They were celebrating at the White House Saturday after the confirmation of Judge Bret Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.  Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Republican members of Congress will tout this as a huge victory for conservatives.  And millions of President Trump’s supporters, particularly evangelicals, will now be salivating for the end of constitutionally protected abortions and gay marriage.

But for the rest of us — hopefully the majority of Americans — Kavanaugh’s confirmation means our democracy has been seriously undermined.  Republicans will control all three branches of government if Democrats don’t take the House and/or Senate in November and the separation of powers as designed by the Founders in the Constitution won’t exist.

Republicans railed against Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee for attempting to derail Kavanaugh’s confirmation.  But remember, McConnell aggressively blocked President Obama’s appointments to the federal bench and he refused to even hold hearings in 2016 when Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court.  The many obstructive actions taken by McConnell during Obama’s tenure poisoned the atmosphere in the Senate.

So, it’s not surprising that the Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings were filled with drama highlighted by partisan maneuvering and heated rhetoric.  It all started with McConnell’s rush to judgement on filling the vacancy left when Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement in June.  He was desperate to get Kavanaugh seated on the Court before the end of September.  McConnell no doubt thought it would improve Republican chances in the midterm elections and he probably feared they might lose control of the Senate in November.

Most readers know the chronology of Kavanaugh’s confirmation process so I won’t repeat it in detail here.  But McConnell’s plan seemed to be working for the first few weeks and he was ready to schedule a vote after Democrats were blocked from a comprehensive review of Kavanaugh’s extensive paper trail.  Then the bombshell letter from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford surfaced, claiming that a drunken Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her when both were in high school in the early 1980s.

Kavanaugh gave an unprecedented interview on Fox News to plead his case.  Some friends and acquaintances signed letters that were supportive of the judge but others wrote articles and gave interviews that seriously contradicted Kavanaugh’s drinking denials.  After Ford’s emotional, compelling and credible testimony, many observers began to wonder how Kavanaugh could recover when it was his turn to testify.

Reports indicate that Kavanaugh was told to show how he really felt about the hearing process and it was very revealing.  Reading from his own written statement he said:

“This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record, revenge on behalf of the Clintons, and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups,” He almost snarled “This is a circus.”

After the backlash to this highly political defense, Kavanaugh wrote an exculpatory op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, again, unprecedented for a nominee.  Even so, a letter opposing his confirmation was signed by 2,400 law professors and former Justice John Paul Stevens — a Gerald Ford nominee — said Kavanaugh was not qualified to serve on the Court.  But this opposition didn’t matter to McConnell and his Republican caucus.

The FBI supplemental background investigation that was forced by Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Az.) was depicted as sham by many, no doubt restricted by the White House.  Kavanaugh and Ford were not interviewed.  Numerous persons with knowledge of Kavanaugh’s high school and college escapades attempted to contact the FBI but were rebuffed.  So, Republicans, including Flake, called this incomplete FBI report “thorough” and ignored all other evidence.

Personally, I believe Dr. Ford was telling the truth.  And it is entirely possible that Kavanaugh has no memory of the party or the attack on Ford.  Perhaps the night’s events left no lasting impression on him; heavy, possibly binge, drinking can do that.

It seems clear from the facts and testimony, however, that Kavanaugh did not tell the truth about his past and his drinking.  It is also obvious to me that his written and spoken statements show a lack of judicial temperament and a strong conservative bias that should disqualify him to serve on any court.

Kavanaugh was confirmed by the narrowest margin of any justice since 1881 — 50 to 48.  Throughout his tenure there will be as asterisk by his name and his opinions will be dissected for political bias.  Robert Post, the former dean of Yale Law School where Kavanaugh graduated in 1990, said in an op-ed that Kavanaugh will “undermine the [Supreme Court’s] claim to legitimacy,” calling his confirmation “an American tragedy.”

This fiasco by Republicans could scar the Senate for decades.  The FBI’s reputation has suffered.  And Kavanaugh’s highly partisan, unsubstantiated accusations of a “political hit” will further divide this nation.  But the biggest losers are the millions of women who are sexually assaulted and fear being ridiculed like Dr. Ford was for speaking out.

If there is any glimmer of hope for the future of the Court and its independence it is Chief Justice John Roberts.  He could – I say could – become the swing vote in order to preserve his legacy as Chief Justice and protect the reputation of this critically important institution.  We shall see.

After all of the books about President Donald Trump – the latest being Bob Woodward’s “Fear” – is there any doubt that the man in the Oval Office is unfit?  We don’t need $30 books, however, to form a reasonable conclusion that Trump has no business running this country; he proves it almost every day with his tweets.  No doubt Trump is weakening our democracy but I believe there is a much more ominous threat – the conservative-controlled Supreme Court.

Warren Burger was Chief Justice when Roe v. Wade was decided and he was still presiding when I was sworn in to practice before this prestigious body.  It was simply a box checked on my resume; I never argued a case before the Court nor planned to.  Still, it was a sobering experience.

The session began promptly at 10:00 AM with the traditional chant by the Court’s Marshal (bailiff).  This short recitation is repeated each day the Court is in session and ends with “God save the United States and this Honorable Court!”  Then the curtain behind the elevated bench opened and the nine robed justices stepped out in unison to take their seats.  It’s a very formal ceremony and quite intimidating for lawyers waiting to argue their cases.  For this is the most powerful institution in the nation — the court of last resort.

