Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, abortion access has fared very well when it has appeared on the ballot. But it isn't clear how many more ballot initiatives pro-choice advocates are trying to hold in 2024.

What's going on? 🧵

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Thu May 11 11:09:52 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

First, a reminder of recent history:
* California, Michigan and Vermont approved abortion-rights amendments to their state constitutions.
* Kansas and Kentucky rejected measures that could have led to bans.
* The abortion-rights candidate won a Wisconsin Supreme Court race.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Thu May 11 11:11:20 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

The 2024 elections offer supporters of abortion rights an opportunity to continue their winning streak. There are 10 states that both significantly restrict abortion (or may soon) and allow citizen-sponsored ballot initiatives, including Florida, Ohio and Arizona.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Thu May 11 11:11:38 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Yet advocates have not yet collected the signatures they need in most states, nor have they started a national fund-raising campaign for the effort. At this point, some observers say they would be surprised if even 5 of the 10 states held abortion-access initiatives next year.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Thu May 11 11:12:22 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Florida's pro-marijuana movement highlights the slowness of the abortion-rights effort: Organizers of a ballot initiative to legalize pot have already raised $30m and collected nearly all the required signatures — but organizers of an abortion initiative are just getting started.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Thu May 11 11:13:29 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

What explains the apparent lack of urgency from abortion-rights advocates?

In interviews, some said that placing a measure on a ballot took time and money, and that they wanted to make sure the initiatives used language that would survive legal challenges.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Thu May 11 11:14:02 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Other advocates pointed to internal disagreements and disorganization that have delayed action. The movement has not been able to agree on a strategy, including whether ballot initiatives should use the word “women” and how far into pregnancy abortion should remain legal.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Thu May 11 11:14:37 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

The bottom line: Even in many red states, ballot initiatives to expand abortion rights would have a good chance to pass.

And yet some states may not hold initiatives anytime soon. It could be a big missed opportunity for the pro-choice movement.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/11/briefing/abortion-access-ballots-us-elections.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Thu May 11 11:16:14 +0000 2023

Obamacare isn't as widely accepted as Social Security or Medicare, but it's following the same path they did. It started as an object of partisan rancor and harsh criticism. Now, it's increasingly accepted by Democrats and Republicans alike. 🧵 https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/29/briefing/obamacare.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Wed Mar 29 14:40:17 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Consider:
* When Congress was considering Social Security in 1935, conservatives and many business executives bitterly criticized it. One Texas newspaper described Social Security as “a huge sales tax on everybody on behalf of the oldsters"...

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Wed Mar 29 14:41:00 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

... A Wall Street Journal editorial in 1935 predicted that Social Security would eventually be reason for Congress to look back in “humiliation.”

Not exactly: Social Security is so popular that it is known as a third rail in American politics.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Wed Mar 29 14:41:22 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

* When Congress was debating Medicare in the 1960s, Ronald Reagan -- then an actor with a rising political profile -- attacked the program as a step toward socialism....

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Wed Mar 29 14:41:56 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

... If Medicare passed, Reagan warned, “We are going to spend our sunset years telling our children, and our children’s children, what it once was like in America when men were free.”

As president, though, Reagan praised and supported the program.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Wed Mar 29 14:42:09 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

* After Congress created Medicaid — a health-insurance program primarily for low-income households — in 1965, some states did not initially join it. Arizona became the last to do so, in 1982.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Wed Mar 29 14:42:20 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Obamacare is now following this same path. Consider what has happened in North Carolina: Only a decade after the state’s Republican politicians described the law as dangerous, Republicans and Democrats came together to expand Medicaid through Obamacare. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/27/us/politics/north-carolina-medicaid-expansion.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Wed Mar 29 14:43:36 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

“Wow, have things changed,” @CitizenCohn wrote, explaining North Carolina's turnabout on Obamacare. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/north-carolina-republicans-medicaid-health-care_n_641e0c52e4b03793a8af8d03

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Wed Mar 29 14:44:28 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Many Republican politicians still oppose Obamacare. But the list of states signing up for the program seems to be moving in only one direction: It keeps growing, partly because so many Republican voters support it.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Wed Mar 29 14:45:48 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

40 states have expanded Medicaid under Obamacare:

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Wed Mar 29 14:46:19 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

In a country as polarized as the United States, there isn’t much true political consensus. Still, Obamacare has won over the political middle more quickly than seemed likely not so long ago.

