thenation--2020-10-21--Democrats Cannot Cave to the Republican Death Cult on the Stimulus Bill

The latest Covid-19 relief package is held up in the Republican-controlled Senate for a number of reasons .
Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell has been refusing to put the HEROES Act , first passed in the House of Representatives in May and recently updated , on the Senate floor for an up-or-down vote .
That act would almost surely garner support from the three or four Republicans senators needed to pass the legislation , if McConnell would allow simple democracy to function .
Not only is McConnell refusing to put the House bill on the floor ; he ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Democrats .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin are in talks , allegedly trying to hash something out , while McConnell is trying to tell Trump through the press not to make a deal .
Like Elie ’ s writing ?
You ’ ll love him in conversation .
Check out Elie Mystal and an extraordinary group of speakers at the first-ever Nation festival , Nov. 18-21 Arguably , McConnell ’ s antidemocratic stonewalling is “ normal ” Washington gridlock from Republicans , but Covid-19 relief has also been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump administration .
Up until now , the president has spent more time negotiating against himself on Twitter than he has spent working with lawmakers to achieve a compromise .
In addition to trying to work around an unreliable president , lawmakers are staring down the barrel of a national election , and Republican lawmakers are busy trying to rush through a Supreme Court confirmation .
But beyond the “ Democrats want government to work , Republicans want to win at government ” concerns that generally destroy our politics , the Covid-19 relief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the parties .
Shocking , I know .
It ’ s been so long since Democrats and Republicans disagreed about something other than the basic rule of law or the foundations of democratic self-government that an actual policy fight can seem quaint , or even unimportant given the larger issues surrounding a pandemic stimulus package .
The first policy dispute is around how large the relief package should be .
The Republican bill put on the floor by McConnell this week contains no actual payments to people who have been devastated financially by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ checks to people struggling to make rent or in need of groceries .
In fact , their stimulus plan contains no direct stimulus for actual people .
Instead , their $ 500 billion proposal is targeted toward providing loan money to small-business owners—this time , Republicans claim , with additional protections to make sure the loans are given to small-business owners and not wealthy grifters looking for free money .
The Democrats want a much larger bill .
The updated HEROES Act , which the Democrats put forward on October 1 , calls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including direct stimulus payments to people who need them .
As it is , that bill was pared down from an initial $ 3 trillion in proposed stimulus funding , and you could make an excellent case that even $ 3 trillion lowballs the scope of the problem .
The difference between the Democratic and Republican packages could conceivably be overcome by the GOP ’ s usual strategy of hostage taking .
It can be fashionable to say that Democrats always “ cave ” when it comes to fully funding their stimulus programs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bill Clinton ’ s former labor secretary Robert Reich has spent the last 25 years demanding that Democrats do better .
But there ’ s also an asymmetrical war going on .
Democrats are trying to help people who are desperate and in need , but that ’ s also how Democrats talk themselves into the belief that “ some ” stimulus is better than “ no ” stimulus .
We would normally expect Democrats to keep bargaining down until they reached a price point acceptable to miserly Republicans .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ However , there is a second policy principle at stake that the Democrats can not cave on : the issue of liability protection for employers .
McConnell has decided that he will not allow a stimulus bill to pass unless it includes a “ get out of jail free ” card for employers who , through pure greedy negligence , allow their workers ( or customers ) to catch the coronavirus .
The issue of liability protection can be difficult to understand as a moral imperative worth fighting for , but it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ companies and businesses don ’ t currently have the cover McConnell wants to give them is the reason a lot of people are currently alive .
Here ’ s how the system works right now : Employers and businesses must take reasonable care to make sure that people don ’ t get sick or injured on their premises .
There are entire canons of law centered around what “ reasonable care ” looks like , and what steps businesses must take while workers or customers are on their premises .
Lawyers call this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ generally left to the states , so the principle of “ reasonableness ” is more-or-less tied to your community and can vary .
( My favorite example of this variation is animal attack laws : Florida will basically allow pets to eat trespassers ; New York doesn ’ t even like dogs to bite other dogs ; and Alaska pretty much assumes that you shouldn ’ t have messed with that bear . )
But there are general principles .
If I walk into a business and a piano falls on my head @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to sue that business , even if the business is called “ Dangling Pianos Unlimited.
” The same laws governing a business ’ s liability for a falling piano should govern its liability for the coronavirus .
If a restaurant seats you at a table under a hanging piano , and if it then falls on you , the restaurant can not say , “ Wile E. Coyote knew the risks when he sat down for dinner.
” Similarly , if a restaurant seats you right next to a maskless MAGA bro , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say , “ You pays your money and you takes your chances.
” Reasonable care right now requires businesses to take appropriate precautions to stop the spread of the virus .
McConnell wants to change all of that .
He wants to exempt businesses from state tort liability in cases involving the coronavirus , remove all coronavirus tort claims to federal courts ( recently stacked with judges approved by McConnell ) , change the standard for liability from “ reasonable care ” to “ gross negligence ” or “ willful misconduct ” by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ require people to somehow prove that they got sick from that business and nowhere else .
All of that would essentially exempt businesses from any coronavirus responsibility .
It would make it almost impossible for plaintiffs to prove they contracted an airborne virus from a negligent business , particularly in a world where the government does almost no contact tracing .
Even if they somehow could prove where they got sick , the willful misconduct standard would be nearly impossible to meet .
Consider the case of a restaurant where a waiter tests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus .
A “ reasonable ” standard would involve expecting the employer to tell that waiter to go home and take care of themselves for 14 days ( with pay ) .
A “ willful misconduct ” standard would require something like ordering the waiter to come to work , and then ordering that waiter to lick all the plates .
If McConnell has his way , liability will be functionally out of reach .
That ’ s unacceptable , because that fear of liability is probably one of the only things keeping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ motive during the pandemic .
If you give businesses liability protection , they will force their workers to come in sick .
They will pack too many people inside their storefronts .
Liability is pretty much the only thing that is keeping business self-interest and best public health practices aligned .
Irresponsible states are already pushing for this kind of protection within their own borders .
In Florida , where Governor Ron DeSantis has ordered businesses back open with no social distancing , in violation of common freaking sense , business leaders are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safely .
A number of states are considering some form of liability protection for their businesses .
We ’ re Going to Need a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to Recover From Trump There Is Only One Solution to the Amy Coney Barrett Debacle We Still Aren ’ t Prepared for the Fact That Trump May Steal the Election Not to sound like a Republican who fetishizes federalism , but as I look at the coronavirus infections rippling through red states that have bought into Republican death cult chants of “ herd immunity , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make their own tort laws about coronavirus , just like we let them make their own laws about animal attacks .
New York , where I live , gave liability protection to hospitals , not strip clubs , then rolled that back , because New York has not yet completely lost its mind .
The last thing I want is for McConnell to mandate that every state act as dumb and horny as Florida .
Is liability protection an issue that should hold up the entire coronavirus relief package ?
I think so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is literally saving lives right now .
It ’ s saving the lives of workers who are not being forced back needlessly into enclosed spaces and packed close together while they perform their duties .
It ’ s saving the lives of people who practice the kind of reasonable precautions that work only if most everybody else is doing the same .
It ’ s the reason businesses have an incentive to enforce mask use and keep people socially distant .
And it ’ s preserving the ability of states to make their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ground in their region .
McConnell ’ s Senate bill is trash .
It doesn ’ t provide money to people who are suffering , and it doesn ’ t protect people from dying for capitalism .
The Democrats must oppose it .
Speaker Pelosi is said to be trying to craft a counteroffer in her negotiations with Mnuchin on liability protection .
Anything that preserves a “ reasonableness ” standard or doesn ’ t offer blanket state tort immunity for businesses would be preferable to what Republicans want .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the details matter .
This is the correct hill to die on .
If business leaders won ’ t listen to doctors , we have to make them listen to lawyers .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
The latest Covid-19 relief package is held up in the Republican-controlled Senate for a number of reasons. Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell has been refusing to put the HEROES Act, first passed in the House of Representatives in May and recently updated, on the Senate floor for an up-or-down vote. That act would almost surely garner support from the three or four Republicans senators needed to pass the legislation, if McConnell would allow simple democracy to function.