No doubt that’s why Republicans have placed such great emphasis on filling Supreme Court vacancies over the years.  And if Judge Bret Kavanaugh — the current nominee — is confirmed, conservatives will have the most rock-solid, five-member majority on the Court in the past 30 years.

Many Republicans, particularly evangelical Christians, have worked tirelessly to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that provides women with a constitutional right to an abortion in the United States.  Recent polls indicate that their efforts conflict with a majority of Americans that don’t want this landmark decision eradicated.  It’s an emotional, polarizing issue.

Four Republican-appointed justices on the Court are members of the Federalist Society, an elitist organization of pro-life conservatives and libertarians whose members believe the Constitution should be interpreted as written.  Kavanaugh would make it five.  They are all “originalists” — judges who attempt to divine how the Founders intended the Constitution to be interpreted and make their decisions accordingly.  So, I believe there’s a good chance Roe v. Wade will go down.

But I don’t think that’s the worst this Court can do.  Just look at some of the decisions conservative justices have made during the past 20 years.  In the 2010 Citizens United case, they took a narrow issue involving a 2008 video critical of former First Lady Hillary Clinton and issued an unnecessarily broad opinion.   The Court essentially held that corporations and unions are people under the Constitution’s First Amendment and that money is speech.  As a result, wealthy, even anonymous, special interests can unduly influence elections with unlimited amounts of money.

In 2013 the conservative majority struck down a key section of the Voting Rights Act that required certain states to get advanced federal approval for changes to voting laws.  The involved states, including Texas, North Carolina and others that were controlled by Republicans, immediately enacted or implemented strict voter ID laws that were specifically designed to make it harder for those who typically vote for Democrats to cast ballots.   These laws went far beyond simply showing a picture ID to vote.  They shortened early voting days, restricted voter registration and much more.

But the future could be even more problematic.  Republican’s continue to attack the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) and Kavanaugh’s vote may be all they need to scuttle it.   Medicare, Medicaid and other social safety net programs could also be in jeopardy from GOP attacks.

Legal issues involving the president are sure to come before the Court.  If Kavanaugh is confirmed, we can almost be certain that his decisions will favor Trump.  Can he be subpoenaed to testify to a grand jury?  Can he be indicted as a sitting president for the crimes he has likely committed?  Should he even be the subject of an investigation?  Kavanaugh would probably decide: No!

Republicans have focused on appointing conservative federal judges for decades and Trump could appoint hundreds more.  I fear that in time these jurists will rubber stamp conservative policies on government regulations, climate change, religion, health care and immigration while erecting roadblocks for progressive legislation.  In fact, that is exactly what Republicans want.

Let me be clear; liberal justices should not dominate the agenda either.  The Court should be balanced and definitely nonpartisan.  And the majority should not be wedded to an originalist ideology that applies 18th century thinking to 21st century issues.

Trump has divided this nation like no other president in modern history.  If this continues, progressive legislation passed by a Democratic controlled Congress in the future will likely face unrelenting conservative challenges.  Likewise, liberals will challenge conservative legislation and policies.  In this scenario, the Court could actually become the de facto government, virtually dictating what the executive branch can do and what Congress can legislate.  I believe Kavanaugh’s confirmation would be a step in this direction.

Hopefully, the polarization of the Trump era will subside and voters will unite under centrist, progressive leadership.  But the conservative Court could hold sway for an entire generation — and there’s not much we citizens can do about it.

The two-room country schoolhouse where I learned to read and write was demolished decades ago and the site is now a vacant, weed-covered lot that speaks not a word of its past.  Yet, it’s all very clear in my memory.  I can picture the dirty-white, clapboard building – the two privies near the cornfield out back — the swings and the teetertotters on the playground where my classmates and I frolicked during recess — and the hand pump on the well near the porch that was our only source of water.

Our teacher, Mrs. Mershon, took a picture of her 30 students in grades K-3 and put it in a small picture album as a gift for her third-grade graduating class.  Many of these students were products of a hardscrabble existence in the rural Midwest.  I was among the more fortunate ones.

My friend Larry was a victim of the endemic poverty in this area, a small kid, kind of frail looking, but quite smart.  He could have been a teacher or a doctor — but I have been unable to find that he even graduated high school.

One summer day following second grade I was playing at Larry’s home around noon.  His mother invited me to have lunch with Larry and her two other children.  She served a piece of bread flavored with melted bacon grease, a small amount of home fried potatoes and a like amount of creamed corn.  I was not accustomed to such fare and when I left most of it on my plate, the siblings fought over it.

These memories all came rushing back as I was reading an article about the 2018 farm bill that recently passed in the Republican-controlled House.  This five-year, $867 billion legislation is one of the most important actions Congress takes and it is usually a bipartisan process.  But House conservatives frustrated the negotiations this year by including provisions to revise the eligibility formulas for the 42 million recipients of food stamps and adding work requirements for that benefit.

The nonpartisan research firm, Mathematica, used data from the Agriculture Department’s Food and Nutrition Service to determine that almost two million low-income Americans — including 469,000 households with young children — would be purged from the program due to the changed qualification criteria.  A separate analysis by the Congressional Budget Office found that an additional 1.2 million would lose food stamp benefits due to the work requirements.

Mathematica also found that seniors in 677,000 households would lose benefits, along with one in 10 people with a disability, another 214,000 households.  The elderly, the disabled and children comprise two-thirds of food stamp beneficiaries.

