Episode 66: Conviction (Impeachment Politics, w/ Sarah Binder)

The U.S. House has impeached President Donald Trump, for an unprecedented second time. This time, a majority of members of Congress endorsed a single article of impeachment for "incitement of insurrection," based on Trump's urging a crowd of his supporters to march to the Capitol where both houses of Congress were meeting to count electoral votes, urging the crowd to go pressure members of Congress to overturn the results in key states that Trump lost. Once the House officially transmits the article of impeachment to the Senate, they will be able to conduct a trial, which could result in conviction and disqualification of Trump from federal office in the future, ensuring he could not be President ever again. I spoke with an expert on impeachment, Frank O. Bowman, III, the Floyd R. Gibson Missouri Endowed Professor of Law, at the University of Missouri School of Law. He has many areas of expertise, including legal history and the impeachment of the President and other federal officers. We discussed the history of impeachment, his thoughts on the strengths and shortcomings of the single article of impeachment, as well as where blame lies surrounding the riot at the Capitol on January 6. LINKS --Frank Bowman University of Missouri web profile (https://law.missouri.edu/person/frank-o-bowman-iii/) --High Crimes and Misdemeanors: A History of Impeachment for the Age of Trump, by Frank O. Bowman, III (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07R52WC1B/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1) --"Impeachable offenses: Examining the case for removal of the 45th President of the United States" (Bowman's blog) (https://impeachableoffenses.net/) --"The constitutional case for impeaching Donald Trump (again)," by Frank O. Bowman, III (in Just Security) (https://www.justsecurity.org/74127/the-constitutional-case-for-impeaching-donald-trump-again/) --Text of the impeachment resolution approved by the U.S. House on January 13, 2021 (https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-resolution/24/text) Special Guest: Frank Bowman.

In the wake of the violence and destruction resulting from mob action in the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, and given that many view President Donald Trump's public comments beforehand as inciting the mob's action, House Democrats have presented a single article of impeachment with a vote likely imminent. If this happens, Trump would be the first U.S. president impeached twice. I recently spoke with Sarah Binder, Professor of Political Science at The George Washington University, and Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution, speaking with her about impeachment politics, as well as things to watch as Democrats prepare to regain control of the Senate, albeit by the thinnest of margins. LINKS --Binder's GWU profile (https://politicalscience.columbian.gwu.edu/sarah-binder) --Binder's Brookings profile (https://www.brookings.edu/experts/sarah-a-binder/) --"What to expect when Congress counts the electoral college votes on Wednesday," by Sarah Binder (Washington Post's Monkey Cage, January 4, 2021) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/01/04/what-expect-when-congress-counts-electoral-college-votes-wednesday/) --"Impeachment resolution cites Trump's 'incitement' of Capitol insurrection," Brian Naylor (NPR, January 11, 2021) (https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-effort-live-updates/2021/01/11/955631105/impeachment-resolution-cites-trumps-incitement-of-capitol-insurrection) --"Impeachment lessons: Where has deliberation gone?" Sarah A. Binder & Steven S. Smith (Brookings, December 13, 1998) (https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/impeachment-lessons-where-has-deliberation-gone/) --"We're on the road to impeachment. Here's what you need to know about what's ahead," Sarah Binder (Washington Post's Monkey Cage, December 12, 2019) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/12/were-road-impeachment-heres-what-you-need-know-about-whats-ahead/) Special Guest: Sarah Binder.