Not only is McConnell refusing to put the House bill on the floor; he’s actively discouraging the White House from negotiating with Democrats. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin are in talks, allegedly trying to hash something out, while McConnell is trying to tell Trump through the press not to make a deal. Like Elie’s writing? You’ll love him in conversation. Check out Elie Mystal and an extraordinary group of speakers at the first-ever Nation festival, Nov. 18-21
Arguably, McConnell’s antidemocratic stonewalling is “normal” Washington gridlock from Republicans, but Covid-19 relief has also been stymied by the policy incoherence of the Trump administration. Up until now, the president has spent more time negotiating against himself on Twitter than he has spent working with lawmakers to achieve a compromise. In addition to trying to work around an unreliable president, lawmakers are staring down the barrel of a national election, and Republican lawmakers are busy trying to rush through a Supreme Court confirmation.
But beyond the “Democrats want government to work, Republicans want to win at government” concerns that generally destroy our politics, the Covid-19 relief debate actually includes real-life policy differences between the parties. Shocking, I know. It’s been so long since Democrats and Republicans disagreed about something other than the basic rule of law or the foundations of democratic self-government that an actual policy fight can seem quaint, or even unimportant given the larger issues surrounding a pandemic stimulus package.
The first policy dispute is around how large the relief package should be. The Republican bill put on the floor by McConnell this week contains no actual payments to people who have been devastated financially by the pandemic. Republicans have offered no checks to people struggling to make rent or in need of groceries. In fact, their stimulus plan contains no direct stimulus for actual people. Instead, their $500 billion proposal is targeted toward providing loan money to small-business owners—this time, Republicans claim, with additional protections to make sure the loans are given to small-business owners and not wealthy grifters looking for free money.
The Democrats want a much larger bill. The updated HEROES Act, which the Democrats put forward on October 1, calls for $2.2 trillion in spending, including direct stimulus payments to people who need them. As it is, that bill was pared down from an initial $3 trillion in proposed stimulus funding, and you could make an excellent case that even $3 trillion lowballs the scope of the problem. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
The difference between the Democratic and Republican packages could conceivably be overcome by the GOP’s usual strategy of hostage taking. It can be fashionable to say that Democrats always “cave” when it comes to fully funding their stimulus programs; there’s a good reason Bill Clinton’s former labor secretary Robert Reich has spent the last 25 years demanding that Democrats do better. But there’s also an asymmetrical war going on. Democrats are trying to help people who are desperate and in need, but that’s also how Democrats talk themselves into the belief that “some” stimulus is better than “no” stimulus. We would normally expect Democrats to keep bargaining down until they reached a price point acceptable to miserly Republicans. It’s how Republicans usually win these fights. Current Issue View our current issue
However, there is a second policy principle at stake that the Democrats cannot cave on: the issue of liability protection for employers. McConnell has decided that he will not allow a stimulus bill to pass unless it includes a “get out of jail free” card for employers who, through pure greedy negligence, allow their workers (or customers) to catch the coronavirus.
The issue of liability protection can be difficult to understand as a moral imperative worth fighting for, but it is. Put simply, the fact that companies and businesses don’t currently have the cover McConnell wants to give them is the reason a lot of people are currently alive.
Here’s how the system works right now: Employers and businesses must take reasonable care to make sure that people don’t get sick or injured on their premises. There are entire canons of law centered around what “reasonable care” looks like, and what steps businesses must take while workers or customers are on their premises. Lawyers call this “tort law.” Tort law is generally left to the states, so the principle of “reasonableness” is more-or-less tied to your community and can vary. (My favorite example of this variation is animal attack laws: Florida will basically allow pets to eat trespassers; New York doesn’t even like dogs to bite other dogs; and Alaska pretty much assumes that you shouldn’t have messed with that bear.) But there are general principles. If I walk into a business and a piano falls on my head, I will most likely be able to sue that business, even if the business is called “Dangling Pianos Unlimited.”
The same laws governing a business’s liability for a falling piano should govern its liability for the coronavirus. If a restaurant seats you at a table under a hanging piano, and if it then falls on you, the restaurant cannot say, “Wile E. Coyote knew the risks when he sat down for dinner.” Similarly, if a restaurant seats you right next to a maskless MAGA bro, they shouldn’t be able to say, “You pays your money and you takes your chances.” Reasonable care right now requires businesses to take appropriate precautions to stop the spread of the virus.
McConnell wants to change all of that. He wants to exempt businesses from state tort liability in cases involving the coronavirus, remove all coronavirus tort claims to federal courts (recently stacked with judges approved by McConnell), change the standard for liability from “reasonable care” to “gross negligence” or “willful misconduct” by business owners, and, critically, require people to somehow prove that they got sick from that business and nowhere else.
All of that would essentially exempt businesses from any coronavirus responsibility. It would make it almost impossible for plaintiffs to prove they contracted an airborne virus from a negligent business, particularly in a world where the government does almost no contact tracing. Even if they somehow could prove where they got sick, the willful misconduct standard would be nearly impossible to meet. Consider the case of a restaurant where a waiter tests positive for an asymptomatic case of the coronavirus. A “reasonable” standard would involve expecting the employer to tell that waiter to go home and take care of themselves for 14 days (with pay). A “willful misconduct” standard would require something like ordering the waiter to come to work, and then ordering that waiter to lick all the plates. If McConnell has his way, liability will be functionally out of reach.
That’s unacceptable, because that fear of liability is probably one of the only things keeping businesses from giving in to pure profit motive during the pandemic. If you give businesses liability protection, they will force their workers to come in sick. They will pack too many people inside their storefronts. Liability is pretty much the only thing that is keeping business self-interest and best public health practices aligned.
Irresponsible states are already pushing for this kind of protection within their own borders. In Florida, where Governor Ron DeSantis has ordered businesses back open with no social distancing, in violation of common freaking sense, business leaders are saying they need liability protection to reopen safely. A number of states are considering some form of liability protection for their businesses. More from Mystal We’re Going to Need a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to Recover From Trump Elie Mystal There Is Only One Solution to the Amy Coney Barrett Debacle Elie Mystal We Still Aren’t Prepared for the Fact That Trump May Steal the Election Elie Mystal
Not to sound like a Republican who fetishizes federalism, but as I look at the coronavirus infections rippling through red states that have bought into Republican death cult chants of “herd immunity,” I think states should get to make their own tort laws about coronavirus, just like we let them make their own laws about animal attacks. New York, where I live, gave liability protection to hospitals, not strip clubs, then rolled that back, because New York has not yet completely lost its mind. The last thing I want is for McConnell to mandate that every state act as dumb and horny as Florida.
Is liability protection an issue that should hold up the entire coronavirus relief package? I think so. Because the lack of liability protection is literally saving lives right now. It’s saving the lives of workers who are not being forced back needlessly into enclosed spaces and packed close together while they perform their duties. It’s saving the lives of people who practice the kind of reasonable precautions that work only if most everybody else is doing the same. It’s the reason businesses have an incentive to enforce mask use and keep people socially distant. And it’s preserving the ability of states to make their own decisions based on the facts on the ground in their region.
McConnell’s Senate bill is trash. It doesn’t provide money to people who are suffering, and it doesn’t protect people from dying for capitalism. The Democrats must oppose it. Speaker Pelosi is said to be trying to craft a counteroffer in her negotiations with Mnuchin on liability protection. Anything that preserves a “reasonableness” standard or doesn’t offer blanket state tort immunity for businesses would be preferable to what Republicans want. This is an actual policy fight, and so the details matter.
This is the correct hill to die on. If business leaders won’t listen to doctors, we have to make them listen to lawyers.


thenation--2020-10-21--Aaron Sorkin Sanitizes the Chicago 7

Aaron Sorkin Sanitizes the Chicago 7

I confess that I was disheartened when I first heard that Aaron Sorkin , best known as the creator of the TV show The West Wing , was writing and directing a film about the trial of the Chicago Seven .
Although much celebrated not just for The West Wing but for his scripts for films like A Few Good Men ( 1992 ) and The Social Network ( 2010 ) , Sorkin struck me as having the exact wrong sensibility for telling the story of radicals fighting the legal system .
Spanning the years 1969 and 1970 , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying to convict seven anti-war radicals ( Abbie Hoffman , Jerry Rubin , David Dellinger , Tom Hayden , Rennie Davis , John Froines , and Lee Weiner ) along with Black Panther leader Bobby Seale ( whose case was eventually treated separately ) .
All stood accused of fomenting riots during the 1968 Democratic convention .
The trial was extremely controversial and polarizing , with many shocking moments , most notoriously when Judge Julius Hoffman ordered Seale shackled and gagged after the defendant repeatedly tried to represent himself in court .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the job because the Chicago Seven trial is about the deep divisions in American politics , while Sorkin himself has always been celebrator of consensus and civility .
The West Wing was a fantasy of bipartisan reconciliation , featuring a liberal president named Josiah Bartlett who found ways of winning over conservative opponents .
Like Jeet ’ s writing ?
You ’ ll love him in conversation .
Check out Jeet Heer and an extraordinary group of speakers at the first-ever virtual Nation festival , Nov. 18-21 featuring wide-ranging conversations , timely briefing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ panel discussions in the aftermath of the 2020 election .
As Luke Savage noted in Current Affairs , in The West Wing “ Republicans come in two types : slack-jawed caricatures , and people whose high-mindedness and mutual enthusiasm for Putting Differences Aside make them the Bartlett Administration ’ s natural allies or friends regardless of whatever conflicts of values they may ostensibly have.
” In one episode , the Democratic president gets a Republican-dominated Senate to agree to a liberal Supreme Court justice by offering a deal : He guarantees that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ open up soon because one justice is elderly ) will go to a conservative .
The limits of Sorkin ’ s political imagination can be seen in the difference between this imaginary Washington of mutually beneficial cooperation and the way the real GOP has ruthlessly gamed the system to get what will soon be a 6-3 Republican court .
How could someone as committed to the fantasy of American national unity possibly do justice to a story of radicals like Seale and Hoffman who questioned the very validity of the political system ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Time It ’ s Not Sticking Democrats Should Welcome More Trump Town Halls Barrett ’ s Evasions Show Why Expanding the Court Is Necessary My misgivings were misplaced—at least in part .
Sorkin ’ s new movie , The Trial of the Chicago 7 , currently streaming on Netflix , is in fact very entertaining and shows a greater complexity than his earlier work .
The film does a credible job of tracing the trajectory of the trial and highlights the ideological differences between the defendants , with Hoffman ( charismatically performed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leading advocate of in-your-face confrontation while Tom Hayden ( played as inward-looking and cerebral by Eddie Redmayne ) serves as the voice of trying to work within the rules of system .
Surprisingly , Hoffman comes across as the more appealing of the two : He ’ s warm and has a sharp understanding that a political trial demands revolutionary theater .
The film ’ s Hayden , who has politics that are closer to Sorkin ’ s own , seems cold and calculating , although he is also the only character who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ course of the movie , he comes to appreciate Hoffman ’ s more radical politics .
But Sorkin is able to achieve this positive view of the New Left only by sanitizing and romanticizing the historical record .
Sorkin takes many liberties with the facts , most of which are designed to make both the New Left and its conservative opponents more palatable to contemporary liberal viewers .
Sorkin completely erases the anti-imperialist dimension of the New Left .
Throughout the movie , with the exception of one line , the characters talk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war was that American soldiers were being killed , not that they were killing the Vietnamese .
The exception is Tom Hayden during a mock cross-examination saying he didn ’ t enlist in the army because “ I did not volunteer to kill Vietnamese people.
” But the protesters are shown as being obsessed with American war dead , reading out the names of the fallen in the climactic court scene .
There ’ s no sense in the movie that the war was being protested as an imperialist crime .
Bobby Seale @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off to the margins .
He ’ s shown as being gagged only once , when he was gagged for three days .
After his case is declared a mistrial , Seale disappears from the movie .
One strange and telling invention is that David Dellinger is shown hitting a federal marshal .
The real Dellinger was a committed pacifist who would never do such a thing .
But in creating a two-fisted Dellinger , Sorkin in effect undermines Dellinger ’ s radicalism , turning an anti-violence activist into much more conventional American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bullied .
In real life , Abbie Hoffman engaged in a relentless baiting of his namesake , Judge Julius Hoffman , suggesting the jurist was an assimilationist sellout .
He kept hurling Yiddish insults at the judge , calling him a “ Shande fur de Goyim.
” That literally means a “ disgrace for the Gentiles , ” but the defendant added a further insult by offering his own translation and saying the phrase meant “ front man for the WASP power elite.
” The intense inter-Jewish animosity between the two Hoffmans runs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ detectable in the film .
There is an invented scene where Jerry Rubin saves a protester from being raped by frat boys .
Rubin also has a romance with an invented female undercover cop , who is shown to have some sympathy for the anti-war protesters , to the extent of advising them on how to avoid a violent clash with the police .
This parallels the invented emotional complexity given to Richard Schultz , the federal prosecutor .
Schultz is shown to be tormented by the case , knowing that the government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was a hard-liner who was fully committed to jailing the Chicago Seven and Seale .
A dramatization will inevitably swerve from the historical record .
But all of these transformations work in the same direction .
They all turn the story into another fable of reconciliation , a story of how Americans come together despite differences .
Abbie Hoffman , in real life an anarchist and mischief maker , is even shown endorsing electoral politics .
As Ester Zuckerman notes in Thrillist , the final scene is the culmination of Sorkin ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s worth quoting the actual words some of the defendants said at the trial .
Dellinger told the court , “ Tactics will change , people will err , people will die in the streets and die in prison , but I do not believe that this movement can be denied because , however falsely applied , the American ideal was from the beginning , when it excluded Black people and Indians and people without property , nonetheless there was a dream of justice and equality and freedom , and brotherhood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much closer to fulfillment today than it has been at any time in the history of this country.
” Hayden said , “ I have no doubt that if we had a jury of our peers , we would have walked out of this place , or we would have had an absolutely hung jury because younger people in the country today know what principles , and know what bullshit is , and know how to stand up and are not in the least afraid of expressing their convictions in the face of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the troops , in the face of police.
” Both of these statements contain some expression of faith in America and its people , but they are also far more radical than anything the characters say in the movie .
The ultimate message of The Trial of the Chicago 7 is that Americans can always come together on behalf of noble causes like honoring the troops .
This is a message that appeals to many people today .
But it ’ s at radical variance with what happened in Chicago in 1968 and @ @

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
I confess that I was disheartened when I first heard that Aaron Sorkin, best known as the creator of the TV show The West Wing, was writing and directing a film about the trial of the Chicago Seven. Although much celebrated not just for The West Wing but for his scripts for films like A Few Good Men (1992) and The Social Network (2010), Sorkin struck me as having the exact wrong sensibility for telling the story of radicals fighting the legal system. Spanning the years 1969 and 1970, the Chicago Seven trial involved the federal government trying to convict seven anti-war radicals (Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, David Dellinger, Tom Hayden, Rennie Davis, John Froines, and Lee Weiner) along with Black Panther leader Bobby Seale (whose case was eventually treated separately). All stood accused of fomenting riots during the 1968 Democratic convention. The trial was extremely controversial and polarizing, with many shocking moments, most notoriously when Judge Julius Hoffman ordered Seale shackled and gagged after the defendant repeatedly tried to represent himself in court.
I thought Sorkin was the wrong writer for the job because the Chicago Seven trial is about the deep divisions in American politics, while Sorkin himself has always been celebrator of consensus and civility. The West Wing was a fantasy of bipartisan reconciliation, featuring a liberal president named Josiah Bartlet who found ways of winning over conservative opponents. Like Jeet’s writing? You’ll love him in conversation. Check out Jeet Heer and an extraordinary group of speakers at the first-ever virtual Nation festival, Nov. 18-21 featuring wide-ranging conversations, timely briefing sessions, intimate interviews, and interactive panel discussions in the aftermath of the 2020 election.
