Senate tells Elizabeth Warren to take her seat
The Short Version
Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) was interrupted by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnel (R-KY) and charged with violating Senate rule XIX, ” No Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator.” Senator Warren was reading a letter from the late Coretta Scott King opposing the 1986 nomination of Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) to a federal court judgeship. The arcane rule makes any debate on the Senator’s nomination almost impossible.
The Dirty Details
Alabama’s junior Senator, Jeff Sessions, has twice previously been nominated to federal positions that require Senate confirmation. Both times, he was turned down because of concerns regarding his treatment of minorities, specifically black civil rights workers. The matter was raised earlier during the Senate committee hearing, where rule XIX doesn’t apply, but the nomination was then passed on to the full Senate where all rules, including some stupid ones, are put into effect.
Senator Elizabeth Warren, an outspoken critic of both Senator Sessions and the president, was reading a letter from the late Coretta Scott King, the widow of slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr., when Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnel interrupted her, claiming that reading the letter was in violation of Senate rule XIX. Here’s the video of what happened:
As the vote on Senator Session’s nomination is scheduled for today, the employment of this rule by Senate leadership makes it virtually impossible for there to be any debate on the matter. Anything negative that might be used to defeat the nomination can be said to run afoul of rule XIX. The rule is seldom used at all, and is particularly egregious in this case as Session’s nomination as Attorney General of the United States is a critical matter that desperately needs debate.
The move by the majority leader demonstrates a clear intention to not allow any full debate of Sen. Sessions. On one hand, this is a clear continuation of the good ole’ boy system that has permeated Capitol Hill for ages. Members of the same party defend each other on the floor even when they know that the other is in the wrong. At the same time, this is clearly an obstruction of justice by not allowing full debate on a critical matter.
Just what did that letter say that was so damaging against Sen. Sessions? Here’s the full text:
The charges Mrs. King makes against Sessions are extremely critical given his appointment as Attorney General. To ignore her words and approve the nomination is to place the entire justice system of the United States in the hands of someone who is a known bigot with a history of discrimination. Senate leadership has the ability to suspend specific rules when they stand in the way of honest debate, but obviously shows no intention of doing so in this matter.
Given that the vote on the Sessions nomination is scheduled for this morning, citizens are strongly encouraged to call their Senators in opposition to both the nomination and the censorship of Senator Warren.
What is #tiedtogether
A new movement is underway in the fashion industry
The Short Version
Digital fashion magazine Business of Fashion (BOF) introduced the #tiedtogether campaign this week, just in time for the ready-to-wear fashion season. Its aim is to provide a focus point for unity and inclusiveness by asking people to wear white bandanas.
A Little More Detail
There’s not a whole lot more to write on the matter. BoF’s own #tiedtogether page is rather brief and void of too many details. The movement is in response to the significant silence on the part of the fashion industry as a whole regarding recent world events, such as the US travel ban and the impact of more nation-centric trade deals. Fashion brands must have a global presence to be successful, but things such as travel limitations and high import fees/tariffs can not only strain the business side of fashion but create animosities between people from different countries.
Few fashion brands have bothered to say much about political situations for fear the backlash might hurt business. While there was some dustup last month regarding which designers might dress the new First Lady of the United States, most companies have chosen to not take a stand. The most notable exception is Levi’s, the denim jean maker, which signed on to an amicus brief for the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals opposing the travel ban.
BoF’s movement is admirable, to be sure. With the world seeming to fray at the edges, it would seem that we could do with a little more unity and inclusiveness. The question is whether people are actually interested in either. The distance between political ideologies is extreme and in many camps, unity is seen as a compromise that favors the evil of the other side and inclusiveness is pretty much the same as fraternizing with the enemy. The strength of the #Resist movement is an example of the challenges to finding or creating a global sense of unity around most any topic.
Fashion is not immune from politics and the question designers and labels face now is how much of their personal attitudes and feelings to allow into their work. Under previous circumstances, the conventional wisdom has been to keep the two separate. However, there are some notable exceptions to that rule, the most obvious probably being Dame Vivienne Westwood and her strong stand for environmental causes. Much of the rest of fashion, however, prefers to remain quiet.
#tiedtogether did get an important endorsement last night as all the models walking in the Tommy Hilfiger show on Venice Beach were wearing white bandanas imprinted with #tiedtogether on their wrists. Even the designer had one tied to his belt loop as he made the finale walk. If BoF can convince other designers to incorporate the concept into their shows in a similar fashion, the idea might have a chance of catching on, at least as an accessory idea.
Still, we’ve seen this type of movement before. Just because people wear a bandana, or a plastic bracelet with a certain inscription, or a given set of beads, doesn’t mean that they actually subscribe to the philosophy behind the symbol. Wearing every white bandana in the world has little effect if the people wearing them do not genuinely believe in unity and inclusiveness across the deep chasm of political divide. The white bandana risks becoming just another fashion trend with no real substance behind it.
What’s missing in this movement is an example, someone or something that demonstrates what unity and inclusiveness mean in the fashion world. If we’re talking racial inclusiveness, which has been a problem for fashion shows, then seeing more diversity on the runway would be a good start. If we’re talking about gender inclusiveness, then the trend toward mixed men’s and women’s show is a start, but seeing more transgender models on the runway would be a significant step forward. Size diversity has been a significant issue, but only a handful of designers have done anything on that front. There are options and those options have always been there. The industry has been frequently criticized for not embracing those options before now. Are we to expect that a white bandana can be the thing that makes a difference?
BoF is certainly trying hard to get as many designers, editors, models, and bloggers on board as possible. Just getting industry insiders to understand and sign on to the concept is a herculean effort. While we applaud BoF for taking the initiative in starting this campaign, however, we remain skeptical of any real change. We’ve seen other campaigns for inclusivism before and watched as major designers totally ignored them. We will be watching carefully to see if a white bandana can actually make a difference.
Share this:
Like this: