The News That Didn’t Make The News
June 18, 2022
Vaccine Apartheid/The Voice of Corporate Crime
July 2, 2022
Show all

Trump’s Inside Job

 In the midst of finding out how Donald Trump tried to dismantle democracy with the Big Lie, Ralph welcomes Professor Thomas McGarity, who has chronicled how Trump, as president, tried to demolish government from the inside in his book “Demolition Agenda: How Trump Tried to Dismantle American Government, and What Biden Needs to Do to Save It.”

Thomas McGarity is the William Powers Jr. and Kim L. Heilbrun Chair in Tort Law at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law and the past president of the Center for Progressive Reform. He is the author of Pollution, Politics, and PowerFreedom to HarmThe Preemption War, and Demolition Agenda: How Trump Tried to Dismantle American Government, and What Biden Needs to Do to Save It.

That’s the great challenge of progressive populism. I think it’s out there and I think it has potential. This desire to be protected against the uncontrolled, unrestrained free market is out there… But so far, so many of them have heard the appeal of Donald Trump and others that is based on fear and resentment. This notion of replacement, the notion of us against the other. And the appeal to fear so far, has overwhelmed the appeal to good citizenship. We all owe each other something. And one thing we owe ourselves is protection from corporate malfeasance.

Thomas McGarity, author of Demolition Agenda

 

There’s a great asymmetry in administrative law that’s out there— an administrative law is the law that the courts apply when they are reviewing actions or inactions of administrative agencies— and the asymmetry is that courts are very keen to ensure that agencies don’t exceed the authority that Congress has granted them. But they are basically silent on agencies that don’t do what their statutes tell them to do.

Thomas McGarity, author of Demolition Agenda

 

[Demolition Agenda] is a book about how the Trumpsters, directed by Trump himself, cut out protective programs and allowed you to breathe more dirty air, drink more contaminated water, be exposed to more contaminated and un-inspected food, and all kinds of other things that affect you, your families, your children, and your community.

Ralph Nader

Ralph Nader Radio Hour Ep 433 Transcript (Right click to download)

8 Comments

  1. NooN says:

    If we cannot TesT & Clean the Water
    in My Home & My Commmunity,
    The CLEAN AIR ACT of the ‘60’s
    SEEMS 2 BE MISSING
    MIS.PLACED
    RE.PLACED
    TesTs MiSsing inAcTioN (MiA)
    Peace Programs MIA

    replaced those “god awful”
    🛑 bang.bang Programming
    🛑 reckless driving

  2. Nancy Camargo says:

    2022: “WASHINGTON, June 24 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday overturned the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that recognized women’s constitutional right to abortion . . ”

    I am in tears remembering many years ago when I took two girl friends (we were so young, barely past driving age) for then-illegal abortions, so frightening, would they die in the process? They insisted it was what they wanted. Now we are thrust back into that dark age of suffering and lack of choice in our country. A country that could never even pass the ERA.

  3. Martin White says:

    This is was a fine conversation, always dancing on the edge of an all-out fracas but somehow making it through, as is the RNRH trademark.
    As is with everything political, there’s always kvetching and nibbling to be done from the side: why not this or that?
    George W. Bush worked off the Nixon/Reagan playbook of putting it the most idiotic, lickspittle junior unqualified Christian college rejects into governmental appointee positions, the better to kill off anything remotely positive or progressive, and Trump’s gauleiters went just another step with this criminal youthbot charade.
    Unlike the McKibben interview, where our hero Rosa Parks, I mean, Feldo lobbed in a haymaker at the end that shook the brain pan of the guest’s low tolerance for dispute, this was calm.

  4. Bill says:

    Love you Ralph but you are fighting a losing battle. I live in Westchester County in NY and I have a neighbor down the road with a Let’s go Brandon flag next to the American flag. MAGA is still popular here and I am afraid that Orange#45 will win in 2024. This is also a heavily Roman Catholic area(I am a reluctant one myself) and the Roe decision is popular.

  5. Don Harris says:

    Thank you for opening the gate.

    Ralph is correct about defining small contributors and that there are many deceptive small contribution schemes (both right and left) that pretend to be small contributor campaigns by touting the average contribution and not the total contributions of each contributor.

    One Demand defines a small contributor as no more than 200 dollars in total contributions from a contributor per election (200 primary, 200 general). Such candidates would not have Pacs outside of their campaign as that would violate their commitment.

    Just 10% of the 150 million 2020 voters investing 100 dollars in contributions to candidates making a commitment to not accept more than 200 dollars from any contributor would total 1.5 billion dollars and be just the tip of the iceberg. Participants in One Demand would send these contributions directly to the candidates, not through One Demand so the participants decide who gets their money, not the organization.

    If there are no small donor candidates on the ballot in 2022 citizens can use a write in vote to register a vote against the big money candidates and to create and demonstrate demand for small donor candidates in 2024. Signing up on the website would make it clear why the write in vote was cast.

    While citizens could make a demand that candidates promise to pass future legislation for public financing of elections, that would still require the big money politicians pass legislation that the big money interests have no interest in passing. Passing such legislation would not be possible until the big money politicians are replaced with small donor politicians. The problem has to be solved before legislation to solve the problem can be passed.

    By demanding that politicians commit to small donor campaigns before we vote for them we free them of the demands made by the big money interests that prevent such legislation from being passed and also eliminate the need for such legislation as making this demand and enforcing it with our votes can solve the problem without such legislation.

    Basically, the legislation cannot be passed without One Demand but One Demand can work without the legislation.

    Thank you for referring listeners to the website and the encouraging words. The text of the website was written in 2015 before Bernie or Trump had declared they were running though some of the dates in the text were changed later on.

    While the website has not been updated recently so that citizens could sign up for 2022, now that Ralph has mentioned it I will get that done soon, hopefully in a few weeks.

    There is still time to get this started in 2022 and build a base that can be expanded in 2024.

    There are many potential participants for 2022. Citizens that do not vote in off year elections could instead use a write in vote to register a vote against the big money candidates on the ballot to create and demonstrate demand small donor candidates in the next election cycle instead of wasting their vote by not voting.

    Citizens that live in congressional districts gerrymandered for one of the current major parties that do not want to vote for the candidate from that party could also use a write in vote to vote against the big money candidates on the ballot as voting for the other big money current major party candidate that cannot win the general election will not make difference in the outcome for 2022, but would create and demonstrate demand and incentivize candidates from the other party or other parties in that district to make the small donor commitment in 2024 to get those votes in 2024.

    It has taken me years to get the gate open. It is up to citizens to now decide if they want to step through and make it happen as it cannot happen without them.

    • Skro35 says:

      And some listeners have been confused when they google “One Demand” and it comes up “Voucher Vendetta.”

  6. Don Harris says:

    Voucher Vendetta was the original name which some people did not like so it was changed to One Demand.