As Luke Savage noted in Current Affairs, in The West Wing “Republicans come in two types: slack-jawed caricatures, and people whose high-mindedness and mutual enthusiasm for Putting Differences Aside make them the Bartlet Administration’s natural allies or friends regardless of whatever conflicts of values they may ostensibly have.” In one episode, the Democratic president gets a Republican-dominated Senate to agree to a liberal Supreme Court justice by offering a deal: He guarantees that the next Supreme Court nomination (expected to open up soon because one justice is elderly) will go to a conservative. The limits of Sorkin’s political imagination can be seen in the difference between this imaginary Washington of mutually beneficial cooperation and the way the real GOP has ruthlessly gamed the system to get what will soon be a 6-3 Republican court.
How could someone as committed to the fantasy of American national unity possibly do justice to a story of radicals like Seale and Hoffman who questioned the very validity of the political system? More From Jeet Heer The Indigenous Roots of Robbie Robertson’s Rock and Roll Revolution August 14, 2023 Why Does This Racist Keep Getting Silicon Valley Money? August 11, 2023 When Phallocrats Go Limp August 4, 2023
My misgivings were misplaced—at least in part. Sorkin’s new movie, The Trial of the Chicago 7, currently streaming on Netflix, is in fact very entertaining and shows a greater complexity than his earlier work. The film does a credible job of tracing the trajectory of the trial and highlights the ideological differences between the defendants, with Hoffman (charismatically performed by Sasha Baron Cohen) standing as the leading advocate of in-your-face confrontation while Tom Hayden (played as inward-looking and cerebral by Eddie Redmayne) serves as the voice of trying to work within the rules of system. Surprisingly, Hoffman comes across as the more appealing of the two: He’s warm and has a sharp understanding that a political trial demands revolutionary theater. The film’s Hayden, who has politics that are closer to Sorkin’s own, seems cold and calculating, although he is also the only character who has a narrative arc. Through the course of the movie, he comes to appreciate Hoffman’s more radical politics. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
But Sorkin is able to achieve this positive view of the New Left only by sanitizing and romanticizing the historical record. Sorkin takes many liberties with the facts, most of which are designed to make both the New Left and its conservative opponents more palatable to contemporary liberal viewers.
Sorkin completely erases the anti-imperialist dimension of the New Left. Throughout the movie, with the exception of one line, the characters talk as if the only problem with the war was that American soldiers were being killed, not that they were killing the Vietnamese. The exception is Tom Hayden during a mock cross-examination saying he didn’t enlist in the army because “I did not volunteer to kill Vietnamese people.” But the protesters are shown as being obsessed with American war dead, reading out the names of the fallen in the climactic court scene. There’s no sense in the movie that the war was being protested as an imperialist crime. Current Issue View our current issue
Bobby Seale’s story is softened and put off to the margins. He’s shown as being gagged only once, when he was gagged for three days. After his case is declared a mistrial, Seale disappears from the movie.
One strange and telling invention is that David Dellinger is shown hitting a federal marshal. The real Dellinger was a committed pacifist who would never do such a thing. But in creating a two-fisted Dellinger, Sorkin in effect undermines Dellinger’s radicalism, turning an anti-violence activist into much more conventional American hero, someone who punches back when bullied.
In real life, Abbie Hoffman engaged in a relentless baiting of his namesake, Judge Julius Hoffman, suggesting the jurist was an assimilationist sellout. He kept hurling Yiddish insults at the judge, calling him a “Shande fur de Goyim.” That literally means a “disgrace for the Gentiles,” but the defendant added a further insult by offering his own translation and saying the phrase meant “front man for the WASP power elite.” The intense inter-Jewish animosity between the two Hoffmans runs through the court records but is barely detectable in the film.
There is an invented scene where Jerry Rubin saves a protester from being raped by frat boys. Rubin also has a romance with an invented female undercover cop, who is shown to have some sympathy for the anti-war protesters, to the extent of advising them on how to avoid a violent clash with the police.
This parallels the invented emotional complexity given to Richard Schultz, the federal prosecutor. Schultz is shown to be tormented by the case, knowing that the government is being unjust. The real Schultz was a hard-liner who was fully committed to jailing the Chicago Seven and Seale.
A dramatization will inevitably swerve from the historical record. But all of these transformations work in the same direction. They all turn the story into another fable of reconciliation, a story of how Americans come together despite differences. Abbie Hoffman, in real life an anarchist and mischief maker, is even shown endorsing electoral politics.
As Ester Zuckerman notes in Thrillist, the final scene is the culmination of Sorkin’s putting his own spin on events:
Sorkin’s reworking of the last moments will inevitably [be] the movie’s most-debated change to the public record. At the sentencing in the film, Tom Hayden, played by Eddie Redmayne, uses his allotted time to speak to read off the names of the U.S. soldiers who had died in Vietnam since the trial began. As he reads, the music starts to swell and the defendants stand up in memory. They are soon joined by the rest of the courtroom, despite the protests of Hoffman. In a particularly saccharine touch, even the prosecution Richard Schultz (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) stands. It’s a cinematic finale that doesn’t touch on the anger of the actual incident. According to the transcript of the trial—which is being republished in conjunction with the movie—this, perhaps obviously, never happened.
It’s worth quoting the actual words some of the defendants said at the trial. Dellinger told the court, “Tactics will change, people will err, people will die in the streets and die in prison, but I do not believe that this movement can be denied because, however falsely applied, the American ideal was from the beginning, when it excluded Black people and Indians and people without property, nonetheless there was a dream of justice and equality and freedom, and brotherhood, and I think that dream is much closer to fulfillment today than it has been at any time in the history of this country.”
Hayden said, “I have no doubt that if we had a jury of our peers, we would have walked out of this place, or we would have had an absolutely hung jury because younger people in the country today know what principles, and know what bullshit is, and know how to stand up and are not in the least afraid of expressing their convictions in the face of the state, in the face of the troops, in the face of police.”
Both of these statements contain some expression of faith in America and its people, but they are also far more radical than anything the characters say in the movie. The ultimate message of The Trial of the Chicago 7 is that Americans can always come together on behalf of noble causes like honoring the troops. This is a message that appeals to many people today. But it’s at radical variance with what happened in Chicago in 1968 and subsequently.


thenation--2020-10-21--What Amy Coney Barrett Means For the Climate

This article is adapted from “ The Climate Beat , ” the weekly newsletter of Covering Climate Now , a global journalism initiative strengthening coverage of the climate story .
Imagine any serious adult saying they don ’ t know whether gravity is real .
That , in effect , is what judge Amy Coney Barrett testified to the US Senate during her Supreme Court confirmation hearings last week .
After denying that she had any “ firm views ” about climate change , Barrett told California Democrat and vice presidential nominee Kamala Harris that she would not comment further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contentious matter of public debate.
” It ’ s not , of course .
“ There is as much scientific consensus about human-caused climate change as there is about gravity , ” Michael Mann , one the world ’ s leading climate scientists , recently told 60 Minutes .
And Barrett ’ s views about climate science matter enormously .
The Supreme Court plays a decisive , if often overlooked , role in shaping US environmental policy .
The Obama administration was able to regulate greenhouse gas emissions because the Supreme Court ruled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that greenhouse gases qualify as a “ pollutant ” under the Clean Air Act of 1970 .
Next year , the court will hear a case in which state and local governments are suing fossil fuel companies for the climate damages knowingly caused by the companies ’ activities .
Journalists Must Demystify the Green New Deal More in this series Much has been said in the press about the potential consequences of Barrett ’ s nomination for Roe v. Wade and the Affordable Care Act , and rightly so .
But the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ implications of a Barrett appointment for the climate crisis and , specifically , the US government ’ s legal authority to address that crisis .
Given Republicans ’ determination to rush this process—the final Senate vote is reportedly scheduled for Monday , October 26—newsrooms will have to work fast .
A handful of good early stories on this subject can bring journalists up to speed and inform further reporting .