We all eat, but we don't all eat well. How can we do so? In particular, what dietary choices are best for an individual's physical wellness? And how much do individuals' unique characteristics determine what choices are best for them? And what choices are best for the environment? Why are calories and "food miles" overrated as metrics? How can governments help consumers make good food choices, especially if they live in food deserts? I discuss such questions with genetic epidemiologist Tim Spector. LINKS --Tim Spector's King's College web profile (https://www.kcl.ac.uk/people/professor-tim-spector) --Spoon-Fed: Why Almost Everything We've Been Told About Food is Wrong (2020), by Tim Spector (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07WSSYZK2/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1) --The Guardian review of Spoon-Fed (by Bee Wilson) (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/aug/05/spoon-fed-by-tim-spector-review-food-myths-busted) --Information on Zoe (program through which individuals learn more about how their bodies process food) (http://www.joinzoe.com/) --"The human microbiome: Our second genome," by Elizabeth Grice & Julia Sege (2012), Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics (https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev-genom-090711-163814) --"Attempts to lose weight among adults in the United States, 2013-2016," report from the CDC: National Center for Health Statistics (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db313.htm) --"Chile battles obesity with stop signs on packaged foods," by Eileen Smith (2016) for National Public Radio (https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/08/12/486898630/chile-battles-obesity-with-stop-signs-on-packaged-foods) Special Guest: Tim Spector.

ABOUT THIS EPISODE Even though some conspiracy theories are only endorsed by a small fraction of the population, it is likely a mistake to write off all who believe in conspiracy theories, especially since some theories are endorsed more widely, and with substantial effect. I discuss these issues with two conspiracy theory researchers: Stephanie Kelley-Romano of the Bates College Department of Rhetoric, Film, and Screen Studies, and Joanne Miller of the University of Delaware Department of Political Science & International Relations. LINKS --Stephanie Kelley-Romano's Bates College web profile (https://www.bates.edu/rhetoric-film-screen-studies/faculty/kelley-romano-stephanie/) --Joanne Miller's University of Delaware web profile (https://www.poscir.udel.edu/people/faculty/MillerJ?uid=MillerJ&Name=Dr.%20Joanne%20Miller) --"Trust no one: The conspiracy genre on American television," (Stephanie Kelley-Romano, in The Southern Communication Journal) (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stephanie_Kelley-Romano/publication/241744909_Trust_No_One_The_Conspiracy_Genre_on_American_Television/links/5cf7f826299bf1fb185ba603/Trust-No-One-The-Conspiracy-Genre-on-American-Television.pdf) --"Make American hate again: Donald Trump and th birther conspiracy," (Stephanie Kelley-Romano & Kathryn Carew, in The Journal of Hate Studies) (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ryan_Scrivens/publication/330482179_The_Dangers_of_Porous_Borders_The_Trump_Effect_in_Canada_Journal_of_Hate_Studies/links/5c41dea092851c22a37ea15b/The-Dangers-of-Porous-Borders-The-Trump-Effect-in-Canada-Journal-of-Hate-Studies.pdf#page=40) --"Conspiracy endorsement as motivated reasoning: The moderating roles of political knowledge and trust," (Joanne Miller, Kyle Saunders, & Christina Farhart, in American Journal of Political Science) (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/ajps.12234) --"Gender differences in COVID-19 conspiracy theory beliefs," (Erin Cassese, Christina Farhart, & Joanne Miller, in Politics & Gender) (https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/11E1C0AA1837CFA7E3926F5E9AF30782/S1743923X20000409a.pdf/div-class-title-gender-differences-in-covid-19-conspiracy-theory-beliefs-div.pdf) --Little A'Le'Inn (Rachel, NV) (http://www.littlealeinn.com/) Special Guests: Joanne Miller and Stephanie Kelley-Romano.

ABOUT THIS EPISODE The firings and resignations of senior civilian officials at the Pentagon--most notably of Secretary of Defense Mark Esper--has raised alarm in many quarters. Many are also concerned about President Trump's refusal to concede the election and his refusal to support a transition to the administration of President-elect Joe Biden. I discuss these concerns, and other issues, with Roger Williams University Professor of Law, and expert on national security law, Peter Margulies. LINKS --Peter Margulies's Roger Williams University profile (https://law.rwu.edu/faculty/peter-s-margulies) --"Trump administration removes senior defense officials and installs loyalists, triggering alarm at Pentagon," by Barbara Starr, Zachary Cohen, & Ryan Browne, for CNN (https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/10/politics/pentagon-policy-official-resigns/index.html) --"Is it mere spite--or something more sinister?" by Michael T. Klare, for The Nation (https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/esper-trump-fired/) --"Exclusive: Top official on U.S. election cybersecurity tells associates he expects to be fired," by Christopher Bing, Joseph Menn, & Raphael Satter, for Reuters (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-officials-exclusive-idUSKBN27S2YI) --"Kavanaugh decision sides with immigrant seeking factual review of denied torture claim," by Debra Cassens Weiss, for ABAJournal (https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/kavanaugh-decision-sides-with-immigrant-seeking-factual-review-of-denied-torture-claim) Special Guest: Peter Margulies.