More here: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/29/briefing/obamacare.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Wed Mar 29 14:46:49 +0000 2023

Thoughtful critique of today’s Morning ⬇️

I’d say the answer is that Biden can sometimes be quite socially liberal. But he picks his shots (and marriage equality was a big one) rather than mistakenly thinking the country wants the full liberal agenda.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/20/briefing/biden-2024.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Feb 20 14:56:50 +0000 2023

David Leonhardt tweeted this while quoting the below tweet.

Nice column today by @DLeonhardt about Biden's working class liberalism and social moderation. But it's more complicated than he suggests. It was Biden who pushed Obama on same-sex marriage.

-- Reeve Vanneman (@RVanneman) Mon Feb 20 13:53:45 +0000 2023

Replying to @DLeonhardt

What do you think @RVanneman?

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Feb 20 14:57:24 +0000 2023

Many Americans who would benefit most from Paxlovid and other post-infection Covid treatments are not receiving them.

It's a major problem. The country could prevent most ongoing Covid deaths - and maybe a very large majority - if this changed. 🧵

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:11:18 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

There seem to be two main explanations for the underuse of Paxlovid and monoclonal antibodies:

1) The public discussion of them has tended to focus on caveats and concerns, rather than on the overwhelming evidence that they reduce the risk of hospitalization and death.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:12:14 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Yes, Paxlovid often leaves a nasty taste in your mouth. Yes, its benefits appear to be small for adults under 50 (because their risk of Covid hospitalization is already so close to zero if vaccinated). And, yes, rebound Covid is real.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:13:25 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

But rebound Covid has fueled a misunderstanding. Even with rebound, Paxlovid tends to make Covid milder, as Dr. Fauci explained about his rebound.

Not taking Paxlovid because of rebound is akin to skipping the vaccines because they don't prevent all Covid. A very bad tradeoff.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:16:15 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

“Never really in recent history for a respiratory virus can I think of an anti-viral medication being as effective, demonstrated in scientific literature, as what Paxlovid has shown," @rebeccaxwang says. https://www.unionleader.com/news/health/coronavirus/despite-covid-rebound-cases-docs-say-paxlovid-is-saving-lives/article_f39f48dc-7c9d-50ad-a1c4-1eb62c3884a3.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:17:14 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

“The public doesn’t seem to understand that the evidence around hospitalization and deaths is really powerful,” @Bob_Wachter says.

Underuse of Paxlovid is already associated with thousands of preventable deaths in the U.S., he adds.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:18:01 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

“A large chunk of deaths are preventable right now with Paxlovid alone,” @ashishkjha says: If every American 50 and above with Covid received a course of either Paxlovid or monoclonal antibodies, daily daily deaths might fall to about 50 per day, from about 400 now.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:19:02 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Perhaps the most shocking statistic about Paxlovid’s underuse is that a smaller share of 80-year-olds with Covid in the U.S. is now receiving the drug than 45-year-olds with Covid, per Jha. For the 45yo's, the benefits are typically small. For 80 yo's, they can be lifesaving.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:20:42 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

“Medicine is about weighing costs and benefits,” @Bob_Wachter said. “The recommendation should be clear and unambiguous for people at high risk: The benefits of the drug outweigh the downsides.”

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:21:08 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

And does Paxlovid does matter for vaccinated people. Death rates, per @EpicResearchOrg:

Among vaccinated 50+yo who took Paxlovid: 0.022%.
Among vaccinated 50+yo who did not take Paxlovid: 0.067%

Cutting your risk of death by a factor of three is a good deal.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:25:36 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

The second explanation for Paxlovid's underuse is that many Americans, disproportionately Republicans, are still not taking Covid seriously. They imagine it to be little different from a normal flu.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:27:07 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

This attitude has created a huge gap in vaccination rates and is the main reason Republicans are dying at such higher rates from Covid. A new study from three Yale researchers, controlling for age and other factors, finds a very large partisan effect. https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.10751

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:28:32 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

This is the Red Covid phenomenon: Since vaccines became available, deaths in Republican communities have far outpaced those in Democratic ones. It’s a tragic reminder that so many of these deaths were preventable.

Chart by @ashhwu:

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:32:49 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Now something similar is happening with Paxlovid: Democratic states are using it much more than Republican ones. Of the 20 states with lowest use per 100 cases of Covid, 18 were won by Trump in ‘20.