The New York Times explained how putting Barrett on the court could imperil not only Massachusetts v. EPA but also the EPA ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare—the finding that provided the legal authority for the Obama administration ’ s 2015 Clean Power Plan .
E & E News quoted Jason Rylander , an attorney with the nonprofit Defenders of Wildlife , who suggested that Barrett ’ s inability to “ admit climate change is real ” casts doubt on how she could “ fairly assess the validity of law and regulations enacted to address it.
” InsideClimate News published the most instructive piece to date—a detailed examination of how Barrett ’ s legal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regulation , clash with the very notion of government action against climate change .
The author , Marianne Levell , interviewed environmental law scholars who described Barrett ’ s grooming by the Federalist Society , a conservative legal organization that abhors government regulation as an infringement on economic liberty and has propelled scores of alumni onto federal courts .
A close reading of Barrett ’ s writings , the scholars said , reveals an originalist view of the Constitution that would likely make her “ inclined to chip away at or overturn Massachusetts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concerned that the Supreme Court could , with Barrett ’ s help , limit the right of individual states to sue under the Clean Air Act .
To date , Lavelle reported , “ 115 multi-state lawsuits [ have been ] filed to block or reverse Trump administration actions like repeal of the Clean Power Plan , the weakening of fuel economy standards and the elimination of requirements to control methane emissions at oil and gas industry facilities.
” She added that “ more than a third of the cases are still pending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Supreme Court.
” The so-called # ExxonKnew lawsuits , which seek to hold fossil fuel companies accountable for the damages their products have caused , as well as for the companies ’ decades of knowing and lying about those damages , could be at particular risk .
The Supreme Court has already put on next year ’ s docket a case in which BP and other companies are appealing lower-court rulings in suits filed by five cities—Baltimore , Md .
; Boulder , Col. ; and Imperial Beach , Richmond , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California counties .
The oil companies argue that the cases should be heard in federal court , a contention that the local governments dismiss as a legally baseless delaying tactic .
Covering Amy Coney Barrett ’ s Supreme Court nomination illustrates a core principle of good climate journalism : Every beat in the newsroom—from weather and the economy to , in this case , politics and the law—is part of the climate beat .
Granted , unpacking the climate implications of this story is no simple task , especially given Republicans ’ haste @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before Election Day .
Given the stakes , however , newsrooms must somehow rise to the challenge .

This article is adapted from “The Climate Beat,” the weekly newsletter of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism initiative strengthening coverage of the climate story.
Imagine any serious adult saying they don’t know whether gravity is real. That, in effect, is what judge Amy Coney Barrett testified to the US Senate during her Supreme Court confirmation hearings last week. After denying that she had any “firm views” about climate change, Barrett told California Democrat and vice presidential nominee Kamala Harris that she would not comment further because climate science is “a very contentious matter of public debate.”
It’s not, of course. “There is as much scientific consensus about human-caused climate change as there is about gravity,” Michael Mann, one the world’s leading climate scientists, recently told 60 Minutes. And Barrett’s views about climate science matter enormously.
The Supreme Court plays a decisive, if often overlooked, role in shaping US environmental policy. The Obama administration was able to regulate greenhouse gas emissions because the Supreme Court ruled, in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, that greenhouse gases qualify as a “pollutant” under the Clean Air Act of 1970. Next year, the court will hear a case in which state and local governments are suing fossil fuel companies for the climate damages knowingly caused by the companies’ activities. Covering Climate Now How to Stop the Spread of Climate Disinformation Erika Seiber and Michael Khoo A Soundtrack for the Climate Emergency Mark Hertsgaard Can Gen Z Save the Midterms for Democrats? Mark Hertsgaard
Much has been said in the press about the potential consequences of Barrett’s nomination for Roe v. Wade and the Affordable Care Act, and rightly so. But the press also needs to make clear the implications of a Barrett appointment for the climate crisis and, specifically, the US government’s legal authority to address that crisis. Given Republicans’ determination to rush this process—the final Senate vote is reportedly scheduled for Monday, October 26—newsrooms will have to work fast.
A handful of good early stories on this subject can bring journalists up to speed and inform further reporting. The New York Times explained how putting Barrett on the court could imperil not only Massachusetts v. EPA but also the EPA’s subsequent “endangerment finding” that greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare—the finding that provided the legal authority for the Obama administration’s 2015 Clean Power Plan. E&E News quoted Jason Rylander, an attorney with the nonprofit Defenders of Wildlife, who suggested that Barrett’s inability to “admit climate change is real” casts doubt on how she could “fairly assess the validity of law and regulations enacted to address it.” Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
InsideClimate News published the most instructive piece to date—a detailed examination of how Barrett’s legal views, especially with respect to government regulation, clash with the very notion of government action against climate change. The author, Marianne Levell, interviewed environmental law scholars who described Barrett’s grooming by the Federalist Society, a conservative legal organization that abhors government regulation as an infringement on economic liberty and has propelled scores of alumni onto federal courts. A close reading of Barrett’s writings, the scholars said, reveals an originalist view of the Constitution that would likely make her “inclined to chip away at or overturn Massachusetts v. EPA.” Current Issue View our current issue
The scholars were especially concerned that the Supreme Court could, with Barrett’s help, limit the right of individual states to sue under the Clean Air Act. To date, Lavelle reported, “115 multi-state lawsuits [have been] filed to block or reverse Trump administration actions like repeal of the Clean Power Plan, the weakening of fuel economy standards and the elimination of requirements to control methane emissions at oil and gas industry facilities.” She added that “more than a third of the cases are still pending, and most will be headed for the Supreme Court.”
The so-called #ExxonKnew lawsuits, which seek to hold fossil fuel companies accountable for the damages their products have caused, as well as for the companies’ decades of knowing and lying about those damages, could be at particular risk. The Supreme Court has already put on next year’s docket a case in which BP and other companies are appealing lower-court rulings in suits filed by five cities—Baltimore, Md.; Boulder, Col.; and Imperial Beach, Richmond, and Santa Cruz, Calif.—as well as three California counties. The oil companies argue that the cases should be heard in federal court, a contention that the local governments dismiss as a legally baseless delaying tactic. The Nominee Amy Coney Barrett Displays Her Twisted Views on Voting Rights Joan Walsh
Covering Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court nomination illustrates a core principle of good climate journalism: Every beat in the newsroom—from weather and the economy to, in this case, politics and the law—is part of the climate beat. Granted, unpacking the climate implications of this story is no simple task, especially given Republicans’ haste to vote on Barrett’s nomination before Election Day. Given the stakes, however, newsrooms must somehow rise to the challenge.


thenation--2020-10-21--Will Union Workers Deliver Nevada For Biden?

“ Look , folks , the air quality is in the red zone today .
The EPA says that means people with lung or heart issues should avoid prolonged activity outdoors.
” That was J.R. de Vera , one of two directors of UNITE-HERE !
’ s independent expenditure campaign to elect Biden and Harris in Reno , Nev. UNITE-HERE !
is a union representing 300,000 workers in the hospitality industry—that world of hotels and bars , restaurants and caterers .
Ninety percent of its members are now laid off because of Donald Trump ’ s bungling of the Covid-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chance to help get him out of the White House .
“ So some of you will want to stay in your hotel rooms and make phone calls today , ” JR continues .
Fifty faces fall in the 50 little Zoom boxes on my laptop screen .
Canvassers would much rather be talking to voters at their doors than calling them on a phone bank .
Still , here in the burning , smoking West , the union is as committed to its own people ’ s health and safety as it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So , for many of them , phone calls it will be .
My own job doesn ’ t change much from day to day .
Though I live in San Francisco , I ’ ve come to Reno to do back-room logistics work in the union campaign ’ s cavernous warehouse of an office : ordering supplies , processing reimbursements , and occasionally helping the data team make maps of the areas our canvassers will walk .
Our field campaign is just one of several the union is running in key @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Arizona and Florida and , only last week , we began door-to-door canvassing in Philadelphia .
