About Senator Joe Manchin and a Victory for the Swamp

Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) has been representing West Virginia in the Senate since the death of Senator Robert Byrd in 2010.  Manchin ran on a pledge protect Second Amendment rights as well as to to take dead aim of Barack Obama's Cap and Trade policy, which severely threatened the coal industry.  

While he may call himself a centrist or perhaps a conservative Democrat, in modern terms he ran as a Republican.  But now Mountain State voters may well wonder if Manchin was just blowing smoke around election season.

As Manchin vies for a second full term, he is considered the most vulnerable Senate incumbent for Election 20118.  Manchin's refusal to drift to the left endangers himself with the progressive drift of Democrats, yet he is chary about crossing the aisle to the Republican side.

So in a bid to save his seat, Senator Manchin took the the Senate floor to promote a pledge of bipartisan cooperation and agreement.  While that sounds noble and constructive, the reality is that Manchin was coercing his colleagues not to campaign against him or raise money against him.

 An incumbent wants to ensure that notable opposition can not criticize him on the hustings because of a supposed pledge of bipartisan cooperation.  How convenient! No wonder pundits and comedians are so critical of anything labeled bipartisan. 

Radio commentator Larry O'Connor surmises that Manchin is trying to obscure the fact that he votes with Democrat Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) regarding the tax reform. Manchin also campaigned hard for Hillary Clinton in 2016, which proved quite out of step with his West Virginia constituents.  

The Republican National Committee used Twitter to expose Senator Manchin's Janus faced campaigning, as the supposed maverick conservative Democrat posed with both Planned Parenthood as well as Pro Life activists.  

Manchin laughed off this apparent hypocrisy saying that he'd pose for pictures with anyone.  Larry O'Connor laments that this was one more victory for the swamp co-opting a maverick.  

 It may be better to think of this as  sort of a pyrrhic victory which salts the swamp and causes the District of Calamity to be drained of unviable swamp creatures and Congress critters.

H/T: Washington Times

On Behind the Lines Flanks From the Left

Two term Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) reluctantly announced his re-election effort for the 2018 election cycle. His candidacy is the strongest of the nine Democrat incumbents who are defending in states which voted for President Donald Trump.  But Machin's blunt talk to fellow Democrats reveals a rift in the Democrat party.  Manchin will likely have a challenger from the left, coming from the "Feel the Bern" wing of the party.

Even Democrats in the leadership are at risk from flanks from the left.  Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who was the face of the "Schumer Shutdown" supposedly to advance the DACA Deal, had protests staged around his residence by leftists who thought the Democrats wimped out for only having a three day government shutdown. These are indications that the far left is asserting its authority over the Democrat Party and it is not just centrists like Senator Manchin who will be scorned if they do not dance their progressive tarantella. 

Senator Joe Manchin on Politics

Joe Manchin on Politics

Primary Concerns for Senate Democrats Supporting Gorsuch Cloture Vote

Now that they are relegated to minority political status in the District of Calamity, the progressive wing of the Democrat party feel free to impose purity tests and try to effectively take over the party.

One of the litmus tests for a Senate Democrat to show their loyalty towards liberalism is to oppose President Trump's choice for the Supreme Court, Judge Neil Gorsuch.  

Senate Democrats may stew over a "stolen" SCOTUS pick, because the Senate Majority in the 114th Congress refused to hold hearings and scuttled former President Obama's lame duck Supreme Court pick Merrick Garland. This Senate Advice and Consent through inaction followed a 70 year precedent of not confirming SCOTUS picks in the last year of an Administration so as to let voters decide.

However some Democrats are so obstreperous that they will not meet with Judge Gorsuch, like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY).  Those who consented to meet Judge Gorsuch have been charmed by him and his impeccable legal credentials.

Liberal advocacy groups like Credo Action felt emboldened by Schumer's antipathy approach thus they warned wavering Senate Democrats that if they so much even consented to a Cloture vote for Judge Gorsuch that they will face primary opposition in the 2018 cycle.

So Democrats opposed Republicans effectively filibustering Garland through a no vote yet they want to do the same thing to Judge Gorsuch.  As Chris Plante is wont to say, if it wasn't for double standards, liberals would not have any at all.  Ironically, filibustering will be futile thanks to the legacy of  former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) who invoked the nuclear option in 2013.  Now all the current Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) needs to do is expand the rule change in medias res to include Supreme Court nominations. 

From an objective standpoint, Democrats threatening to primary vulnerable Senate Democrats to just allow a vote for a Supreme Court Associate Justice seems counter-intuitive.  The Scalia replacement would not drastically change the balance of the court, so why come out with guns blazing against your own for a goal which is note a game changer.  