This is a highly effective drug that’s widely available and free for patients.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:35:45 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

The disproportionate underuse of Covid treatments in Republican areas is part of the larger story: Many political conservatives have not treated Covid as the mortal threat that it really is.

But Paxlovid underuse is also a national phenomenon, not just a Republican one.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:37:30 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Don't be confused by the caveats and limitations about Paxlovid. The drug is highly effective. It's widely available. It's free for patients. Yet many are saying no thanks, leading to thousands of avoidable deaths among older Americans. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/07/briefing/covid-treatment-paxlovid.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:40:26 +0000 2022

The key part of this skepticism is the age of the hypothetical patient: Paxlovid probably has only tiny benefits -- maybe rounding to zero -- for a vaxxed 25-year-old because the Covid risks are already so low to that person.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:42:31 +0000 2022

David Leonhardt tweeted this while quoting the below tweet.

Replying to @walidgellad

Really powerful?
Again, in unvaccinated people yes. In vaccinated, where does 'really powerful' come from?

For older high risk adults absolutely the evidence is sufficient, but for the 25 year old triple vaccinated? How can we say this?
https://twitter.com/DLeonhardt/status/1578389184850657285?s=20&t=8OTNkvhdQhQELUXggTVWLA

-- Walid Gellad, MD MPH (@walidgellad) Fri Oct 07 14:40:32 +0000 2022

David Leonhardt Retweeted

Genuinely curious how much of the low rates of Paxlovid usage comes from patients, some of whom are COVID skeptics -- or from a broader lack of urgency in prescribing it from doctors.

I'm just not totally sure doctors are generally promoting Pax as much as they could be

-- Ryan McCarthy (@mccarthyryanj) Fri Oct 07 14:35:17 +0000 2022

Ryan McCarthy tweeted this while quoting the below tweet.

Replying to @DLeonhardt

This attitude has created a huge gap in vaccination rates and is the main reason Republicans are dying at such higher rates from Covid. A new study from three Yale researchers, controlling for age and other factors, finds a very large partisan effect. https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.10751

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:28:32 +0000 2022

I don't think there is a strong argument for this hypothetical person to take it. There is some hope that the drug may reduce long Covid, but no strong evidence that it does. I also understand why a person in this category who's focused on Covid risks might choose to take it.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:46:04 +0000 2022

David Leonhardt tweeted this while quoting the below tweet.

Replying to @DLeonhardt

@DLeonhardt I kind of agree for at risk populations, but what would you say to a healthy 40 year old, 4 time vaxxed (reg shots + boosters) who has mild symptoms on a positive? Should you take it and run the risk of getting a rebound when you will be fine to begin with.

-- Chewy (@NYGJared) Fri Oct 07 14:19:19 +0000 2022

Things are rational:
* Living life
* Not wearing a mask (for most people)
* Staying current on Covid boosters
* Taking Paxlovid if you get Covid and are older

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 14:49:29 +0000 2022

David Leonhardt tweeted this while quoting the below tweet.

Replying to @DLeonhardt

@DLeonhardt David it is time for another visit to reality-land (anywhere outside Boston/NYC/DC). Less than 1% masking and everyone living life.

-- Matthew Marchant (@MatthewMarchant) Fri Oct 07 14:44:20 +0000 2022

Age is such an important dividing line here. Covid is hospitalizing almost nobody under 50 and boosted. Paxlovid has little apparent benefit for most of them.

Covid remains a major killer of people 65 and above.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Fri Oct 07 17:38:27 +0000 2022

David Leonhardt tweeted this while quoting the below tweet.

Replying to @DLeonhardt

@DLeonhardt David, it's not just the absolute gain that may be smaller. With low risk sometimes drug safety twarts benefit and there is even harm.

If this weren't COVID, and we were talking about risks of this magnitude, no doctor nor the FDA would even permit it
@DrToddLee @walidgellad

-- Vinay Prasad MD MPH (@VPrasadMDMPH) Fri Oct 07 14:53:37 +0000 2022

David Leonhardt Retweeted

When my kids were in daycare, I would get the flu every year despite being vaccinated. But I'd only feel really bad for a day or two. By comparison, I had the flu once as an unvaccinated person and was knocked out for a week. I'll take the help that vaccines offer.

-- Jennifer Nuzzo, DrPH (@JenniferNuzzo) Fri Oct 07 18:00:48 +0000 2022

Jennifer Nuzzo, DrPH tweeted this while quoting the below tweet.

Starting to see tweets from people who got bivalent booster and then got infected >2 weeks later. We'll likely see more of these. It doesn't mean vaccines failed. The primary goal of vaccination--to reduce severity of illness-- has not changed.

-- Jennifer Nuzzo, DrPH (@JenniferNuzzo) Fri Oct 07 17:28:04 +0000 2022

The most vulnerable generally receive the *biggest* benefits from the Covid vaccines.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Wed Oct 05 14:38:45 +0000 2022

David Leonhardt tweeted this while quoting the below tweet.

There seems to be a lot of misinformation going around that immunocompromised people don't benefit at all from vaccines or existing COVID therapies.

That is *absolutely* false and very dangerous falsehood to spread, as such people might not realize the many options they have.🧵

-- zeynep tufekci (@zeynep) Tue Oct 04 23:45:28 +0000 2022

Early school start times are a real public health problem.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:44:32 +0000 2022

David Leonhardt tweeted this while quoting the below tweet.

As evidence piles up for the benefits of later start times, Baltimore city has moved high school starts *earlier*, as early as 7:30, in a city where many rely on city buses. "Every day, less than half the class arrives to my first period before 7:40 a.m."
https://www.baltimoresun.com/opinion/readers-respond/bs-ed-rr-early-school-hours-letter-20220929-j7kjupiiyfetxmaokcnlvc24ai-story.html

-- Alec MacGillis (@AlecMacGillis) Tue Oct 04 12:42:12 +0000 2022

Have the original racial gaps in Covid gaps really disappeared? Yes. By either of the main measures, the Black and Latino Covid death rates are no longer higher than the white rate. Here’s what happened … 🧵https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/04/briefing/covid-race-gaps.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:46:10 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Early in the pandemic, there were very large gaps, with the Black and Latino rates of serious Covid and death much higher than the white rates. A major reason: Lack of convenient vaccine access in many communities.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:46:42 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

This is a heartbreaking story from 2020: As Teresa Bradley, a Michigan nurse with Covid, was being wheeled through an ER, she looked around. “Everybody in there was African-American,” she said. “Everybody was.” https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/05/us/coronavirus-latinos-african-americans-cdc-data.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:47:29 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

What changed? 1) Grass-roots activists and medical providers made a big push, both to get vaccines into vulnerable communities and to persuade skeptics of their importance. 2) The Biden administration replaced the Trump administration and set out to equalize vaccine access.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:47:51 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

It worked. By late 2021, the racial vaccination gaps had largely disappeared. And the gaps in Covid death rates soon followed.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:49:49 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Here is the overall rate — per 100,000 people (which is the main way that the CDC and many other organizations report disease statistics). The Covid death rate among Black Americans was last above the white rate in early 2022.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:51:02 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Many experts prefer an age-adjusted rate, which effectively compares a disease’s toll in a given group to its expected toll based on age profile. By the age-adjusted rate, the gap between the Black and Latino Covid death rates and the white rate disappeared about six months ago.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:51:49 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Since April, the Latino age-adjusted rate has been about 15% lower than the white rate. The age-adjusted Black rate has been nearly identical to the white rate — with the Black rate about 1% lower — during the same period. The Asian rate has been lowest for much longer.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:52:19 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

The cumulative toll remains higher for Black and Latino Americans because the early gaps were so large. But Covid has managed to become a public health success story, in which a dedicated campaign eliminated large inequities, despite underlying inequities in medicine and society.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:52:59 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

That success story has potential lessons for reducing the country’s other racial inequities — in incomes, housing, education, criminal justice, the medical system and many other realms. Some of those inequities have gotten worse not better in recent years.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:53:21 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

I find this statistic especially shocking: Once you control for the rise of Black men outside the labor force (like those incarcerated), wages of Black men trail those of white men by as much as when Harry Truman was president.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/25/opinion/sunday/race-wage-gap.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:54:14 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

The elimination of Covid’s racial gaps, on the other hand, even offers lessons for future Covid policy. Absent a continued effort, racial gaps could open in booster rates or access to Paxlovid....