Social media , TV ads , bulk mail , and phone calls are all crucial elements in any modern electoral campaign , but none of them is a substitute for face-to-face conversations with voters .
We ’ ve been in Reno since early August , building what was , until last week , the only field campaign in the state supporting Joe Biden and Kamala Harris .
( Just recently , our success in campaigning safely has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own ground game here and elsewhere . )
We know exactly how many doors we have to knock on , how many Biden voters we have to identify , how many of them we have to convince to make a concrete voting plan , and how many we have to get out to vote during Nevada ’ s two-week early voting period to win here .
We ’ re running a much larger campaign in Clark County , where close to three-quarters of Nevada ’ s population lives ( mostly in Las Vegas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the twin cities of Reno and Sparks , is the next-largest population center , with 16 percent of Nevadans .
The remaining 14 counties , collectively known as “ the Rurals , ” account for the rest .
Washoe and Clark are barely blue ; the Rurals , decidedly red .
In 2018 , UNITE-HERE !
’ s ground campaign helped ensure that Jacky Rosen would flip a previously Republican Senate seat , and we helped elect Democrat Steve Sisolak as governor .
He ’ s proved a valuable union ally , signing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law protecting workers and businesses in Nevada from the worst effects of the Covid-19 pandemic .
Defying a threatened Trump campaign lawsuit ( later dismissed by a judge ) , Sisolak also signed an election reform bill that allows every active Nevada voter to receive a mail-in ballot .
Largely as a result of the union ’ s work in 2018 , this state now boasts an all-female Democratic senatorial delegation , a Democratic governor , and a female and Democratic majority in the state legislature .
Elections , as pundits of all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have consequences .
Each morning ’ s online canvass dispatch meeting starts with that call-and-response followed by a rousing handclap .
Then we talk about where people will be walking that day and often listen to one of the canvassers ’ personal stories , explaining why he or she is committed to this campaign .
Next , we take a look at the day ’ s forecast for heat and air quality as vast parts of the West Coast burn , while smoke and ash travel enormous distances .
Temperatures here were in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hovering around 115 degrees in Las Vegas ) .
And the air ?
Let ’ s just say that there have been days when I ’ ve wished breathing were optional .
Climate-change activists rightly point out that “ there ’ s no Planet B ” for the human race , but some days it seems as if our canvassers are already working on a fiery Planet A that is rapidly becoming unlivable .
California ’ s wildfires—including its first-ever “ gigafire ” —have consumed more than 4 million acres in the last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to record heights , and dumping a staggering amount of smoke into the Reno-Sparks basin .
Things are a little better at the moment , but for weeks I couldn ’ t see the desert mountains that surround the area .
Some days I couldn ’ t even make out the Grand Sierra Reno casino , a quarter-mile from the highway on which I drive to work each morning .
For our canvassers—almost every one a laid-off waiter , bartender , hotel housekeeper , or casino worker—the climate emergency and the Covid-19 pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don their N95 masks to walk the streets of Reno .
It ’ s the same for the voters they meet at their doors .
Each evening , canvassers report ( on Zoom , of course ) what those voters are saying and , for the first time I can remember , they are now talking about the climate .
They ’ re angry at a president who pulled the United States out of the Paris climate accord and they ’ re scared about what a potentially searing future holds for their children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ read Joe Biden ’ s position on clean energy and environmental justice , but they know that Donald Trump has no such plan .
In his classic book Guns , Germs , and Steel , Jared Diamond suggested that the three variables in his title helped in large part to explain how European societies and the United States came to control much of the planet in the 20th century .
As it happens , our door-to-door canvassers confront a similar triad of obstacles right here in Reno ( if you replace that final @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
Nevada is an open-carry state and gun ownership is common here .
It ’ s not unusual to see someone walking around a supermarket with a holstered pistol on his hip .
A 2015 state law ended most gun registration requirements and another allows people visiting from elsewhere to buy rifles without a permit .
So gun sightings are everyday events .
Still , it can be startling , if you ’ re not used to it , to have a voter answer the door with a pistol all too visible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ occasionally , our canvassers have even watched those guns leave their holsters when the person at the door realizes why they ’ re there ( which is when the campaign gets the police involved ) .
Canvassers are trained to observe very clear protocols , including immediately leaving an area if they experience any kind of verbal or physical threat .
African American and Latinx canvassers who ’ ve campaigned before in Reno say that in 2020 Trump supporters seem even more emboldened than in the past to shout racist insults at them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ called the police on our folks , essentially accusing them of canvassing-while-Black-or-brown .
Two days before I wrote this piece , the police pulled over one young Latino door-knocker because neighbors had called to complain that he was walking up and down the street waving a gun .
( The “ gun ” in question was undoubtedly the electronic tablet he was carrying to record the results of conversations with voters . )
The officer apologized .
Which reminds me of another apology offered recently .
A woman approached an African American canvasser @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world he was doing in her neighborhood .
On learning his mission , she offered an apology as insulting as her original question .
“ We ’ re not used to seeing people like you around here , ” she explained .
Until the pandemic , my partner and I had planned to work together with UNITE-HERE !
in Reno during this election , as we did in 2018 .
But she ’ s five years older than I am , and her history of pneumonia means that catching Covid-19 could be especially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s stayed in San Francisco , helping out the union ’ s national phone bank effort instead .
In fact , we didn ’ t really expect that there would be a ground campaign this year , given the difficulties presented by the novel coronavirus .
But the union was determined to eke out that small but genuine addition to the vote that a field campaign can produce .
So they put in place stringent health protocols for all of us : masks and a minimum of six feet of distance between everyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bars , restaurants , or casinos , including during off hours ; temperature checks for everyone entering the office ; and the immediate reporting of any potential Covid-19 symptoms to our health and safety officer .
Before the union rented blocks of rooms at two extended-stay hotels , our head of operations checked their mask protocols for employees and guests and examined their ventilation systems to make sure that the air conditioners vented directly outdoors and not into a common air system for the whole building .
To date , not one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a record we intend to maintain as we add another 17 full-timers to our team next week .
One other feature of our coronavirus protocol : We don ’ t talk to any voter who won ’ t put on a mask .
I was skeptical that canvassers would be able to get voters to mask up , even with the individually wrapped surgical masks we ’ re offering anyone who doesn ’ t have one on or handy .
However , it turns out that , in this bizarre election year , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vent their feelings and be heard .
So many of the people we ’ re canvassing have suffered so much this year that they ’ re surprised and pleased when someone shows up at their door wondering how they ’ re doing .
And the answer to that question for so many potential voters is not well—with jobs lost , housing threatened , children struggling with online school , and hunger pangs an increasingly everyday part of life .
So yes , a surprising number of people , either already masked or quite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to talk to us about an election that they generally see as the most important of their lifetime .
And did I mention that it ’ s been smoky here ?
It can make your eyes water , your throat burn , and the urge to cough overwhelm you .
In fact , the symptoms of smoke exposure are eerily similar to the ones for Covid-19 .
More than one smoke-affected canvasser has spent at least five days isolated in a hotel room , waiting for negative coronavirus test results .
The White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his administration ’ s testing record : “ We do tremendous testing .
We have the best testing in the world.
” Washoe County health officials are doing what they can , but if this is the best in the world , then the world is in worse shape than we thought .
So why , given the genuine risk and obstacles they face , do UNITE-HERE !
’ s canvassers knock on doors six days a week to elect Joe Biden and Kamala Harris ?
Their answers are a perfect embodiment of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political.
” Every one of them has a story about why she or he is here .
More than one grew up homeless and never want another child to live that way .
One is a DACA recipient who knows that a reelected Donald Trump will continue his crusade to end that amnesty for undocumented people brought to the United States as children .
Through their participation in union activism , many have come to understand that workers really can beat the boss when they organize—and Trump , they say , is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of political campaigning , the union ’ s leaders have learned that voters may think about issues , but they ’ re moved to vote by what they feel about them .
The goal of every conversation at those doors right now is to make a brief but profound personal connection with the voter , to get each of them to feel just how important it is to vote this year .
