“I have instructed my representatives to stop negotiating until after the election,” President Donald Trump announced (via tweet) on October 6. “[I]mmediately after I win, we will pass a major Stimulus Bill …”

Trump reversed himself three days later, but House Majority leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) isn’t having any of it. On October 10, she described the administration’s current “COVID-19 relief” proposal as “one step forward, two steps back.”

Both major political parties would have you believe that the devil is in the details — that they’re both fighting hard for particular priorities and just can’t come to a meeting of the minds.

In reality, this is all about next month’s elections, which will decide control of the White House for the next four years, and possibly of both houses of Congress for the next two.

“There is no limit to the amount of good you can do,” President Ronald Reagan once said, “if you don’t care who gets the credit.”

Donald Trump, Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, and (in the background) Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden care a great deal about who gets the credit.

Donald Trump would love nothing better than to put a big fat “stimulus” check, signed “Donald J. Trump,” in your mailbox before you cast your vote. Nancy Pelosi’s signature wouldn’t accompany his.

Pelosi’s more expansive proposal focuses more on extending “enhanced” unemployment benefits, as well as new funding for Democratic Party constituencies in public education and local government — “relief” that might get her party at least a little credit.

Neither side is likely to give an inch until after November 3. Maybe not until after January 20 of next year if the White House changes hands.

I can’t say I’m unhappy about that. Politicians throwing “stimulus” money at Americans is a poor substitute for those same politicians knocking off their COVID-19 panic-mongering, getting their boots off our necks, and letting us get back to normal life.

On the other hand, they’re not likely to do the latter any time soon, any more than they can agree on doing the former at the moment.

Americans always find ourselves prisoner to partisan political considerations, but never more cruelly or more obviously than as a major election nears. And yet the majority of those who bother to vote continue to vote for these opportunistic, self-serving jailers.

The beatings will continue until morale improves — or until we pull a mass jailbreak and start voting Libertarian.

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY

With the 2020 presidential election less than a month away, my TV screen and snail and email boxes are awash in, and my phone is ringing off the hook with, reminders of how very, very important it is that I vote. Pleas from the candidates and their proxies, of course, but also the generic “no matter who you vote for, vote.”

How important is it, really, that you or I mark and cast a ballot?

According to the political operatives knocking on my door (sometimes literally), my potential failure to vote — or my decision to vote for the “wrong” candidate — constitutes an existential threat to motherhood, apple pie, and America.

Could my vote (which, by the way, I’ve already cast by mail for the Libertarian Party’s Jo Jorgensen) affect the outcome of next month’s election?

It seems unlikely. The last time a single vote decided a statewide election was in 1839 when Marcus Morton became governor of Massachusetts with 51,034 votes out of a total 102,066 ballots cast.

I probably have a better chance of winning next week’s Mega Millions jackpot than of casting the vote that decides which candidate’s slate of electors will represent Florida in choosing the next president. And as a Libertarian, the chance of my vote putting my preferred candidate over the top, in Florida or nationally, is even slimmer.

So does it really matter whether I vote or not? Absent some earth-shaking development that I can neither predict nor bring about by force of will, more than nine of every 10 voters will choose “business as usual” by casting their ballots for Donald Trump or Joe Biden. They’ll vote against freedom and for an ever more authoritarian state. And yes, they’ll almost certainly win.

Why bother? Because it matters to ME, that’s why. I have an opinion, voting is a way of expressing that opinion, and the vote total my preferred candidate gets, however small, will remain a matter of public record long after you’ve forgotten this column.

If one or two of a hundred voters choose freedom, they — WE — light a flame of hope in the deep dark night of fear and loathing that is 21st century American politics. A tiny, guttering flame, perhaps, but a flame I’d not want to see go out entirely.

Your vote is your voice. I won’t join my voice to the voices of the party of hate or the party of fear. Will you?

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY

As I write this, President Donald Trump is at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center after testing positive for COVID-19 and, we are told, experiencing “very concerning” symptoms.  I wish the president a full and speedy recovery, but like many Americans I’m also interested in how this development affects the upcoming presidential election.

The consensus seems to be that it’s bad for Trump — he’s off the campaign trail for at least two weeks, his medical condition is the center of attention, and any kind of illness tends to make a president look “weak” (not good less than a month ahead of an election).

But Trump could use his unfortunate affliction to his own political advantage, by invoking the 25th Amendment.

Yes, I’m talking about the same 25th Amendment which some figures in the “Russiagate” investigation had apparently hoped to use to remove him from office early on. That amendment has two sides.

One side of the 25th involves the vice president and a majority of the cabinet deciding (and informing the Senate and the House) that the president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. The other side involves the president himself notifying the Senate and the House of the same conclusion. In either case, the vice president becomes acting president until and unless the president recovers.

Two significant issues in this election involve the transfer of presidential power.

One concerns the ages and apparent infirmities of the two “major party” candidates. Donald Trump and Joe Biden are both in their 70s. Both seemingly suffer from health problems including but not limited to incipient or actual dementia. Whether either of them, if elected, would survive the next four years in a physically vigorous and mentally competent state is a reasonable concern.

The other involves a seeming unwillingness on Donald Trump’s part to voluntarily relinquish personal power under any circumstances — maybe not even after losing the election next month.

Trump could reassure the public on both of those matters by invoking the 25th Amendment himself. That would communicate to the electorate that he cares more about continuity of government than about personal power. It would also would give Vice President Mike Pence a chance to prove himself ready to serve as president when and as needed. Both would likely play well with any remaining undecided voters.

On the practical side, COVID-19 can move very quickly. In August, my mother went from an apparent turn for the better, sitting up in bed, talking and eating, to dead in about two hours. A president hospitalized with that kind of condition is inherently incapacitated. President Trump should focus on his own recovery, not on appearing strong ahead of an election.

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY

• “How the 25th Amendment Could Help Trump Win Re-Election,” by Thomas L. Knapp, OpEdNews, 10/04/20