As the House was narrowly passing its farm bill, the Agriculture Department announced that 15 million households reported being “food insecure” in 2017.  This means they struggled to put adequate food on the table.  We don’t know how many children are in these families but no doubt there are millions.

Like most Americans, I can’t stand the thought of a child going most days without adequate nourishment or going to bed hungry.  My wife and I have frequently joined our neighbors, conservative and liberal alike, in providing foodstuffs for backpack programs.  They provide needy school kids with supplemental provisions for the weekends when school lunches aren’t provided.  Hungry children have difficulty concentrating on their studies and paying attention in class.  As a result, they fall behind and many don’t grow up to be productive adults.

Now the House and the Senate are negotiating over their two competing farm bills.  Both provide billions in subsidies for agricultural states that have been hit hard by President Trump’s tariffs and falling commodity prices — the less onerous Senate bill is expected to prevail.  But Trump has called for the final passage of the House version of the legislation, particularly the section on work requirements.  His political base abhors government “welfare,” and they are his main priority.

The food stamp program didn’t exist when I was a child but I’m sure many of my elementary school families would have easily qualified for it, along with Medicaid and other government programs.  These benefits might have helped my friend Larry realize his full potential.  But all I can do is speculate and think – what a waste if he didn’t.

Conservatives constantly rail about the excesses and fraud in government safety net programs and seek arbitrary ways to purge beneficiaries from the rolls.  Sure, they may eliminate some adults who shouldn’t qualify for food stamps and Medicaid.  But what about the tens of thousands of children who lose critically needed benefits in the process?

I keep asking myself, what motivates Republican politicians like Freedom Caucus radicals Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), to name a few.  They eagerly give trillions in tax cuts to the wealthy and throw money at defense contractors that squander tens of billions on expensive weapons systems.  Yet, they want to cut funding for food stamps to save a few billion.  Are they bought and paid for by greedy plutocrats — or is it just the result of their ultra-conservative mindset?

To me it’s so obvious — children are our future.  We should do everything we can to enable them to grow up mentally and physically strong and healthy.  We should help them to become winners in our society – instead of losers to right-wing ideology.

No, it doesn’t start with “once upon a time” or “in the beginning.”   The opening words are, “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. —- They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.”  Yes, it starts with a candidate for president of the United States declaring that his campaign will be based on bigotry and prejudice.  It starts –of course — with Donald J. Trump.   And in him the right-wing has found a leader who they believe will turn their intolerance into policy and their desire for political supremacy into reality.

But there’s a long prologue to this this saga.  And I believe it began with the presidency of Ronald Reagan in 1981 and the concurrent budding careers of former Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).  I disagree with many things Reagan did as president but I think he actually cared about America, the “shining city upon a hill” as he called it. Gingrich, McConnell and many of their colleagues are totally obsessed with power and Republican Party dominance.

Reagan is responsible for a tax cutting fervor in the GOP that has morphed into a pledge by most members to never raise taxes on anything, ever.  This is a pernicious policy, particularly when Republicans are driven to continually cut taxes, mainly for the wealthy.  Although they claim that lower taxes will grow the economy, I believe their objective is to cause ever-increasing federal deficits and use the red ink as an excuse to severely slash funding for the social safety net.

Reagan’s policies didn’t create an economic miracle as his devotees claim.  But they dramatically increased the share of the nation’s wealth held by the richest Americans. Union membership began to shrink during Reagan’s tenure — declining from 20 percent of the workforce in 1983 to less than 11 percent today – and along with it the middleclass.  This shift of economic power gave wealthy Republican supporters tremendous political clout and significantly weakened the voice of “we the people” in elections.

Gingrich was responsible for guiding the GOP on a nasty turn to the right when he became Speaker of the House in 1995.  He eschewed compromise with Democrats, portrayed liberals as traitors — or worse — and supported his ultra-conservative clones in elections.  He has been credited with falsely tying the media to liberals and elitists in a conspiracy against the American public.  Gingrich created a toxic atmosphere in the House that I believe continues to cripple bipartisanship in that chamber to this day.

Gingrich resigned from the House “under a cloud” in 1999.  He was succeeded as Speaker by like-minded Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) who initiated the existing GOP policy to never bring any legislation to the floor for a vote unless it is supported by a majority of the Republican caucus.  Thus, many bills that have significant bipartisan support and legislation that is mainly supported by Democrats is stymied.  That’s not democracy.

McConnell deserves every anti-democratic charge that can be leveled against him.  He was mainly responsible for obstructing President Barack Obama for eight years, aided by a Tea Party sweep of the House in 2010.  He didn’t care that the nation was in the throws of the worst recession since the Great Depression; he weaponized the filibuster in the Senate to impede everything the president tried to do.

McConnell was not deterred by the hundreds of cases that were clogging the federal courts as he blocked Obama’s appointments to the federal bench.  Nor was he concerned when he prevented Obama from filling important executive branch positions.  And he infamously refused to even hold hearings on Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland for a position on the Supreme Court.  This and other actions by McConnell virtually destroyed comity in the Senate.

But what I find significant about McConnell’s strategy is his lack of concern about political reprisals for his totally partisan actions, including ramming Trump’s conservative appointments to the federal courts through the Senate.   He acts as if Democrats will never have an opportunity to do the same to Republicans.  In fact, McConnell’s tactics seem to anticipate long term, perhaps permanent, GOP control of the government.

