Welcome to BeltwayBreakfast.com, a new destination for trusted news on government, politics, law, and regulations, plus insights into how the news is gathered and how all of it fits into the larger world around us.
BeltwayBreakfast is proudly brought to you by same the team that you’ve trusted to bring you the best in technology and telecommunications policy news at BroadbandBreakfast.com.
While we’re glad you’re here, please be aware that we’re still working the kinks out and growing our team, so we hope you’ll bear with us if content shows up in fits and starts for now.
We hope you will subscribe to desktop notifications and continue to watch this space as we build what we hope will be a must-read destination for fresh insights on the day’s news, served daily.
In the Biden Versus Trump Contest, It’s Not the Republican Who is Like Lincoln
If one of the two presidential candidates on the debate stage Thursday night was like Abraham Lincoln, it wasn’t the Republican.
Lincoln had a deep abhorrence to hurting others, as Doris Kearns Goodwin writes in her masterful biography “Team of Rivals.” This was born of Lincoln’s character and his empathy, which provides a model to which U.S. citizens should look in the 2020 presidential election.
“He possessed extraordinary empathy — the gift or curse of putting himself in the place of another, to experience what they were feeling, to understand their motives and desires,” Goodwin writes in the 2005 book. Indeed, Lincoln’s tenderheartedness left him open to melancholy but also endowed him with the ability to lead others.
As you consider for whom you will vote for president, I encourage you to summon the empathy of a Lincoln. Put yourself in the shoes of someone with a perspective and background that might be different from your own.
For example, if I were voting based on my experience living in Utah and interacting with a federal government that thinks it knows better than the state of Utah and overreaches to declare 1.3 million acres for Bears Ears National Monument, I might vote for the Republican candidate who appropriately reduced its size to 201,876 acres.
If I were voting solely based upon which candidate promises to do more to support the religious freedom in which I believe deeply, I might be tempted to vote Republican.
But how should I vote if my ancestors came to America as refugees fleeing violence and political instability? The number of refugees resettled in America has dropped from 89,500 in 2016 to 6,600 in 2020.
Under our current president, America has retreated from being “the shining city upon a hill” of which President Ronald Reagan spoke. Through restrictions on refugees and on legal immigration, through barbaric family separations at the border and the throttling of asylum claims, the Trump administration treats migrant detainees worse than it does prisoners of war.
Of, if I were a Black American, how would I feel in the presence of our current president? Of all the many appeals court judges he has appointed, not one is Black. He has encouraged and refused to denounce the most extreme white nationalist groups. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 preserves the ability of Blacks to vote, but Trump promises a retreat to a racially divided America, with white supporters watching over voting in mostly Black areas.
In 2016, I could not support either presidential campaign of the two major parties because neither possessed the character necessary to lead our nation.
But 2020 is different. I have no connection to any political campaign this year. This year only one of the two major party candidates — Joe Biden — speaks with civility and will act with empathy for and understanding of others.
As Biden said in his Democratic Party acceptance speech, “As God’s children, each of us have a purpose in our lives.” Can you imagine our current president saying this?
Central to Abraham Lincoln’s success as a political leader was his ability to understand and speak to those different from him.
Donald Trump approaches politics as being something of “style and confidence and flair,” as he said in his Republican Party acceptance speech. You may think that you are part of his political coalition when he praised “these pioneers” who “picked up their Bibles, packed up their belongings, climbed into their covered wagons and set out West for the next adventure.”
But does the current president speak for anyone outside of his narrow white and religious political base? His actions and words show that he lacks concern for others, and acts against the public interest of Americans as a whole.
“We can choose a path of becoming angrier, less hopeful, more divided, a path of shadow and suspicion,” Joe Biden said in his acceptance speech. “Or we can choose a different path, and together take this chance to heal, to reform, to unite.”
Will you vote as a partisan or one with a favored interest? Look outside of yourself in your voting as in your everyday life and support a candidate whom you can see others supporting, too.
This OpEd originally appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune on October 25, 2020. The author is a former opinion editor of the Deseret News. An attorney licensed in Utah and Illinois, he also runs Broadband Breakfast, a Washington-based media company focused on politics and technology. Reach him at email@example.com.
G7 Leaders Will Coordinate Response To Coronavirus Pandemic
The heads of government for the world’s seven International Monetary Fund-designated advanced economies have pledged to do what it takes to ensure a “strong global response” to the novel coronavirus outbreak currently causing massive disruptions to the global economy.
In a statement released after an extraordinary teleconference-based meeting of the Group of 7, the leaders of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States said they are “committed to doing whatever is necessary to ensure a strong global response” to the COVID 19 pandemic “through closer cooperation and enhanced coordination of our efforts.”
“While current challenges may require national emergency measures, we remain committed to the stability of the global economy,” they said. “We express our conviction that current challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic need a strongly coordinated international approach, based on science and evidence, consistent with our democratic values, and utilizing the strengths of private enterprise.”
Specifically, the leaders announced that they would commit their respective governments to “coordinate on necessary public health measures to protect people at risk from COVID-19, restore confidence, growth, and protect jobs, support global trade and investment, and encourage science, research, and technology cooperation.”
The G7 member countries’ finance ministers will also confer on a weekly basis to coordinate the mobilization of a “full range of instruments, including monetary and fiscal measures, as well as targeted actions” to support workers, companies, and sectors most affected by the pandemic.
In addition, the leaders said they would ask central banks, the IMF and World Bank to work together to bolster both the G7 economies and those of other countries.
Exposed to Quarantined Congressmen, Trump Shrugs Off Coronavirus Test
President Donald Trump on Tuesday said he has been told that there is no need for him to undergo a test for the novel Coronavirus that has now killed 26 Americans.
Two members of Congress Trump has interacted with in recent days, Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., and Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., announced that they would “self-quarantine” after being informed that an individual with whom they’d interacted at last week’s Conservative Political Action Conference had tested positive for the virus.
But Trump, who spoke to reporters after attending Senate Republicans’ weekly caucus lunch, said White House Medical Unit chief Dr. Sean Conley had informed him that a test was not necessary at this time.
“I spoke to the White House doctor — terrific guy, talented guy — he said he sees no reason to do it. There’s no symptoms, no anything,” Trump said.
Despite the growing number of cases in states across the country, Trump still insisted on taking credit for keeping the reported number of cases low, despite the fact that part of the reason the number remains relatively low compared to other countries is the Trump administration’s failure to develop and deploy an accurate test for the virus.
“As you know, it’s about 600 cases, it’s about 26 deaths, within our country. And had we not acted quickly, that number would have been substantially more,” he said, adding that his meeting with Senate Republicans, which was ostensibly to discuss proposals to stimulate the economy in the event of a Coronavirus-induced downtown, was “great.”
“There’s a great feeling about doing a lot of things,” Trump said, though he said “we’re going to see” about some of the suggestions Democrats have made for dealing with the problem in recent days, including using federal funds to allow for paid leave for hourly workers affected by the virus.