BARRETT RAINEY   Second Thoughts

A number of my Republican friends – in their cups and glasses since the November drubbing at the hands Democrats and the right wing of their own party – are sobering up nicely and beginning to talk of better days ahead – in 2014. Given what’s been happening – and not happening – inside the GOP since those losses at the polls, I’m sorry to be the bearer of bad news. Things don’t look any better for 2014. Or 2016.

In fact, a fine op-ed piece from NPR the other day declared “Forget 2016. Soonest to look for improvements might be 2020!” Given the irrefutable evidence thus far, that might send my GOP friends back to their glasses.
Look at this from two angles. The first is what to expect our national ethnicity will look like by 2020. Director Paul Taylor of Pew Research says today’s white 63% majority will have shrunk to 60%. “Not a loose prediction, he says, “because it’s the statistical future we already know.” Further, according to Taylor, our voting patterns are highly aligned by race. Have been for many years and many elections.

Fact: the white voter pool is draining. Quickly. In 2012, white voters accounted for 220 fewer electoral college votes than just 14 years ago. President Obama took 80% of the non-white vote.

As Hispanics age and parent future generations, fortunes for Democrats look much brighter than the GOP. A 15-year-old Hispanic sophomore high school student today will be a 24-year-old adult in 2020, will have gone through our public school system and, by that time, have either college or work experience. Just look at “red state” Texas where, in two more national elections, Hispanics will be the majority population. Which party would be favored by heritage and education then? Those numbers clearly put Republicans everywhere on the wrong side of what’s coming. What we KNOW is coming.

Ironically, George Bush was on the right track to gain Hispanic support for Republicans in 2005 with prominent Hispanic appointments and outreach programs to reach Hispanic voters. But the Republican party operators – glad to see Bush go and to bury his memory – failed to follow up after he left office and Democrats have been actively making connections.

Now, look at the second angle: what today’s Republicans are doing to catch up. Basically – nothing. Oh, there’s that new bi-partisan immigration bill in the U.S. Senate. But, even if it gets to the floor for a vote – no sure thing – it likely will die there. Or, whatever’s left after House Teapublicans get through with it will be unrecognizable.

Then there are these facts. The National Republican Party this month re-elected a chairman who presided over 2012 losses from coast to coast and a reduction of seats in both Senate and House. Nearly all national GOP officers were re-elected as well. A day or two later, Speaker Boehner pledged ending abortion “is one of our most fundamental goals this year.” Several dozen anti-abortion bills are sitting in Boehner’s own House committees. More than 100 others are in Republican-dominated state legislature’s. Of interest to Hispanic and other immigrants? You bet!

House Budget Chief Paul Ryan has a new impossible federal budget to pay the national debt off in 10 years by – among other draconian measures – savaging Medicaid and Medicare, many of whose clients are Hispanic. In GOP dominated Texas, funding for Planned Parenthood was eliminated in a state where access to women’s health care is most used by – Hispanics. The same Hispanics who will soon be the majority there. Republican-dominated legislatures in six states are trying to change election laws to reduce minority voting and re-jigger electoral college votes to do the same.

Columnist Paul Krugman looking at all this – and much more – summed it up “Their proposals for a (party) makeover all involve changing the sales pitch rather than the product.” I’d add, “Changing deck chairs on the old Titanic again.”

So, here are just two factors working against the Ol’ GOP for upcoming elections. On one hand, they’re actively pursuing a diminishing supply of white voters while ignoring – in every substantive way – irreversible ethnic changes of epic national proportions. And not just Hispanics. On the other, they’re sponsoring whitewash, “feel good” ideas while continuing direct legislative assaults to limit minority voter access to the ballot box and feverishly trying to change historic national campaign rules to undermine the entire electoral process.

If you’re not Black or Hispanic, but words such as “deceitful,” “dishonest,” double-dealing,” “lying,” “cheating,” “uncaring” and more come to your mind because of all this, imagine if you were actually a member of a minority. Imagine the magnification of your feelings if these were your rights under the Republican knife.

Bottom line. If the National Republican Party really hopes to win at the polls anytime soon – anytime in the next 20 years or so – leaders are ignoring the one word of serious change absolutely required to do the job: CULTURE. If the current CULTURE of in-party extremism, playing to a diminishing white voter source while trying to placate a declining membership base of ignorance and confused ideology goes unchanged, perhaps 2020 is too soon to think of GOP gains. Trumped up, feel good legislation is NOT going to buy minority votes. Not while the Party continues efforts to block minority access to voting and other rights of citizenship.

It takes a long time to change an entire culture. It takes even longer to re-establish trust once broken. Where the fortunes of the National Republican Party are concerned, it may be a generation. Or two. Depends on when they stop changing curtains in the window and get around to fixing the problems in the foundation.

