The deficit (the annual imbalance between what the government takes in and pays out), which over the past thirty years averaged under 4% of GDP, will likely climb from the current rate of 5.6% of GDP to a record 8.5% by 2054. The cumulative stock of debt, now roughly equal to this year’s expected GDP, is projected to climb to 166 percent of GDP over that same thirty-year horizon. Much of the increase stems from entitlement spending (mostly social security, Medicare and Medicaid) and interest on the debt.
So what? Here is what the report says: “Such large and growing debt would slow economic growth, push up interest payments to foreign holders of U.S. debt, and pose significant risks to the fiscal and economic outlook; it could also cause lawmakers to feel more constrained in their policy choices.” In plain English, we will not grow out of this problem, it will make us more vulnerable to forces and countries over which we have little or no control, and we will have less money to spend on needed discretionary domestic programs and defense.
The report does not include policy recommendations, as that would be beyond the CBO’s mandate. But entitlement reform, improved investment in areas that will lead to greater growth, more skilled immigration, and increased revenues, i.e., tax receipts, are all critical to avoiding this outcome. The problem is that our politics will make it difficult for either party to do these things unless they are uncharacteristically prepared to do them together, such as through a bipartisan commission.
The Rights of States
I also want to highlight an article in the New York Times that is well worth reading and contemplating. The piece’s focus is the growing tendency of states to go their own way when they disagree with Washington, most notably Texas’s ongoing push to enforce its own immigration policy through a state law authorizing local law enforcement to arrest and deport those suspected of illegally crossing the southern border. Right now, we also see Republican states acting to assert their perceived prerogatives in realms beyond immigration, such as abortion, gun rights, and energy policy. In recent years, we also saw Democratic states adopt policies to their liking on immigration (sanctuary cities), automobile emissions standards, gun control, and abortion.
The topic is as old as the Constitution itself. Older, actually, as the balance of powers between states and the central government is ultimately what did in the Articles of Confederation. To some extent, we’re seeing this issue resurface now because so little gets done at the national level. But there is a darker and more worrisome explanation, namely, that the country's divisions are deepening, often along state lines. The question going forward is whether states will accept Supreme Court rulings they disagree with. It is not obvious that they will. Nor is it obvious what would follow.
State of the Election
The most encouraging news of the week was Mike Pence's decision not to endorse Trump. It was another example of Pence putting country before party or person, the most significant prior case being January 6, 2021, when his refusal to do Trump’s bidding and derail the electoral college certification process may well have averted much more extensive political violence and a constitutional crisis of historic proportions.
Also significant is what Pence had to say when explaining his decision not to endorse his former boss. What comes through is that Pence remains a true conservative, clearly out of sync with a party dominated by a populist who has contempt for institutions, precedents, decency, and the rule of law. Pence has shown himself to be someone of principle and backbone, distinguishing himself from the vast majority of his fellow Republicans in the process. I have no idea what, if any, impact figures like him will have on the election, but it is a rare piece of good news, whatever the ripple effects.
Unfortunately, voters in the Ohio Senate Republican primary overwhelmingly rejected the traditional Republican in favor of a Trump acolyte with a considerable amount of personal baggage. The result says a whole lot about Trump’s grip on the party, the party’s rejection of what until recently was its DNA, and the shift in Ohio, which not that long ago was something of a purple, toss-up state and now looks to be increasingly red.
All in all, it was a pretty good week for President Biden. The Federal Reserve made it clear that interest rates are coming down, which is to say that they will be lower when people vote in November than they are now. And speaking of money, the President is raising lots of it, much more than his opponent. That same opponent is facing personal as well as political money problems, just this week claiming that he is unable to pay the $454 million he owes New York state in a civil fraud lawsuit. What’s more, thanks to his takeover of the RNC, money raised for Trump’s campaign is increasingly being used to pay his legal expenses rather than to promote his candidacy. And the former president does himself little favor by claiming that the 2024 election is being rigged, a prediction that may make it less likely that his supporters turn out to vote in November. But these accusations also make it more likely that the 75-day period between election day and the inauguration could be fraught and then some.
The Jewish State
I also cannot ignore (although I probably should) two sets of comments by Trump. I don’t know which was the more egregious. He referred to those arrested, tried, convicted, and imprisoned for their multiple violations of the law on January 6 as “hostages” And “unbelievable patriots.” At Trump’s rally last weekend, he also made clear his readiness to pardon them if elected. This is insulting both for its disdain for due process, which they verifiably received, and the use of the word “hostage” at a time when truly innocent men and women, including American citizens, are being held in Gaza.
Speaking of which, there are also Trump’s comments on American Jews and Israel. “Any Jewish person that votes for Democrats hates their religion,” he claimed. “They hate everything about Israel, and they should be ashamed of themselves, because Israel will be destroyed.”