Although Democrats only need to garner three net seats to regain control of the Senate, they face a tough election cycle in 2018 with 23 of 33 seats up.  Incumbents have a much easier time fund raising and winning general elections, so why take out your own (even if they stray from the party line on some issues)?  Furthermore, ten of the Senate races are Democrats in states that voted strongly for President Trump.  Threatening to primary Democrat incumbents pushes them further to the left, which was not were the vox populi seems to be in those states.

If opposition from the left seems too strident, some incumbents like Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND)  might conclude that the grass is greener on the other side of the aisle. Even if they do not politically defect, they may be emboldened to vote their conscience to keep their integrity or burnish their independence from a progressive purge to keep their seat.

It would seem prudent for progressives to not play hardball on this Supreme Court nomination but fight like hell if a senior liberal Associate Justice (like 83 year old Ruth Ginsburg or 78 year old Stephen Breyer) or majority maker 80 year old Anthony Kennedy decided to retire.  But it seems that progressives do not want to leave any powder in reserve for such a contingency.  

Even though objections to the Scalia replacement were packaged as being objections to Garland's no vote or automatically opposing President Trump's pick, it seems that progressives are concerned that reversing Roe v. Wade and throwing the adjudication of abortion back to the states is at stake. 

Joe Manchin on Flag Burning

Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) seized upon the Donald Trump generated controversy concerning flag burning to voice patriotic support for protecting Old Glory.

There has been some talk that the Reagan Democrat might choose to caucus with the Republican Senate Majority in the 115th Congress. This seems dubious, as there were similar rumors that Manchin might vote with his feet after winning the Special Election in 2010 to replace the deceased Democrat mainstay Robert Byrd (D-WV). But those prospects never panned out and Manchin ran for a full term as a Democrat in 2012.

It should be noted that Senator Manchin will be up for re-election in the next cycle and he is vulnerable because Trump won the Mountaineer State by 40 points in the general election.

Moreover, Manchin has been tarnished with a reputation of nepotism with the Epipen controversy.

Manchin's talking tough on the burning of the American flag shows that the campaign for 2018 has already begun.

Outrage Over EpiPen Exploitation

As the school year is beginning and students with allergies are adjusting to new environs and routines, it has come to light that the cost of EpiPens, a life saving medical device to treat anaphylaxis from food allergies and bee stings, has skyrocketed.

The price of an EpiPen has gone from $57 to over $400 a unit.  This dramatic price increase prompted one exasperated mother to concede that she is no longer putting away money for her kid's college fund but in order to save for EpiPens.

While Mylan, the manufacturer of EpiPens, has declined to indicate the reasons for the price spike, pharmaceutical manufacturers typically impose significant price in the waning years of a monopoly before generic alternatives are allowed on the market.  However, in this case, the FDA has unexpectedly rejected a generic anaphalaxis alternative from Teva, requiring "more data".  And dosing problems prompted Sanofi pharmaceuticals to pull Auvi-Q (a non-generic treatment) from the market.  So EpiPens has a virtual monopoly on anaphylactic remedies as Mylan was seeking to suck every last cent of profit from EpiPens.

It may raise eyebrows that as Mylan acquired its virtual monopoly for EpiPens, Mylan's CEO Heather Bresch saw a 671% increase in  salary and compensation, going from $2.4 Million to a reported $18.9 Million. And it is an inconvenient truth that Ms. Bresch is the daughter of Senator Joe Manchin III (D-WV) who has donated $60,750 from 2011 to 2015. Between the generous financial support and filial ties,  it raises the specter of crony capitalism and possible nepotism. 

While Senator Manchin does not directly sit on heath committees and has voiced public concern over the incredible cost increases for EpiPens, his daughter might not be grilled harshly by his colleagues.  And it is unclear how the FDA decided that they needed more data for the generic.  With accusations of State Department concierge service associated with the Clinton Foundation and the politicization of Executive Branch Agencies (EPA, Energy, Agriculture etc..) and supposedly Independent Agencies (e.g. FCC on net neutrality), family ties may expedite an advantageous environment.  Or perhaps it's just another isolated incident of corporate serendipity .

The public was outraged by the EpiPen exploitation.  Sarah Jessica Parker, whose son suffers from anaphylactic shock, agreed to be the celebrity spokeman for EpiPens.  When this controversy arose, Sarah Jessica Parker went on social media to end her association with Mylan, thus walking away from a lucrative endorsement contract.

Mylan sought to mitigate the public relations mess about EpiPens by announcing that a family of four making $97,000 would pay nothing out of pocket for the prescription. That sounds nice but the inflated costs are just passed along to insurers and employers. With Obamacare on the precipice of a financial death spiral in 2017 and insurers pulling out of health exchange markets, this solution is a mere chimera.