There are lots of arguments for the benefits of diversity, but few more powerful the initial US response to the pandemic. Neither China cancelling the Lunar New Year nor having to completely shut down the world’s second largest economy in face losing fashion really broke through.
And I’m not just talking about the federal government but in the general discourse - in local governments and within organizations and among everyday people. The import of his bad this was just didn’t resonate.
Cancelling the Lunar New Year is the equivalent of cancelling Christmas, Thanksgiving, and western New Year. It’s huge. The Lunar New Year is the one time a year that many factory workers from inland provinces get to go home. That it happened was epically big.
But lack of cultural knowledge - and lack of diversity - caused many people to miss that big signal.
Ditto lack of awareness about the comparative size, modernness & sophistication of the Chinese economy. Many Americans still imagine China to be the much poorer country of 30 years ago & so failed to realize what was happening was happening in a country much more like our own.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This piece is just plain wrong. Yes, it is too late for Congress to mandate independent redistricting commissions for this round of mapdrawing. But there is still *lots* that Congress can & urgently needs to do. #fairmaps 1/ thefulcrum.us/amp/reforms-fo…
I talk here👇about how the redistricting reforms in the For the People Act aren’t just one reform but a power package of reforms that will work in tandem to fix a badly broken process. #fairmaps 2/ brennancenter.org/our-work/analy…
At the top of the list is a statutory ban on partisan gerrymandering. The gerrymandering ban in the For the People Act is strong, targeting both intent *and* effect - and it can and should be further fine-tuned and strengthened yet in various ways. #fairmaps 3/
It’s hard to describe how clueless *and* depressing this situation is. To quote the great Eminem, “If you one shot, or one opportunity . . . Would you capture it or just let it slip?” For some in power, it seems to be the latter.
We stand at an inflection point about whether we can be a multiracial democracy or not. Few people in history have been given as stark a choice. And that people can’t see it is 🤦🏻♂️😑
I mean just consider gerrymandering which could determine control of the House for a decade. Hard to “organize” out of that. Yes, Democrats won back the House in 2018 after losing it in 2012 - but they benefitted from a couple of factors that won’t likely be present this decade.
The logo for the 1976 Bicentennial is still one of the best pieces of public design.
Though it raises the question - planning for the Bicentennial began in 1966. With the nation’s 250th anniversary just five years away, is there going to be something similar? Is that even possible in a country seemingly as divided as we are today?
The year before (2025) will be the 60th anniversary of both the Voting Rights Act and the Immigration Nationality Act - two bills that transformed the country and set the stage for who we are today. In a different world, you could see a big celebration leading into 2026.
Section 2 as it applies to redistricting survives Brnowich, but Section 2 in the redistricting context was already getting harder to use.
That’s both because SCOTUS interpreted it restrictively and because Section 2 claims, with those restrictions, are hard to successfully bring in the places where people of color increasingly live (namely, the suburbs). 2/
To win a Section 2 redistricting case, the Supreme Court requires that you prove that you can draw a reasonably compact minority district that is 50%+1 citizen voting age population. That’s possible in the traditional big city cores where people of color used to mostly live. 3/
SCOTUS has spoken and said that “mere inconvenience” and “some [racial] disparity” is not enough for **courts** to invalidate laws.
But you know what, **Congress** is a co-equal branch & has broad power under the Elections Clause to set a floor for what is acceptable.
Congress has used this power many times: to require use of single-member districts (1842), to set a uniform national election day (1844), the Absentee Voter Act (1986), the National Voter Registration Act (1993), the Help America Vote Act (2002) - to name just a few. 2/
And lest there be any doubt that this power is broad, none other than Justice Scalia wrote in 2013 that Congress’ power under the Elections Clause was “comprehensive” and included the power to adopt “a complete code for congressional elections” if it wanted. 3/
Watching GOP Senators talk today about federalizing state elections is completely head spinning - because, of course, the federal government has *long* set election rules and standards. #S1#HR1#ForThePeople 1/
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is an obvious example. But more recently, UOCAVA (1986), National Voter Registration Act (1993), the Help America Vote Act (2002) - the first and last of which were signed into law by Republican presidents. #S1#HR1#ForThePeople 2/
In some cases, these federal laws forced states to change longstanding practices. The Help America Vote Act, for example, required states to have a chief election officer - something many states did not have at the time. #S1#HR1#ForThePeople 3/