Which brings me back to President Trump who has his own plan for dominating the government.  Like Gingrich and many other Republicans, he attacks the mainstream media, calling them the “enemy of the people.”  With very little pushback from spineless congressional Republicans, Trump assaults the Justice Department, the FBI and the rule of law.  He apparently thinks his word should be the law.

Clearly, Trump is on a route to a Trumpocracy with state-controlled media, an autocratic government and suppressed individual freedoms.  It’s a destination where the wealthy few will control the multitudes – where the average American will struggle to secure health care and prosperity — where freedom of religion is only for Christians — and where freedom of the press is only for right-wing media.  It is a path we do not want to take and a result we must avoid at all costs.

Yes, the saddest story ever told is about the GOP quest for political dominance, Donald Trump’s authoritarianism and the eventual demise of democracy in the United States.  But the last chapter is still just an outline.  So, voters can take a giant step in November toward ensuring that this tragic ending is never written.

The oath of office that government officials and lawyers must take has been on my mind a lot recently.  It’s a solemn pledge that I have taken at least seven times, as a government employee, as a soldier and as an attorney.  Oath takers swear to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”  To me, the pledge of alliance to the flag is similar – but not nearly as personal.  The oath is more than passive support; it connotes a duty to actively engage in its commitments. Every time I have raised my right hand and recited these words the effect is both physical and mental.  It does something to my spine – a chill perhaps — and my chest – a swelling with pride in being a citizen of this great nation, dedicated to its cause.

My most memorable oath was in the chambers of Oklahoma House of Representatives when I was sworn in for the first time as an attorney at law and an officer of the court.  Over the years since then it remained in the back of my mind as my obligation to uphold the rule of law and comply with the attorney’s code of ethics was tested by corporate clients.  And it is front and center in my brain today as I hear President Trump violate his oath of office almost daily and listen to the numerous Republican members of Congress who are being tested as a result.

With a few exceptions like Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), who is not up for reelection this year, and Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Az.), who will not seek reelection in 2018, Trump can attack the Justice Department and the FBI with precious little pushback from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) or his caucus.  The president can make racist comments, tell the most audacious lies, demean dedicated public servants and attempt to obstruct justice in plain sight.  These spineless politicians, many of whom have served in Congress for decades, shrug and make excuses or tell us about the good things Trump has done.  They have been cowed into submission by a tinhorn con man who has no thought of defending the Constitution.  In fact, he is attacking it and they are letting or abetting him.

Trump recently called the Justice Department “corrupt” and blamed President Obama’s administration.  He derides Attorney General Jeff Sessions constantly for rightly recusing himself from the Russia investigation.   And while Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) once promised to protect his old friend from Alabama, he now casually observes that Sessions will probably be fired after the midterm elections.  “The president’s entitled to an attorney general he has faith in,” Graham observed.  “Clearly, Attorney General Sessions doesn’t have the confidence of the president.”

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, tried to support Sessions not too long ago by saying his committee would not have time to confirm a new AG.  Now he says he will make time.  Both of these Senators know full well that Trump’s devious purpose in replacing Sessions is to stop special counsel Robert Mueller and the Russia investigation.  These cowardly sycophants — and most of their Republican colleges — are turning their backs on the Constitution to support their party and a corrupt administration.  They have no shame or honor.

Well, I believe it is too late to stop Mueller and his team.  There are too many dedicated public servants in Justice and the FBI — Democrats and Republicans alike — who won’t allow the evidence they have gathered to be swept under the rug.  They too have taken the oath and I am confident the majority will abide by it, maybe even Sessions.  A former Watergate prosecutor recently confirmed that copies of the evidence against President Richard Nixon and his co-conspirators had been taken to secure locations out of fear Nixon would shut the official investigation down.  I suspect the same is being done by Mueller’s team.

But thankfully the Russia investigation is not the only effort to reveal the truth about Trump’s nefarious dealings.  New York State officials are examining Michael Cohen’s guilty plea to determine if state laws were broken by Cohen, Trump or the Trump organization.  This could result in charges against members of Trump’s family or his company and the president can’t pardon violations of state law.

An even better opportunity to derail Trump’s assault on the Constitution will occur if the Democrats take control of the U.S. House next year.  They will have the oversight power that Republicans in that body weaponized against the Obama administration and former secretary of State Hillary Clinton for political purposes.  Except their investigations will uncover actual wrongdoing, including the many conflicts of interest and other corrupt activities involving Trump and his administration.  That’s why the upcoming election is so important, not just for Democrats but for the rule of law and the entire nation.

Yes, I have been thinking a lot about the oath of office lately and about the heroic men and women in our military and our law enforcement departments who – after taking it – gave their lives to achieve its objectives.  If I could remind every Republican in Congress of the oath they took to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, perhaps – just perhaps — some of them might decide that now is the time for them to be heroic too.

Early in my adult life I got up close and personal with Kentucky during Army basic training at Fort Knox.  For sure the eight weeks of hell I endured there left an impression on me but what stayed more in my memory were the Kentuckians who trained alongside me and who shared my barracks.

It all started at the reception center where we were being issued uniforms and gear.  There I met a dozen or so young men — boys really – who were National Guard trainees from the mountains in the eastern part of the state.  All were poorly educated and several could neither read nor write.  Most had difficulty coping with military discipline and it occurred to me that their opportunities for a decent life were limited.  I was shocked and saddened by their plight.

