Uring No Votes from Other States' Senators

 I just emailed three senators from states other than my own. All are Democrats who have signaled their willingness to support the continuing resolution narrowly passed by the house. The CR advances Trump's plans to consolidate sweeping power into the executive branch. It supports DOGE's charade of cost-cutting while increasing the overall budget.

Here's the email I wrote:

I live in Louisiana. Neither of my two senators represents my interests. Both are voting for a stopgap budget we know to be a dereliction of duty by the legislative branch. The executive branch needs reining in. There is no long-term up-side to supporting the continuing resolution in the face of President Trump's authoritarian overreach.

I know the arguments for not playing into Trump's hands, for keeping your powder dry, and for preventing the pain of a shutdown. But we're in pain already. Passing the CR is exactly what Trump wants, and the chances to stop him dwindle as he gains more power.

I beg you, as someone who can be my senator when Louisiana's senators won't: please stop this budget.

Thank you.

At least I spelled reining correctly. (I spelled it reigning in a different email to my own senators.) 

It looks like just enough Democratic senators will vote along with the Republicans to keep the government open. The decision is partly tactical (Trump would benefit from a shutdown that he could blame on Democrats), partly ethical (it'll be harmful to shut down the government, including harm to ongoing judicial checks against Trump), and partly--well--it's hard for many Democrats to set a firm boundary. I get it. I don't like setting boundaries myself, and I'm constitutionally skeptical of government shutdowns as political messaging.

But I'm swayed by arguments like those of the Federal Workers Union, which points out that we're already in the middle of a de facto shutdown via Trump's executive orders. Isaac Saul's Tangle, my go-to for a taste of what the other side thinks (Saul samples all sides), lambasted the CR, a highly unusual move for an outlet that relies on credibility with conservatives as well as liberals. "I don’t just think Trump’s plan is bad in the immediate term," he writes, "I think it will do lasting damage to our government by becoming a blueprint for how a president can wrest control of spending from the legislative branch."

The chances that my little emails--as a non-constituent--move the needle at all are minuscule. But I'm taking a page from my partner's survival advice and making my voice heard, even a little bit.