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:54:36 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

... “The natural social history of many diseases is that they tend toward inequality, unless you intentionally combat it,” Dr. Cameron Webb, a pandemic adviser in the Biden administration, said.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:54:45 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

For all of the misery that Covid has brought — including the stark inequities of the pandemic’s first year — it has also become a case study that should remind us racial injustice can sometimes be overcome.

More here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/04/briefing/covid-race-gaps.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:55:09 +0000 2022

David Leonhardt Retweeted

This is a good news/bad news story. Good news is that black and Latino vax rates rose sharply, and their relative death rates fell. But the racial gap in mortality rates also closed because unvaxxed and unboosted white ppl kept dying at high rates.

-- James Surowiecki (@JamesSurowiecki) Tue Oct 04 17:56:53 +0000 2022

James Surowiecki tweeted this while quoting the below tweet.

Have the original racial gaps in Covid gaps really disappeared? Yes. By either of the main measures, the Black and Latino Covid death rates are no longer higher than the white rate. Here’s what happened … 🧵https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/04/briefing/covid-race-gaps.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Tue Oct 04 12:46:10 +0000 2022

A note of dissent to this @DLeonhardt & @Nate_Cohn analysis: gerrymandering isn't just about D-R balance; there's also the problem of too many safe seats, exacerbated by partisan primaries. The resulting Ds &Rs, even if near 50-50, may be more polarized.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/30/briefing/gerrymandering-maps-districts-republicans-democrats.html?smid=tw-share

-- Ned Foley (@Nedfoley) Fri Sep 30 17:35:40 +0000 2022

The COVID #vaccine and #Booster make a difference for hospitalization or death--especially for older people.

Infection rates typically increase at the start of winter, consider a shot to protect yourself. via @DLeonhardt
More: https://kingcounty.gov/depts/health/covid-19/data/vaccination-outcomes.aspx

-- Chris Mehl (@ChrisMehl7) Wed Sep 28 12:58:44 +0000 2022

American democracy faces two major threats: 1) a movement within the Republican Party that refuses to accept election defeat; 2) a growing disconnect between public opinion and government power. 🧵

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/17/us/american-democracy-threats.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:18:34 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

The Jan. 6 attack was the only most obvious part of the movement that refuses to accept election defeat. Hundreds of elected Republican officials around the country falsely claim that the 2020 election was rigged, suggesting they may be willing to overturn a future election.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:19:08 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

“There is the possibility, for the first time in American history, that a legitimately elected president will not be able to take office,” as @Yascha_Mounk says.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:19:23 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Even many Republicans who do not repeat the election lies have chosen to support those who do. Kevin McCarthy, the Republican House leader, has gone so far as to support colleagues who have used violent imagery in public comments, such as calling for the killing of Democrats.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:20:07 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

But there are also many senior Republicans who have signaled they would be unlikely to participate in an effort to overturn an election, including Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate. He recently said that the United States had “very little voter fraud.”

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:20:21 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

This combination suggests that the risk of an overturned election remains uncertain. But the chances are much higher than would have fathomable until the past few years. Previous leaders of both parties consistently rejected talk of reversing an election outcome.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:20:34 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

In addition to this acute threat, American democracy also faces a chronic threat: The power to set government policy is becoming increasingly disconnected from public opinion.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:20:43 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Two of the past four presidents have taken office despite losing the popular vote. Senators representing a majority of Americans are often unable to pass bills, partly because of the increasing use of the filibuster....

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:21:08 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

... And the Supreme Court is dominated by an ambitious Republican-appointed bloc even through Democrats have won the popular vote in seven of the past eight presidential election — an unprecedented run of popular-vote success in U.S. history.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:21:15 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Parties in previous eras that fared as well in the popular vote as the Democrats have fared in recent decades were able to run the government and pass policies they favored. Examples include Jefferson's Democratic-Republicans, the New Deal Democrats and the Reagan Republicans.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:21:44 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

The growing disconnect from federal power and public opinion generally spring from enduring features of American government, some written into the Constitution. But these features did not conflict with majority opinion to the same degree in past decades....