Over the years the Bluegrass State didn’t appear much on my radar screen until several years ago when I started writing a column for a local newspaper.  My research soon focused on the dire economic status of the nation’s poorest states, most of which were controlled by Republicans.  It puzzled me; why would they vote for the anti-union GOP that favors the wealthy, refuses to raise the minimum wage and opposes government programs for needy people?  Kentucky stood out as the obvious poster child for these states.

Kentucky is 87 percent white with a small black population and an insignificant number of Latinos.  Almost half of its residents are evangelical Christians, second highest percentage in the nation.  Walmart is its largest single employer.  And the coal industry, which gets lots of media attention, employs less than 6,300 workers.

By almost every measure, many Kentucky residents still struggle to be happy, healthy and prosperous — and the recent statistics dramatically indicate why:

• Around eight percent are on disability, the fourth highest in the nation.
• Thirty-three percent have preexisting health conditions, tied for third highest.
• Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) cover almost 30 percent of Kentucky’s residents and 62 percent of its children.
• Kentucky is among the 10 poorest states with a median income of under $47,000.
• Food stamps help feed 655,000 of its residents, one out of every seven.
• It is number two of the states most dependent on federal government assistance.
• Drug overdoses took 1,565 Kentucky lives in 2017, a 40 percent increase over five years.

In 2013, then-Democratic Governor Steven L. Beshear courageously tried to help his suffering constituents.  He established the state’s very successful Affordable Care Act health insurance exchange called Kynect.  And he expanded Medicaid in 2014, providing health care insurance to more than 500,000 additional Kentuckians.  But as they became more dependent on federal support, Kentucky voters inexplicably tacked harder to the right.

In 2014 they elected Tea Party Republican Matt Bevin as governor, a candidate who promised to abolish Kynect and cancel Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion.  He wanted to eliminate Obamacare, even though Kentucky would be the third state most damaged by its repeal.  Bevin managed to shutdown Kynect.  But when Medicaid expansion proved too popular for him to ax, he received federal permission as the first state to impose strict work requirements on Medicaid recipients.  Bevin threatens to dismantle the Medicaid expansion if the courts block this plan.

To make matters worse, Kentucky’s legislature recently passed a typical GOP flat-rate income tax of five percent for everyone.  This law nearly doubled the cigarette tax and imposed sales taxes on 17 additional services, including auto repair, pet care and recreational activities.  As a result, small companies and Kentucky residents with average incomes will face tax increases and higher earners will get tax cuts.

I feel sorry for today’s Kentuckians, just like I did for those in my basic training unit.  But they keep voting for Republicans like Senators Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul, politicians who promote policies that will hurt Kentucky families.  There’s not much I can do to help people who vote against their self-interest; so why should I give them a second thought?

The problem is, Kentucky and similar needy states like Oklahoma, Alabama, and Louisiana — to name a few — elect Republicans to Congress who control the legislative agenda.  These four are among 14 GOP-led states that have a combined population less than California’s almost 40 million.  But they have 28 members in the Senate – including Senate Majority Leader McConnell.  Consequently, wealthier, urban states are being dominated by Senators from poorer, rural states.

To control the U.S. House, GOP state legislatures have gerrymandered congressional districts to favor Republican candidates.  And they’ve enacted election laws that make it harder for typical Democrats to cast ballots.  This results in electing Republicans whose billionaire financial supporters advocate conservative policies that will make these states even poorer.

I truly believe that the United States does much better when all Americans are doing better.  But working people — whose wages are basically stagnant — received little financial help from the Republicans’ tax cut while the wealthy revel in its benefits.  To me, that’s not a sustainable economic situation for Kentucky or any other state.

So yes, I have good reason to care about Kentucky and not just because I’m concerned about its struggling citizens.  Kentucky is emblematic of the Republican states whose right-wing politicians want to impose their failing ideology on the entire nation.

All voters should keep Kentucky in mind come November.

The Republican tax cut and military buildup that President Trump frequently lauds is supercharging yearly federal budget deficits.  While this stimulus is giving a short-term boost to the economy, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has issued dire warnings about the $1+ trillion red ink it will create for each fiscal year from 2019 through 2028.  The CBO projects that even with a good economy and low unemployment, interest on the national debt alone will exceed defense spending in 2023.  So, what happens when the inevitable recession occurs?  Well, we’re almost sure to find out.

Trump – the self-proclaimed “king of debt” – apparently doesn’t have a problem with massive deficits.  He and congressional Republicans are already planning for “Tax Cuts 2.0”.  They want to add another $600 billion to the national debt by making the individual provisions of the 2017 tax reform that are scheduled to expire for 2026 permanent.  The CBO estimates that this legislation would increase the federal debt to near record levels by 2028 and further increase the likelihood of a fiscal crisis.  “The longer you [Congress] wait, the more draconian the measures have to be to fix the problem,” warned CBO Director Keith Hall.

The Republican-controlled Congress, however, doesn’t have a viable plan to significantly reduce deficit spending.  The Trump administration’s claim that the tax cuts will pay for themselves by greatly increasing economic activity is a cruel hoax that has no empirical basis or chance of succeeding.  Most Republicans have signed a pledge to never increase taxes on anything, ever.  So, the only GOP solution is to make the “draconian” cuts to the most expensive nondefense budget items, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.  Their plan has about the same probability of success as the tax cuts have of paying for themselves.  It simply won’t happen.  So, where does that leave deficit reduction?