ABOUT THIS EPISODE As Democrats were reminded (the hard way) in 2016, elections don't always turn out as we expect them to. When a political party loses an election, especially if it does more poorly than expected, it often has tough, self-reflective conversations about what happened. In so doing, parties try to learn lessons from their losses. University of Denver political scientist has written about these issues in his new book, Learning from Loss: The Democrats, 2016-2020. LINKS --Seth Masket's DU profile (https://www.du.edu/ahss/polisci/facultystaff/masket_seth.html) --Learning from Loss: The Democrats, 2016-2020 (Amazon) (https://www.amazon.com/Learning-Loss-Democrats-Seth-Masket/dp/1108482120) --"Amid tears and anger, House Democrats promise 'deep dive' on election losses," by Luke Broadwater and Nicholas Fandos (New York Times, 2020, Nov. 5) (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/05/us/house-democrats-election-losses.html) --"Susan Collins was never going to lose," by Robert Messenger (New York Times, 2020, Nov. 6) (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/06/opinion/susan-collins-was-never-going-to-lose.html) --Fair Fight (Voting Rights Organization founded by Stacey Abrams) (https://fairfight.com/) Special Guest: Seth Masket.

ABOUT THIS EPISODE Many people discuss the public's trust in, and willingness to accord legitimacy to, U.S. courts, especially the Supreme Court. But why does that trust and legitimacy matter? What factors determine it? How might recent Republican maneuvering affect legitimacy, including maneuvering that has recently resulted in the confirmation of President Trump's third Supreme Court nomineee? What might be the impact of Democrats' increasing the number of seats on the Supreme Court? How might race matter for any of these questions? I discuss such questions with University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee political scientist Sara Benesh. LINKS --Sara Benesh's website (https://sites.uwm.edu/sbenesh/) --"Understanding public confidence in American courts," Sara Benesh. (2006). Journal of Politics (https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/sites.uwm.edu/dist/6/132/files/2016/09/Benesh-2006-10av01d.pdf) --"Be Careful with My Court," Shawn C. Fettig & Sara C. Benesh. (2016), in The Chief Justice: Appointment and Influence, Artemus Ward and David Danelski, Editors. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. (https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/sites.uwm.edu/dist/6/132/files/2016/09/Ch.-15-Fettig-Benesh-Proofs-1ef2244.pdf) --"Blacks and the United States Supreme Court: Models of Diffuse Support," James L. Gibson & Gregory A. Caldeira. (1992). The Journal of Politics (https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2132111.pdf) Special Guest: Sara Benesh.

ABOUT THIS EPISODE My generation, and the ones before mine, have really screwed things up, it seems. But eventually, younger people will take their place as leaders (and some already are). For all our screw-ups, those of us who have some years under our belts can potentially play helpful roles as mentors, as younger folks find their way. I recently had a chance to talk about mentorship with Jean Rhodes, an influential expert on the topic, and the Frank L. Boyden Professor of Psychology at the University of Massachusetts Boston. She studies intergenerational relationships, especially formal and informal mentorship, and their effects on the development of youth, particularly marginalized youth. Among the issues we discussed: What is the impact of mentorship? When is it most effective? What’s the role of gender and race? What does it take to be a good mentor? And what kinds of policies can support effective mentoring? LINKS --Jean Rhodes web profile (https://www.rhodeslab.org/jean-e-rhodes-ph-d/) --New York Times obituary on George Albee (https://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/15/us/15albee.html) --"The effects of youth mentoring programs: A meta-analysis of outcome studies," Raposa et al. (2019), Journal of Youth and Adolescence (https://www.rhodeslab.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Raposa2019_Article_TheEffectsOfYouthMentoringProg.pdf) --Older and Wiser: New Ideas for Youth Mentoring in the 21st Century, by Jean E. Rhodes (https://www.amazon.com/Older-Wiser-Ideas-Mentoring-Century/dp/0674248074) Special Guest: Jean Rhodes.

