My 30-minute one-on-one discussion with US Congressman Joaquin Castro

(Given this is the de facto political news forum, I felt this more appropriate here than in MSIPSM’s, where many would likely miss it.)

Many times in doing Lyft/Uber, I work late Friday and Saturdays, picking up inebriated people who can’t drive and get them safely home, just like I did at UGA back when I was 20 (I ran a car service between these clusters of apartments and downtown Athens, charging $3-5 bucks a ride, minimum 2 people. Anyway, I digress.).

This past Friday, around 1:30am, I’m sitting in downtown San Antonio when I receive a call to pick up “Joaquin” from the Paramour Bar, an upscale bar where you can wine and dine with SA’s movers and shakers. I get there, parked the car, and Joaquin Castro, US Representative from Texas (and MY representative as well) gets in the back seat, passenger side. I check the destination on the app – 35 minutes away, it tells me, meaning 25 given the way I drive and Lyft calculates driving times.

Having my Congressman in my car for 30 minutes (let’s say I was sure to keep within the speed limit) – I had a few things I wanted to say, some things I wanted to ask. To be frank, I likely talked too much, but c’est la vie – he is my representative, and when does one get 30 minutes of their Congressman to themselves?

Please note, I am not a professional reporter. I did not record this, nor was I able to take notes. The conversation below is the best, to MY recollection, of how it went, but while I am using quotes, they are more of a literary convention to aid the author and not a direct word-for-word citation of what was said. So, please, do not quote this saying ‘here is a reported DIRECT QUOTE from Joaquin Castro!’

“Excuse me, but are you Representative Castro?”

“Yes, you recognize me?”

“Laura, my wife, and I are big supporters of yours and of progressive causes, so yes. We were even at your rally the other night regarding the children being separated by their parents. We’ve met a few times, but not in any manner which you would likely remember.”

(We talk pleasantries for a minute. Then I get down to brass tacks.)

JT: “Do you mind if I ask you something?”

JC: “Sure.”

JT: “All the Twitterati are talking about a ‘blue wave’. What are you seeing?”

JC: “Well, as you probably know, the electorate turns against the President’s party in the midterms, so we would expect to see some movement towards us regardless. As an analogy, a typical midterm is a category 1 to 2 storm – some changes are made, but most things remain the same. Had these midterms happened in February, it would have been a category 5 for the Republicans, far worse than 1994 was for the Democrats.

But right now we are fighting Trump fatigue, there haven’t been new revelations from Mueller, and so I would put the category… if the election were held today… at 3.5.”

JT: “Funny you should mention 1994, because something happened that year that I am firmly convinced could help the Democrats, if done correctly. Do you remember Newt Gingrich and his ‘Contract with America’?”

JC: “Of course.”

JT: “If I had my druthers and absolute power, I would have the Democrats do the same thing. Derive a list of 10 progressive… and fully progressive… positions which the Democratic party will work on in the local, state, and federal level for the next 20 years. Things like Universal Health Care, college cost reductions, UBI, more. The Republicans didn’t get everything they wanted with their Contract, but I can tell you that it definitely fired up the base and was one of the driving forces to the category 4 shitstorm that hit the Dems that year and helped lead us to where we are today. I am firmly convinced that the Democrats need something similar – leadership and a path forward.”

JC: “Interesting. How do you know about the CWA?”

JT: “Back then I lived in Newts district and was a typical young conservative. Well, except I didn’t like the lying.”

(This is where the conversation got a little… I don’t know, sad…)

JC: “One of the problems we have as Democrats is that we always get hit with the ‘tax and spend’ label. For example, the tax cuts. Everyone is asking us ‘are you going to repeal the tax cuts?’, and we are, but as soon as we propose something, the Republicans are going to hit back with their ‘tax and spend’ message, so we have to fight against that, which is extremely difficult because we are, in fact, raising taxes and increasing spending.”

(He seemed genuinely perplexed and concerned about this, almost defeatist. But it was late and, I’m sure, everyone was tired.)

JT: “Well, if you are going to let the opposition literally set the terms of the debate, you’ll always find yourself in a losing position. When they accuse of you being ‘tax and spend’, and you defend yourself on those terms, you already lost as you accepted their parameters and the validity, moral and intellectual, to their arguments. Why not work to change the terms of the debate?”

JC: (amused) “Like what?”