Current federal health care spending is not sustainable.  The last of the baby boomers will be retiring during the coming decade, exacerbating the fiscal problems of both Medicare and Social Security.  The GOP has no plan for health care except to cut benefits; Democrats are moving closer to supporting a “Medicare for all” program.  Congress must find a way to legislate solutions to moderate health care costs and shore up the Social Security trust fund.  But these days such a compromise doesn’t seem remotely possible.

A border wall is not the infrastructure this nation needs.  It’s a waste of tax dollars for a political promise Trump must fulfill to satisfy his base.  And there aren’t many politicians claiming that a wall would be effective in preventing illegal immigrants from entering the U.S.  Meanwhile our highways, bridges, water systems, airports and other infrastructure are in bad need of repair and upgrades.  Having spent well over $1 trillion on tax reform, Trump and Republicans have no budget money left for this critical investment in our economy and our future.

Corporations and the wealthy are the big beneficiaries of the Trump/GOP tax reform.  Lower corporate tax rates have fueled stock buybacks of over $600 billion in the first half of this year. This exceeds the previous record for an entire year according to Morgan Stanley and is double what occurred in the first six months of 2017 according to Merrill Lynch.  Buybacks increase share prices and corporate executives are reaping huge gains selling their holdings in record numbers.  Meanwhile, wage increases for workers – which barely exceed inflation — are being consumed by higher prices of food, gas and medical care.

Republican politicians like to energize their base by attacking Democratic women, particularly the strong, intelligent ones.  Former secretary of State Hillary Clinton is no longer a significant political adversary but Trump and his supporters still want to “Lock her up.”   House Democratic Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is a perennial target of vicious conservative TV ads, along with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).  Beware misogynous guys.  There are a lot of fired up liberal ladies challenging you for office this year.

There is something fundamentally flawed about a person like Trump who lies constantly about everything.  He’s so insecure that he can’t take criticism of any kind and his attacks on the media as the “enemy of the people” are bizarre and frightening.  Trump’s campaign rallies are becoming more unhinged and devoid of veracity.  He seems to be living in an authoritarian alternative reality, which makes him unpredictable and a threat to democracy.  Many Republicans just shrug.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is succeeding in destabilizing and dividing the United States, aided by Trump and his GOP enablers in Congress.  For many of us who well remember the cold war and the Soviet Union’s quest for world dominance, this is simply incredible.  Those Republicans who cling to Trump like Velcro, excusing his abuses of power and near-treasonous catering to Putin, are weakening our national security.

Trump will not give up the presidency without a divisive fight, whether he is impeached or defeated at the ballot box.  He constantly lays the groundwork for challenging elections by calling them “rigged”.  He insists that there is massive voter fraud and ludicrously claims that Russians will be hacking to aid Democrats.  If he’s impeached, he will likely incite his base into an angry mob.  What will the GOP do then?

Putting the era of Trump/Republican control behind us will not be easy or smooth but let’s take the first step in November.

President Trump lies incessantly, savages the rule of law and weakens our institutions of democracy.  The Republican-controlled Congress looks the other way and does nothing to stop him.  What is unfolding daily is just the latest example of how the legislative branch of our government has become partisan and ineffective.

Both political parties are partially responsible, of course, but I believe the blame for this dysfunction falls most heavily on the GOP.  Congress wasn’t always this way and neither were Republicans.  But in 1978, a right-wing firebrand from Georgia was elected to the U.S. House — Newt Gingrich.  While giving a speech to College Republicans during his campaign he claimed the problem with the Republican Party was that “we don’t encourage you to be nasty.”   Well, during his 20 years in Congress, Newt changed all that.

In 1996 Gingrich’s political action committee published a list of terms Republican candidates should use when referring to liberals and Democrats, encouraging them to “speak like Newt.”  It included degrading labels like, “traitor,” “corrupt,” “radical,” “pathetic,” and “intolerant”.  Gingrich’s aggressive tactics were instrumental in destroying congressional comity.

As speaker of the House from 1995 until 1999, Gingrich infused the GOP with an uncompromising, conservative ideology that reached its zenith of obstruction during President Obama’s two terms.  This far-right mindset became the gospel of numerous talk show hosts on Fox News and verbal bomb-throwers like radio personality Rush Limbaugh.  Their radical vitriol eventually infected rank and file Republican voters and unleashed thousands of vicious Internet trolls.

Gingrich had a strong ally in creating congressional gridlock — Grover Norquist.   He rose to power during President Reagan’s second term as president of Americans for Tax Reform, espousing a Libertarian agenda of tax cuts and dramatic government downsizing.   Norquist’s most damaging contribution to politics, however, is a pledge to never raise taxes on anything — ever.  The vast majority of today’s congressional Republicans have signed Grover’s pledge and they refuse to waver from it.  Consequently, while they control Congress, budget negotiations with Democrats can’t include any type of tax increase.  This makes compromise on deficit reduction almost impossible.

Trump has adopted the Gingrich nastiness mantra to keep his base energized, creating a cult-like following that eschews all issues except whether a candidate is with Trump or against him.  As a result, Republicans facing reelection in 2018 fear doing anything that will anger “The Great One,” or his base.

I don’t believe Congress will be an effective legislative body again until the Gingrich and Norquist protégés and the Trump sycophants are voted out.

