Dem
47
GOP
53
Democrats in Congress are still charging up their kyber crystals, or something. While there are stirrings of some sort of organized opposition to Donald Trump's depredations against democracy, the blue teamers on the Hill aren't quite there yet, and have largely limited themselves to TV/radio appearances, lists of priorities, and strongly worded letters. These things are not going to do a whole lot, by themselves.
In the interim, Democrats in New York appear to have come up with something that will contribute to the cause, in some small way. One of New York's House seats is open (or, technically, soon will be), by virtue of Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) being appointed to serve as the United States' ambassador to the United Nations. Given Donald Trump's opinion of the U.N., and of international organizations in general, we're not so sure that's the promotion Stefanik thinks it is. But what do we know? After all, it worked out so well for Trump v1.0 U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley, right?
In any case, Stefanik's seat will soon be open. And Democrats in the New York state legislature have taken notice that they are the ones who get to make the rules about filling vacancies. And so, they are about to take up a measure that would enable Gov. Kathy Hochul (D-NY) to leave the seat open for an extra month or two. Maybe the bill won't pass. Maybe, if it does pass, Hochul won't sign it. Maybe if it passes and gets signed, Hochul won't exercise her newfound authority, since she needs at least some votes from purplish upstate New York in order to be reelected. Still, if all works out for the New York Democrats, they'll be able to secure a small victory for their team. And these days, small victories are pretty much all that's available.
And that brings us to the broader purpose of this item. We've had a number of readers write in and suggest that we should add an additional weekly feature, highlighting people and groups who are fighting the good fight against authoritarianism. If we did it, the point would not be Democrats vs. Republicans, it would be pro-democracy vs. anti-democracy. That said, given where the two political parties currently stand, the entries in the series would end up with a Democrats vs. Republicans tinge, at least some of the time. In any case, we are primarily considering the idea because we think such stories might brighten some readers' days.
If you would like to weigh in on this idea, we have put together a brief (4-question) survey here. We very much appreciate your input. (Z)