BARRETT RAINEY   Second Thoughts

No question. I owe everyone who regularly follows these wandering thoughts an apology. And I offer such. Now. I apologize. I screwed up.
One of my frequent rants has been how I seriously believe far too many Americans go to the polls with little knowledge of the issues – of how government operates – of worthiness (or lack thereof) of candidates. Now, after a lifetime of media and civic participation, I’ve stumbled. Badly.

I’m a law and order kind of guy. Proud to say I’ve had some excellent experiences with outstanding people in law enforcement for decades with a number of friends in the business whom I deeply respect and admire. In our last local unopposed election for sheriff, I listened to the incumbent and cast what I thought was a knowledgeable vote. But it wasn’t. I didn’t know the real candidate and I didn’t know what he intended to do. Or not do. He didn’t come clean. I didn’t do my homework.

With a four-year renewal of his contract in hand, our local fella announced he’s not going to enforce all the laws. Oh, some he agrees with and you can expect he’ll do his duty on those. But there are others he won’t touch. A few days back, he even fired off a letter to Vice President Biden telling him the same thing. He went on quite a bit about what he’d decided was “constitutional” and what wasn’t. And he said he wouldn’t enforce laws he said were “unconstitutional.” No, Sir. If some gun laws come his way, he’s gonna pick and choose. He’ll decide what’s legitimate – “constitutional” he said – and act only on the ones he agrees with. Forget the others.

A week or two passed after his heated missive to Washington and I thought he might feel better now that he got it off his chest – that he’d simmer down and do his duty after all. But, no! Not our sheriff! He subsequently told the crew at our little almost-daily, almost-newspaper the other day he still meant it. No backing down there.

What’s really got his knickers knotted is if he’s told to “disarm” our county citizenry. If the feds tell him that. Of if the feds try to do that, he would “not tolerate” them doing so in his jurisdiction. To allow it, he said, “would mean violating (my) constitutional oath.” The U.S. Supreme Court didn’t tell him that. He decided on his own. Sorta from the hip.

Now, I’ve read the vice president’s recommendations. All of ‘em. Pretty reasonable stuff. I can’t find that part about “disarming” citizens – who would recommend it – under what conditions – who would authorize it -who would carry it out. Or that anyone would even think about it. The only voices I’ve heard even coming close to such conspiratorial crap have been on Faux “news” and we all know how they’re crazy as hell. Maybe that’s where our local sheriff got it. He might be a “Faux guy.”

He carefully pointed out “more than 4,000 people in Douglas County are “concealed carry” gun owners,” making it “one of the safest parts of the country.” Well, maybe. But figure 4,000 citizens in a county population of about 110,000 is less than four-percent. They’d all have to do a lot of shootin’ and killin’ to make it “one of the safest parts of the country.”
Suppose 40% or so in our county owned guns and were inclined to use them on other people. I doubt they would – but suppose. That means about 60% are unarmed with no intention of shooting anyone. So, in both cases, he’s concerned about a minority rather than the majority. Interesting that it was the majority of us who put him in his job – not the minority. And it was the protection of ALL of us he swore would be his job.

None of this “I’ll decide what to enforce and what to ignore” was part of his campaign for office. No, he presented a very positive law and order image. Not one word of choosiness about constitutional issues. Or his unique “knowledge” to decide what is and what isn’t.

Another sheriff – two counties over from us – looked at that same list Biden’s committee presented and said he found nothing wrong – nothing “unconstitutional.” “Nothing new – nothing that’s not already happening,” said Sheriff Bishop. Of the nearly three-dozen sheriff’s in Oregon, only about half-a-dozen have set themselves up as “constitutional deciders.” The other 25 or so looked at the list and went on with their duties. Same thing happened across the country. Sheriffs by the thousands took a look at the proposals and went back to work. No thousands of angry letters. No huge outpouring of declarations of what was – and was not – “constitutional.” In their unscholarly opinions.

Elected officials – yes, sheriffs, too – often have to find a dictionary to look up the word “malfeasance” during their careers. It gets used a lot when people in elected office become contrary or decide which of their duties they’ll carry out. There’s a lot of legal mumbo-jumbo when defining “malfeasance,” but it’s really just “improper professional conduct.”

Our reluctant sheriff is playing to the paranoid fears of a goofy minority of a minority while telling the majority of gun and non-gun owners – under his lawful protection – he won’t uphold laws he “thinks” are wrong. He’ll gamble with their safety – their lives. Is that proper professional conduct?

Law enforcement – like the military – is not a career in which each individual can decide which orders he’ll obey and which he’ll ignore. There are courts for that. There are other people hired to decide what is – and what is not – lawful. That’s their job. With proper procedures to involve them if necessary.

Peace officers – like the military – are given an order and expected to say “Yes, Sir” and get it done. The lives of each person in the military – and law enforcement – depend on the absolute willingness of all others given similar orders to carry them out. The successful can do that and do it well. Others chose a new career.

So, I apologize for not doing the same electoral due diligence I’ve long castigated others for ignoring. I let a candidate for office have my vote before I found out how unwilling he was to do his job. All of his job.