Canvassers do this by asking how a voter is doing in these difficult times and listening—genuinely listening—and responding to whatever answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by being vulnerable enough to share the personal stories that lie behind their presence at the voter ’ s front door .
One canvasser lost his home at the age of 7 , when his parents separated .
He and his mother ended up staying in shelters and camping for months in a garden shed on a friend ’ s property .
One day recently , he knocked on a door and found a Trump supporter on the other side of it .
He noticed a shed near the house , pointed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ living in something similar as a child .
That Trumpster started to cry .
He began talking about how he ’ d had just the same experience and the way , as a teenager , he ’ d had to hold his family together when his heroin-addicted parents couldn ’ t cope .
He ’ d never talked to any of his present-day friends about how he grew up and , in the course of that conversation , came to agree with our canvasser that Donald Trump wasn ’ t likely to improve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was , he said , changing his vote to Biden right then and there .
( And that canvasser will be back to make sure he actually votes . )
Harvard University Professor Marshall Ganz pioneered the “ public narrative , ” the practice of organizing by storytelling .
It ’ s found at the heart of many organizing efforts these days .
The 2008 Obama campaign , for example , trained thousands of volunteers to tell their stories to potential voters .
The It Gets Better Project has collected more than 50,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ LGBTQ youth who might be considering suicide or other kinds of self-harm—assuring them that their own lives did , indeed , get better .
Being the sort of political junkie who devours the news daily , I was skeptical about the power of this approach , though I probably shouldn ’ t have been .
After all , how many times did I ask my mother or father to “ tell me a story ” when I was a kid ?
What are our lives but stories ?
Human beings are narrative animals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the issues we may sometimes be , we still live through stories .
Data can give me information on issues I care about , but it can ’ t tell me what issues I should care about .
In the end , I ’ m concerned about racial and gender justice as well as the climate emergency because of the way each of them affects people and other creatures with whom I feel connected .
A Campaign Within a Campaign Perhaps the most inspiring aspect of UNITE-HERE !
’ s electoral campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ developing every canvasser ’ s leadership skills .
The goal is more than winning what ’ s undoubtedly the most important election of our lifetime .
It ’ s also to send back to every hotel , restaurant , casino , and airport catering service leaders who can continue to organize and advocate for their working-class sisters and brothers .
This means implementing an individual development plan for each canvasser .
Team leaders work with all of them to hone their stories into tools that can be used in an honest and generous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters .
They help those canvassers think about what else they want to learn to do , while developing opportunities for them to master technical tools like computer spreadsheets and databases .
There ’ s a special emphasis on offering such opportunities to women and people of color who make up the vast majority of the union ’ s membership .
Precious hours of campaign time are also devoted to workshops on how to understand and confront systemic racism and combat sexual harassment , subjects President Trump is acquainted with in the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its success depends as much on fostering a culture of respect as on the hard-nosed negotiating it ’ s also famous for .
After months of pandemic lockdown and almost four years of what has objectively been the worst , most corrupt , most incompetent , and possibly even most destructive presidency in the nation ’ s history , it ’ s a relief to be able to do something useful again .
And sentimental as it may sound , it ’ s an honor to be able to do it with this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Sí , se puede .
Yes , we can .

EDITOR’S NOTE: This article originally appeared at TomDispatch.com. To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
“Look, folks, the air quality is in the red zone today. The EPA says that means people with lung or heart issues should avoid prolonged activity outdoors.”
That was J.R. de Vera, one of two directors of UNITE-HERE!’s independent expenditure campaign to elect Biden and Harris in Reno, Nev. UNITE-HERE! is a union representing 300,000 workers in the hospitality industry—that world of hotels and bars, restaurants and caterers. Ninety percent of its members are now laid off because of Donald Trump’s bungling of the Covid-19 pandemic and many are glad for the chance to help get him out of the White House.
“So some of you will want to stay in your hotel rooms and make phone calls today,” JR continues. Fifty faces fall in the 50 little Zoom boxes on my laptop screen. Canvassers would much rather be talking to voters at their doors than calling them on a phone bank. Still, here in the burning, smoking West, the union is as committed to its own people’s health and safety as it is to dragging Trump out of office. So, for many of them, phone calls it will be.
My own job doesn’t change much from day to day. Though I live in San Francisco, I’ve come to Reno to do back-room logistics work in the union campaign’s cavernous warehouse of an office: ordering supplies, processing reimbursements, and occasionally helping the data team make maps of the areas our canvassers will walk.
Our field campaign is just one of several the union is running in key states. We’re also in Arizona and Florida and, only last week, we began door-to-door canvassing in Philadelphia. Social media, TV ads, bulk mail, and phone calls are all crucial elements in any modern electoral campaign, but none of them is a substitute for face-to-face conversations with voters.
We’ve been in Reno since early August, building what was, until last week, the only field campaign in the state supporting Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. (Just recently, our success in campaigning safely has encouraged the Democratic Party to start its own ground game here and elsewhere.) We know exactly how many doors we have to knock on, how many Biden voters we have to identify, how many of them we have to convince to make a concrete voting plan, and how many we have to get out to vote during Nevada’s two-week early voting period to win here. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection How the “Brooks Brothers Riot” Set the Stage for Insurrection Chris Lehmann
We’re running a much larger campaign in Clark County, where close to three-quarters of Nevada’s population lives (mostly in Las Vegas). Washoe County, home of the twin cities of Reno and Sparks, is the next-largest population center, with 16 percent of Nevadans. The remaining 14 counties, collectively known as “the Rurals,” account for the rest. Washoe and Clark are barely blue; the Rurals, decidedly red. Current Issue View our current issue
In 2018, UNITE-HERE!’s ground campaign helped ensure that Jacky Rosen would flip a previously Republican Senate seat, and we helped elect Democrat Steve Sisolak as governor. He’s proved a valuable union ally, signing the Adolfo Fernandez Act, a first-in-the-nation law protecting workers and businesses in Nevada from the worst effects of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Defying a threatened Trump campaign lawsuit (later dismissed by a judge), Sisolak also signed an election reform bill that allows every active Nevada voter to receive a mail-in ballot. Largely as a result of the union’s work in 2018, this state now boasts an all-female Democratic senatorial delegation, a Democratic governor, and a female and Democratic majority in the state legislature. Elections, as pundits of all stripes have been known to say, have consequences.
Door-to-Door on Planet A
“¿Se puede, o no se puede?”
“¡Sí, se puede!”
(“Can we do it?” “Yes, we can!”)
Each morning’s online canvass dispatch meeting starts with that call-and-response followed by a rousing handclap. Then we talk about where people will be walking that day and often listen to one of the canvassers’ personal stories, explaining why he or she is committed to this campaign. Next, we take a look at the day’s forecast for heat and air quality as vast parts of the West Coast burn, while smoke and ash travel enormous distances. Temperatures here were in the low 100s in August (often hovering around 115 degrees in Las Vegas). And the air? Let’s just say that there have been days when I’ve wished breathing were optional.
Climate-change activists rightly point out that “there’s no Planet B” for the human race, but some days it seems as if our canvassers are already working on a fiery Planet A that is rapidly becoming unlivable. California’s wildfires—including its first-ever “gigafire”—have consumed more than 4 million acres in the last two months, sending plumes of ash to record heights, and dumping a staggering amount of smoke into the Reno-Sparks basin. Things are a little better at the moment, but for weeks I couldn’t see the desert mountains that surround the area. Some days I couldn’t even make out the Grand Sierra Reno casino, a quarter-mile from the highway on which I drive to work each morning.
For our canvassers—almost every one a laid-off waiter, bartender, hotel housekeeper, or casino worker—the climate emergency and the Covid-19 pandemic are literally in their faces as they don their N95 masks to walk the streets of Reno. It’s the same for the voters they meet at their doors. Each evening, canvassers report (on Zoom, of course) what those voters are saying and, for the first time I can remember, they are now talking about the climate. They’re angry at a president who pulled the United States out of the Paris climate accord and they’re scared about what a potentially searing future holds for their children and grandchildren. They may not have read Joe Biden’s position on clean energy and environmental justice, but they know that Donald Trump has no such plan.