This is equal parts offensive and misguided. I do not appreciate Trump, or anyone for that matter, judging my Jewishness, any more than I would pass judgment on another person’s commitment to their religion or lack of one. The idea that he would link someone’s religiosity to their politics is outrageous. It is also offensive in that it implicitly suggests Jews only vote on the basis of a candidate’s stance on Israel, which is not just wrong but approximates the anti-Semitic trope that American Jews’ first loyalty is not to the United States, but rather to Israel.
As if all this were not enough, Trump invoked the prospect of Israel’s destruction. Again, this has religious overtones I am uncomfortable with, but I raise it here because it does lead to a useful conversation on what constitutes support for Israel. I believe that friends of Israel have not just the right, but also the obligation, to speak out when they believe Israel is acting inconsistent with its own interests, one of which is maintaining a close relationship with the United States, which remains that country’s most important partner. I would say the same thing about any American who speaks out against policies being carried out by this government that are not in America’s interests.
I made clear in the piece I published a week ago in the Wall Street Journal that I thought much of what Israel has done since October 7 has been counterproductive to these interests. I thought Senator Schumer delivered an important statement, although I wish he had not been so personal vis-à-vis Prime Minister Netanyahu nor called for elections in Israel. As a rule of thumb, it is best for outsiders to focus on policy and not on people or politics—even though Netanyahu himself regularly intervenes, or if you prefer, interferes in the politics of this country.
As for policy, Israel is sending two high-level teams to meet with Biden administration officials next week to discuss how Israel will prosecute the war against Hamas and, more specifically, how it will go after Hamas forces embedded in Rafah amidst a civilian population of more than one million. Meanwhile, U.S. officials are engaged in indirect negotiations in Doha, Qatar to secure a temporary pause in the fighting that would also include arrangements for hostage and prisoner releases. The United States is also circulating a draft resolution at the United Nations that would put the Security Council on record calling for “an immediate and sustained cease-fire.” Obviously, a cease-fire and an Israeli offensive in Rafah are mutually exclusive.
Beyond Rafah, it is as well unclear whether there will be any meeting of the minds between the United States and Israel on two other critical issues. One is the extent to which Israel is willing to open up new land corridors for humanitarian aid to enter Gaza. That Gaza may well be on the brink of widespread famine is unacceptable.
The remaining issue concerns the longer-term plan for Gaza and the West Bank. There is still no serious Israeli answer to the question of who will come to govern Gaza or emerge as a political partner for Israel in wider negotiations. A long-term Israeli occupation is not the answer; to the contrary, it will prove costly and delay the necessary answering of these questions.
The emerging political vacuum will be filled by criminal gangs and Hamas offshoots. The notion being put forth by some Israeli politicians that local notables will step up in a meaningful way is unserious, and Arab governments will not provide security or economic aid absent a promising, credible political process accepted by most Palestinians. Israel’s focus should be that of transforming the Palestinian Authority into a potential partner. In the meantime, what is unfolding resembles nothing so much as Iraq after the U.S. invasion and ouster of Saddam’s government in 2003.
The State of Russia
The election (if one can call it that) in Russia produced little in the way of surprise, which is no surprise. Vladimir Putin is set to rule the country for another six years. This means continued aggression abroad and repression at home. And it could even mean increased aggression if the United States fails to step up and provide needed and warranted military assistance to Ukraine.
The only good news is that pockets of resistance to Putin manage to persist. Civil society is resilient, and thousands of Russians took part in a Navalny-inspired action called “noon against Putin,” visiting their polling stations at 12:00 pm to vote for one of Putin’s opponents. This provides a glimmer of hope for the long term, as Putin will one day depart the political scene (most likely feet first and horizontally) and there will be an eventual debate or even a reckoning.
My guess is that his immediate successor will rule in a Putin-esque manner but will lack the skill and the strength to get away with it for long. So, I still believe there is a chance that politics in Russia could emerge that will lead to a successor down the line who might be open to a course change at home and abroad. If so, the day will come when Putin will be more reviled than revered in Russia. That would be a day worth celebrating.
As always, some links to click on. And feel free to share Home & Away.
Richard Haass in the news
Friday, March 15: The Michael Medved Show on WSJ article and the Israel-Hamas war.
Monday, March 18: Foreign Policy Live on foreign policy in this election year. CNN Amanpour on Russia and the conflict in the Middle East.
Tuesday, March 19: MSNBC Morning Joe on the Russian election and Israel (audio-only; begins at 3:32). MSNBC Andrea Mitchell Reports on U.S.-Israel relations.
Podcasts
Check out The Bill of Obligations: The Ten Habits of Good Citizens