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:22:09 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

... One reason is that less populous and more populous states tended to have broadly similar political outlooks in the past.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:22:15 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

A sorting of the population in recent decades has meant that the less populated areas given outsize influence by the Constitution also tend to be conservative, while major metropolitan areas have become more liberal.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:22:31 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

In the past, “the system was still antidemocratic, but it didn’t have a partisan effect,” said Steven Levitsky, co-author of "How Democracies Die." “Now it’s undemocratic and has a partisan effect.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:23:20 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Over the sweep of history, the American government has tended to become more democratic, through women’s suffrage, civil rights laws, the direct election of senators and more. The current period is so striking partly because it is one of the rare exceptions.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:23:42 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

The connection between government power and popular opinion has become weaker in recent decades.

Much more, including graphics by @ashhwu here: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/17/us/american-democracy-threats.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:24:11 +0000 2022

David Leonhardt Retweeted

"The Senate today is split 50-50 between the two parties. But the 50 Democratic senators effectively represent 186 million Americans, while the 50 Republican senators effectively represent 145 million." @DLeonhardt: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/17/us/american-democracy-threats.html?smid=tw-share

-- Alec MacGillis (@AlecMacGillis) Sun Sep 18 23:26:15 +0000 2022

American democracy faces two major threats: 1) a movement within the Republican Party that refuses to accept election defeat; 2) a growing disconnect between public opinion and government power. 🧵

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/17/us/american-democracy-threats.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:18:34 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

The Jan. 6 attack was the only most obvious part of the movement that refuses to accept election defeat. Hundreds of elected Republican officials around the country falsely claim that the 2020 election was rigged, suggesting they may be willing to overturn a future election.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:19:08 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

“There is the possibility, for the first time in American history, that a legitimately elected president will not be able to take office,” as @Yascha_Mounk says.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:19:23 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Even many Republicans who do not repeat the election lies have chosen to support those who do. Kevin McCarthy, the Republican House leader, has gone so far as to support colleagues who have used violent imagery in public comments, such as calling for the killing of Democrats.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:20:07 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

But there are also many senior Republicans who have signaled they would be unlikely to participate in an effort to overturn an election, including Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate. He recently said that the United States had “very little voter fraud.”

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:20:21 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

This combination suggests that the risk of an overturned election remains uncertain. But the chances are much higher than would have fathomable until the past few years. Previous leaders of both parties consistently rejected talk of reversing an election outcome.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:20:34 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

In addition to this acute threat, American democracy also faces a chronic threat: The power to set government policy is becoming increasingly disconnected from public opinion.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:20:43 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Two of the past four presidents have taken office despite losing the popular vote. Senators representing a majority of Americans are often unable to pass bills, partly because of the increasing use of the filibuster....

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:21:08 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

... And the Supreme Court is dominated by an ambitious Republican-appointed bloc even through Democrats have won the popular vote in seven of the past eight presidential election — an unprecedented run of popular-vote success in U.S. history.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:21:15 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Parties in previous eras that fared as well in the popular vote as the Democrats have fared in recent decades were able to run the government and pass policies they favored. Examples include Jefferson's Democratic-Republicans, the New Deal Democrats and the Reagan Republicans.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:21:44 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

The growing disconnect from federal power and public opinion generally spring from enduring features of American government, some written into the Constitution. But these features did not conflict with majority opinion to the same degree in past decades....

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:22:09 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

... One reason is that less populous and more populous states tended to have broadly similar political outlooks in the past.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:22:15 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

A sorting of the population in recent decades has meant that the less populated areas given outsize influence by the Constitution also tend to be conservative, while major metropolitan areas have become more liberal.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:22:31 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

In the past, “the system was still antidemocratic, but it didn’t have a partisan effect,” said Steven Levitsky, co-author of "How Democracies Die." “Now it’s undemocratic and has a partisan effect.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:23:20 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

Over the sweep of history, the American government has tended to become more democratic, through women’s suffrage, civil rights laws, the direct election of senators and more. The current period is so striking partly because it is one of the rare exceptions.

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:23:42 +0000 2022

Replying to @DLeonhardt

The connection between government power and popular opinion has become weaker in recent decades.

Much more, including graphics by @ashhwu here: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/17/us/american-democracy-threats.html

-- David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) Mon Sep 19 00:24:11 +0000 2022

David Leonhardt Retweeted

"The Senate today is split 50-50 between the two parties. But the 50 Democratic senators effectively represent 186 million Americans, while the 50 Republican senators effectively represent 145 million." @DLeonhardt: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/17/us/american-democracy-threats.html?smid=tw-share

-- Alec MacGillis (@AlecMacGillis) Sun Sep 18 23:26:15 +0000 2022