Braving Guns, Germs, and Smoke
In his classic book Guns, Germs, and Steel, Jared Diamond suggested that the three variables in his title helped in large part to explain how European societies and the United States came to control much of the planet in the 20th century. As it happens, our door-to-door canvassers confront a similar triad of obstacles right here in Reno (if you replace that final “steel” with “smoke”).
Guns and other threats
Nevada is an open-carry state and gun ownership is common here. It’s not unusual to see someone walking around a supermarket with a holstered pistol on his hip. A 2015 state law ended most gun registration requirements and another allows people visiting from elsewhere to buy rifles without a permit. So gun sightings are everyday events.
Still, it can be startling, if you’re not used to it, to have a voter answer the door with a pistol all too visible, even if securely holstered. And occasionally, our canvassers have even watched those guns leave their holsters when the person at the door realizes why they’re there (which is when the campaign gets the police involved). Canvassers are trained to observe very clear protocols, including immediately leaving an area if they experience any kind of verbal or physical threat.
African American and Latinx canvassers who’ve campaigned before in Reno say that in 2020 Trump supporters seem even more emboldened than in the past to shout racist insults at them. More than once, neighbors have called the police on our folks, essentially accusing them of canvassing-while-Black-or-brown. Two days before I wrote this piece, the police pulled over one young Latino door-knocker because neighbors had called to complain that he was walking up and down the street waving a gun. (The “gun” in question was undoubtedly the electronic tablet he was carrying to record the results of conversations with voters.) The officer apologized.
Which reminds me of another apology offered recently. A woman approached an African American canvasser, demanding to know what in the world he was doing in her neighborhood. On learning his mission, she offered an apology as insulting as her original question. “We’re not used to seeing people like you around here,” she explained.
Germs
Until the pandemic, my partner and I had planned to work together with UNITE-HERE! in Reno during this election, as we did in 2018. But she’s five years older than I am, and her history of pneumonia means that catching Covid-19 could be especially devastating for her. So she’s stayed in San Francisco, helping out the union’s national phone bank effort instead.
In fact, we didn’t really expect that there would be a ground campaign this year, given the difficulties presented by the novel coronavirus. But the union was determined to eke out that small but genuine addition to the vote that a field campaign can produce. So they put in place stringent health protocols for all of us: masks and a minimum of six feet of distance between everyone at all times; no visits to bars, restaurants, or casinos, including during off hours; temperature checks for everyone entering the office; and the immediate reporting of any potential Covid-19 symptoms to our health and safety officer. Before the union rented blocks of rooms at two extended-stay hotels, our head of operations checked their mask protocols for employees and guests and examined their ventilation systems to make sure that the air conditioners vented directly outdoors and not into a common air system for the whole building.
To date, not one of our 57 canvassers has tested positive, a record we intend to maintain as we add another 17 full-timers to our team next week.
One other feature of our coronavirus protocol: We don’t talk to any voter who won’t put on a mask. I was skeptical that canvassers would be able to get voters to mask up, even with the individually wrapped surgical masks we’re offering anyone who doesn’t have one on or handy. However, it turns out that, in this bizarre election year, people are eager to talk, to vent their feelings and be heard. So many of the people we’re canvassing have suffered so much this year that they’re surprised and pleased when someone shows up at their door wondering how they’re doing.
And the answer to that question for so many potential voters is not well—with jobs lost, housing threatened, children struggling with online school, and hunger pangs an increasingly everyday part of life. So yes, a surprising number of people, either already masked or quite willing to put one on, want to talk to us about an election that they generally see as the most important of their lifetime.
Smoke
And did I mention that it’s been smoky here? It can make your eyes water, your throat burn, and the urge to cough overwhelm you. In fact, the symptoms of smoke exposure are eerily similar to the ones for Covid-19. More than one smoke-affected canvasser has spent at least five days isolated in a hotel room, waiting for negative coronavirus test results.
The White House website proudly quotes the president on his administration’s testing record: “We do tremendous testing. We have the best testing in the world.” Washoe County health officials are doing what they can, but if this is the best in the world, then the world is in worse shape than we thought.
The Power of a Personal Story
So why, given the genuine risk and obstacles they face, do UNITE-HERE!’s canvassers knock on doors six days a week to elect Joe Biden and Kamala Harris? Their answers are a perfect embodiment of the feminist dictum “the personal is political.” Every one of them has a story about why she or he is here. More than one grew up homeless and never want another child to live that way. One is a DACA recipient who knows that a reelected Donald Trump will continue his crusade to end that amnesty for undocumented people brought to the United States as children. Through their participation in union activism, many have come to understand that workers really can beat the boss when they organize—and Trump, they say, is the biggest boss of all.
Through years of political campaigning, the union’s leaders have learned that voters may think about issues, but they’re moved to vote by what they feel about them. The goal of every conversation at those doors right now is to make a brief but profound personal connection with the voter, to get each of them to feel just how important it is to vote this year. Canvassers do this by asking how a voter is doing in these difficult times and listening—genuinely listening—and responding to whatever answer they get. And they do it by being vulnerable enough to share the personal stories that lie behind their presence at the voter’s front door.
One canvasser lost his home at the age of 7, when his parents separated. He and his mother ended up staying in shelters and camping for months in a garden shed on a friend’s property. One day recently, he knocked on a door and found a Trump supporter on the other side of it. He noticed a shed near the house, pointed to it, and told the man about living in something similar as a child. That Trumpster started to cry. He began talking about how he’d had just the same experience and the way, as a teenager, he’d had to hold his family together when his heroin-addicted parents couldn’t cope. He’d never talked to any of his present-day friends about how he grew up and, in the course of that conversation, came to agree with our canvasser that Donald Trump wasn’t likely to improve life for people like them. He was, he said, changing his vote to Biden right then and there. (And that canvasser will be back to make sure he actually votes.)
Harvard University Professor Marshall Ganz pioneered the “public narrative,” the practice of organizing by storytelling. It’s found at the heart of many organizing efforts these days. The 2008 Obama campaign, for example, trained thousands of volunteers to tell their stories to potential voters. The It Gets Better Project has collected more than 50,000 personal messages from older queer people to LGBTQ youth who might be considering suicide or other kinds of self-harm—assuring them that their own lives did, indeed, get better.
Being the sort of political junkie who devours the news daily, I was skeptical about the power of this approach, though I probably shouldn’t have been. After all, how many times did I ask my mother or father to “tell me a story” when I was a kid? What are our lives but stories? Human beings are narrative animals and, however rational, however versed in the issues we may sometimes be, we still live through stories.
Data can give me information on issues I care about, but it can’t tell me what issues I should care about. In the end, I’m concerned about racial and gender justice as well as the climate emergency because of the way each of them affects people and other creatures with whom I feel connected.
A Campaign Within a Campaign
Perhaps the most inspiring aspect of UNITE-HERE!’s electoral campaign is the union’s commitment to developing every canvasser’s leadership skills. The goal is more than winning what’s undoubtedly the most important election of our lifetime. It’s also to send back to every hotel, restaurant, casino, and airport catering service leaders who can continue to organize and advocate for their working-class sisters and brothers. This means implementing an individual development plan for each canvasser.
Team leaders work with all of them to hone their stories into tools that can be used in an honest and generous way to create a genuine connection with voters. They help those canvassers think about what else they want to learn to do, while developing opportunities for them to master technical tools like computer spreadsheets and databases.
There’s a special emphasis on offering such opportunities to women and people of color who make up the vast majority of the union’s membership. Precious hours of campaign time are also devoted to workshops on how to understand and confront systemic racism and combat sexual harassment, subjects President Trump is acquainted with in the most repulsively personal way. The union believes its success depends as much on fostering a culture of respect as on the hard-nosed negotiating it’s also famous for.
After months of pandemic lockdown and almost four years of what has objectively been the worst, most corrupt, most incompetent, and possibly even most destructive presidency in the nation’s history, it’s a relief to be able to do something useful again. And sentimental as it may sound, it’s an honor to be able to do it with this particular group of brave and committed people. Sí, se puede. Yes, we can.