**********

Ever since the presidency of Ronald Reagan conservatives have promoted tax cuts and greatly reduced government spending, which is around 20 percent of the U.S. economy.   In actual fact, the federal government collects tax revenue from the wealthier states like New York and California and distributes it to the poorer states like Kentucky and West Virginia.  Much of the funding that these states receive is for health care, education and food stamps.  Federal dollars help create more jobs for nurses, teachers and grocers.  The result is healthier, better educated citizens who can contribute more effectively to improving the state’s economy.

Politicians always highlight the amount of federal dollars they have brought to their state or congressional district, touting infrastructure projects, government contracts and military bases.  But have you ever heard one brag about how they cut government spending in their state or district?  It would be political suicide.

If Republicans truthfully explain to their constituents how the large cuts in federal spending they demand will affect their state, they won’t be around after the next election.

**********

Last year Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress spent months attempting to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act known as Obamacare.  Having failed to do that legislatively, they are now trying to undermine or invalidate it through executive orders and litigation.

If they succeed, Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion would terminate, leaving millions of Americans in 33 expansion states without health insurance.  Federal subsidies to buy health insurance on the Obamacare exchanges would be eliminated, making health care coverage unaffordable for more millions.  The estimated 52 million Americans with preexisting health conditions would no longer qualify for affordable coverage under most insurance company rules.  Many hospitals with emergency rooms — which are required by law to treat indigent patients — would terminate that service.  Numerous small hospitals in rural communities would be forced to close after losing the revenue from insured patients and Medicaid.  And comprehensive health care insurance would be more expensive for everyone.

Yet somehow, Republicans have been able to lure voters by focusing on noneconomic social issues like gun control, abortion and immigration, which they buttress with large doses of patriotism and religious liberty.  But except for tax cuts, Republicans have not been very effective in passing legislation for their conservative economic policies.

This nation has some very serious problems — huge budget deficits exacerbated by tax cuts — the cost of health care – and climate change, to name just a few.  The Republican answer is always the same, reduce taxes for the wealthy and cut large holes in the social safety net for the middleclass, the poor and elderly.

If the GOP’s core economic policies ever become law, all but the rich will suffer — but Americans in the rural Republican base will suffer the most.

Candidate Donald Trump was a wrecking ball during the first 10 months of 2016.  American leadership had everything wrong in his eyes, immigration, trade relations, health care, the NATO alliance and climate change. Trump claimed that America wasn’t winning anymore and only he could fix it.  He would “Make America Great Again.”  Unfortunately, too many voters believed him.

Well, here we are, almost 18 chaotic months into President Trump’s first term.  So, what has he accomplished and where is this nation headed under his leadership?

Fortunately, he hasn’t derailed the growing economy and low unemployment he inherited – yet. He was able to easily confirm a very conservative Supreme Court justice to a seat that was stolen from President Barack Obama by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).  And he is getting record numbers of conservative federal judges confirmed that McConnell high-jacked from Obama.  Trump’s base is cheering as he rapidly politicizes the judiciary.

Congressional Republicans were able to pass Trump’s huge tax cut for corporations and the wealthy last December, which will dramatically increase the deficits and the national debt.  This financial burden will threaten the economy and national security longer term but Trump and Republicans are not concerned about that.  They just wanted to juice the economy in the short term so the GOP can retain control of Congress in 2018 and Trump can be reelected in 2020.

Trump takes the same transactional, short-term approach to other policies – like tariffs — with little concern about the future or unintended consequences.  The major problem with U.S. trade deficits is China but Trump slapped tariffs on friend and adversary alike.   In fact, he recently called the EU a trade “foe.”  Yet, Trump has outlined no clear objectives for his tariffs beyond reducing the trade deficits and it’s doubtful he will accomplish that.

Trump says he doesn’t like multilateral trade deals and claims that he will negotiate “beautiful” unilateral trade agreements, nation by nation.  He backed out of the Trans Pacific Partnership on his first day in office and is attempting to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement without much success.  His trade negotiations with China are at an impasse and so far South Korea is his only trade deal in Asia.  No one knows where the U.S. is headed with trade relations, including Trump.

It appears Trump is seeking reasons to pick fights with NATO, the strongest defensive alliance in history and a bulwark against communist, and now Russian, aggression in Europe.  So, he rails against our European allies for not contributing enough for their own defense and leaves their leaders wondering if they can still depend the United States.  Germany seems to feel the brunt of his animus, probably because of its Chancellor, Andrea Merkel.  Trump can’t seem to tolerate strong women in leadership roles.

Trump’s performance with British Prime Minister Teresa May, his thoughtless comments about her leadership and his bumbling meeting with Queen Elizabeth were complete embarrassments for the United States.  Hundreds of thousands protested his visit in London and elsewhere around the country.  In fact, Trump is pretty much disliked all over the planet.  According to one poll, Russians don’t even like him.

Many great Americans have sacrificed their blood and sweat to make this nation the greatest and the strongest in the world.  But Trump uses their legacy in a heavy handed negotiating strategy, which he outlined in this quote from his book, “The Art of the Deal:”

“The best thing you can do is deal from strength, and leverage is the biggest strength you can have. Leverage is something the other guy wants. Or better yet, needs. Or best of all, simply can’t do without.” 

The United States has a lot that other countries want — a huge market for their goods.  It also has much that other countries need — a stabilizing influence on world affairs.  And it has the power others can’t do without — protection from ambitious dictators like Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Past presidents have been mindful of the superpower weapons they control, both economic and military.  And they mostly used them carefully where U.S. national interests and security were involved.  But Trump uses them as a cudgel, mainly against our friends and allies, while he treats Putin with kid gloves.