ABOUT THIS EPISODE As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, many people have called for hazard pay for "essential workers" to compensate them for additional risks they encounter because they have to go in to work in person. For example, I'm aware of such calls for custodial workers at colleges and universities that have invited students to campus. Indeed, I've encountered such arguments at the institution where I teach. In this episode, I discuss such issues with philosopher Doug McConnell, who recently published on the topic. We talk about the conditions that can justify hazard pay, we discuss other forms of relevant compensation, we discuss the relevance of race and ethnicity, and we discuss more. LINKS --Doug McConnell's Oxford profile (https://www.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/people/dr-doug-mcconnell) --"Compensation and hazard pay for key workers during an epidemic: an argument from analogy," by Doug McConnell & Dominic Wilkinson, in the Journal of Medical Ethics (https://jme.bmj.com/content/medethics/early/2020/05/27/medethics-2020-106389.full.pdf) --"UT employee petition urges regents to move most classes online, provide hazard pay," by Lara Korte, in the Austin American-Statesman (https://www.statesman.com/news/20200819/ut-employee-petition-urges-regents-to-move-most-classes-online-provide-hazard-pay) --"A majority of workers are fearful of coronavirus infections at work, especially Black, Hispanic, and low- and middle-income workers," by Peter Dorman & Lawrence Mishel, from the Economic Policy Institute (https://www.epi.org/publication/covid-risks-and-hazard-pay/) --"'Heroes or hostages?': Communities of color bear the burden of essential work in coronavirus crisis," by Catherine Thorbecke, for ABC News (https://abcnews.go.com/Business/heroes-hostages-communities-color-bear-burden-essential-work/story?id=70662472) --"Balancing the duty to treat with the duty to family in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic," by Doug McConnell, in the Journal of Medical Ethics (https://jme.bmj.com/content/medethics/46/6/360.full.pdf) Special Guest: Doug McConnell.

ABOUT THIS EPISODE Father James Martin is a Jesuit priest and editor-at-large at America, a weekly magazine published by the Jesuits of the United States. Father Martin is widely know for his advocacy for the rights of LGBT people, including his book Building a Bridge: How the Catholic Church and the LGBT Community Can Enter into a Relationship of Respect, Compassion, and Sensitivity (https://www.amazon.com/Building-Bridge-Relationship-Compassion-Sensitivity/dp/0062694316). In 2017, Pope Francis appointed him as a consultant to the Vatican's Secretariat for Communications (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dicastery_for_Communication). He's appeared on such outlets as CNN, NPR, and Fox News. He's also been a guest on The Colbert Report, and was informally dubbed the "Colbert Report chaplain." Recently, he was also one of three members of the clergy who jointly delivered the benediction at the close of the Democratic National Convention. In this episode, Father Martin and I resume discussion of what it means to be pro-life, broadly defined. LINKS --Father Martin's Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Martin_(priest,_born_1960)) --Contemplation and Political Action: An Ignatian Guide to Civic Engagement (https://www.jesuits.org/our-work/justice-and-ecology/take-action-2/civic-engagement/) --"Pope calls faithful to pray, participate actively in politics," Catholic News Agency (https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-calls-faithful-to-pray-participate-actively-in-politics) --Pope Francis's Laudato Si' (http://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html) --Ignatian Contemplation (a video of Fr. Martin discussing Ignatian prayer) (https://youtu.be/Cw1ZXdBtCug) Special Guest: Father James Martin.