The relationship between Trump and Putin was explored by Vox writer Sean Illing during an interview with Mikhail Fishman, the editor-in-chief of the Moscow Times.  Mr. Fishman, who is a Putin critic, stated that the Kremlin considers Trump to be a stupid, unstrategic [sic.] politician and a “useful idiot” who Putin can manipulate.

Trump proved Fishman’s claims at a joint presser after the Trump/Putin summit by criticizing the United States and the Russia investigation while not offering pushback to Putin’s denial of 2016 election interference.

As far as I am concerned, Trump is the Kremlin candidate, a counterfeit president, minted and manipulated by Putin.  He alienated our allies by imposing illegal tariffs on them.  He is destabilizing NATO and attempting to do the same to the European Union.  In short, he is accomplishing Putin’s objectives.

I don’t believe Trump has a vision for America, for its people or for its institutions.  And his endgame is all about his personal glorification and power.

But perhaps a better question is: What is Putin’s endgame?  Because that appears to be the path Trump is following.

Our nation declared its independence 242 years ago but securing freedom is a continuous battle that must involve both conservatives and liberals.  It has become obvious after the 2016 election that Russian President Vladimir Putin is a major threat to our democratic processes and our freedom.

Putin is a former KGB security and intelligence agent who has been ruling Russia since 2000.  He was recently reelected but had very scant opposition; his major political opponents and detractors seem to experience grave misfortunes, like being imprisoned, poisoned or shot.

In January of 2017 the CIA, NSA, and FBI produced the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) that detailed interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election by Putin and Russia.

The ICA found that:

• Russian efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election demonstrated a significant escalation in the level of activity compared to previous operations.
• Russian activities were conducted against multiple U.S. state or local electoral boards.
• Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, denigrate candidate Hillary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency.
• Putin and the Russian government developed a clear preference for candidate Donald Trump and aspired to help Trump’s election chances by discrediting Clinton.
• Russia’s intelligence services conducted cyber operations in 2016 against both major U.S. political parties and gained access to Democratic National Committee (DNC) networks.

The Republican-controlled Senate Select Committee on Intelligence just released an unclassified, bipartisan report of its in-depth review of the ICA.  It found that:

• The ICA is a sound intelligence product.
• Analysts were under no politically motivated pressure to reach any conclusions.
• Since January 2017, there have been additional examples of Russia’s attempts to sow discord, undermine democratic institutions, and interfere in U.S. elections.
• Extensive efforts by Russia to manipulate social media outlets to sow discord and to interfere in the 2016 election and American society have been exposed.
• All individuals the Committee interviewed verified that the so-called “Steele dossier” did not in any way affect the analysis in the ICA – including the key findings.

Assuming that all of these Russian efforts were done without President Trump’s knowledge or complicity, I keep wondering why he is so enamored with Putin and Russia?  If not for its petroleum reserves, 4,000 nuclear tipped missiles and 18,000+ tanks threatening Western Europe, this huge country with only 144 million people would be a minor player on the world stage.

Still, Trump has been highly complementary of Putin both before and after the election.  You can see the admiration on Trump’s face and in his body language when they are together.  Is he envious of Putin’s authoritarian powers?  Is Trump currying Putin’s favor?  It would appear so.

At the G-7 summit in Canada last month Trump angered the participants by claiming Russia should be allowed back in that organization, despite its annexation of Crimea in 2014.  Reports indicate that Trump also demeaned NATO during that meeting, comparing it to NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement he has threatened to cancel.  No doubt Putin was thrilled.

Putin’s objective is to breakup NATO or create divisions among its members.  He apparently has ambitions to reestablish Russian dominance over Eastern European countries.  NATO stands in his way and the key to the cohesiveness of this organization is the United States.

Yet Trump has continuously and publicly criticized NATO and railed against some of its members for not contributing their share of the joint defense, particularly Germany.  And tensions are already high between the U.S. and the European Union after Trump withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal and imposed tariffs on EU steel and aluminum.

Next week is the yearly NATO meeting in Belgium.   If he treats our European defense partners the way he bullied and criticized our G-7 trading partners in Canada, it will be an ominous sign going into his summit with Putin in Helsinki, Finland a few days later.  It has been reported that they will meet one on one, perhaps with no American translator present.  This is highly unusual and disconcerting.

The Senate put a bipartisan stake in the ground that Russia and Putin attacked our democracy in 2016 and is not letting up.  Trump has pushed back hard against these facts and most Republicans in Congress have cowered under his threats.  If they are afraid of him, every American should be doubly so, conservative and liberal alike.

A recently released annual democracy report by the V-Dem Project rates the status of liberal democracy across 178 countries.  It assesses whether there are free and fair elections; whether civil liberties are protected and whether leaders are constrained by the rule of law and oversight by the legislature and the judiciary. The United States fell 24 places in the country ranking on democracy over the past two years, from seventh in 2015 to 31st in 2017.  This downgrade resulted from weakened restrictions on the executive branch, i.e. Trump.

This great experiment in freedom that was launched by the Declaration of Independence in 1776 depends on the separation of powers, the rule of law, a free press, and a government deriving its power from the consent of the governed.  If it becomes subjugated by a president who governs without constraints, the Declaration’s promise of an unalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness will be destined for the scrap heap of history.