JT: “Well, take ‘tax and spend’. I would counter it with, say, ‘invest and build’ with my message being ‘There was a time in America where we were capable of great projects, where we would invest and build in the Panama Canal, we invested and built the Apollo Project, we invested and built the Manhattan Project, invested and built the Interstate Road System, our education system, etc, etc, etc. But since the conservative mantra of ‘tax and spend’ became the norm since the 1980s, we no longer do great things. What is the greatest thing America achieved since 1980? Collapse of the Soviet Union? They largely did it to themselves, so it can’t count. The Internet? Started in 1960, in the age of ‘invest and build’, so it doesn’t count. Facebook? Is Facebook really the greatest thing America has produced since Reagan took office? ‘Tax and spend’ is killing what is great about America, our civic duty to ourselves and our country’s potential – let’s get back, all of us, to investing and building.”

JC: “What do you think about the Trump/Russia thing?” (Interesting pivot by the Rep, there.)

JT: “Simple: I think Trump is owned by Putin, in one way or another. I think it is reprehensible how the GOP… and many Dems… remain silent on this issue. Vladimir Putin sees himself in position to gain revenge on the very country which destroyed the USSR in 1992, an opportunity to become a Russian historical figure on the scale of Ivan the Terrible, Peter the Great, and Stalin, and he is working to make that happen. It is my contention that Vladimir Putin, not Russia but Putin, has declared war on the United States, a new kind of war, and this country is too into ourselves to see this. I can envision future history books in 200 years being written with the words ‘this new type of warfare was first practiced on an unsuspecting West by Vladimir Putin against Britain and America, respectively, in 2016, to devastating effect.

What are you seeing?”

JC: “As you probably know, I’m on the House Intel Committee and we find things are as troubling as the news reports are saying. Of course, we are limited in what we can do being the minority party, which is why we need Democrats to take over the House this year.”

JT: “True. But since you reminded me you’re on the Intel committee, I’m going to amuse you for a minute with my worst fear regarding Russian meddling…” he nods “… If I were Vladimir Putin, I would do the opposite of 2016 and help, blatantly help, Democrats and openly hurt Republicans. Changed votes, zeroed-out voting rolls in critical counties, more. And don’t worry if you get caught because you want to be caught, so your puppet, Donald Trump, can then successfully argue ‘See? I told you the Russians were meddling for the Democrats! Arrest Hillary, Obama! Suspend elections until we know they are “safe”! I’ll remain President for the duration of the emergency…’ and so on.

We would literally go to war with ourselves for the next decade.”

“Do you think that’s possible?”

“Can you give me reassurances it is not?”

“…”

JT: “Anyway, if the above happens, you can expect the racism to get much worse.”

JC: “That’s an issue which concerns you?”

JT: “Well, Joaquin, we already have concentration camps for children on the Mexican border and Trump does everything he can to wave red flags to his racist base, like pardoning Dinesh D’Souza. Yes, it ‘concerns’ me. But it should frighten the hell out of every non-Caucasian person in this country, and the Democrats would be fools not to capitalize on this.

… Anyway, I believe this is your neighborhood?”

Notes regarding Joaquin Castro’s house (at least his District residence): Solidly middle class, about 1.5 miles from my home, not a gated community. I’m 99.9% sure the 6 cars parked in the driveway/front of the house were violating some sort of city ordinance, but I’m sure they were temporary. :wink:

It pains me to say: he did not tip.

Thank you for sharing this. It may just be that he did not tip because you grilled him for 25 minutes at 1:30 am. In exchange, however, you got to grill him, which is very cool.

Did any of his responses seem less scripted and more off the cuff? The blue wave comment, for example, is interesting, but it strikes me as something that he probably has to say often. Did anything seem more authentic?

Two things:

  1. The defeatism re: the perceived inability to defend against a “tax and spend” accusation
  2. He did not say my scenario was impossible

Also, he brought up Trump/Russia as the first topic he asked to discuss, which I found interesting.

That is an interesting conversation. I like how you reframed the terms of the debate to “Invest and Build.” That’s good and could be devestatingly effective. I also think you are right about Putin which is why I wouldn’t be surprised to see more pro secessionist movements in the liberal democracies. Have you thought about running for office?

Well done, JT!

Thank you

Fascinating. Thanks for speaking up and sharing this.

I think you did great with your “interview”. Just one question. I’ve never taken Uber, but I thought I recalled reading that you did not tip on Uber.

Top notch, JohnT!

I think you didn’t used to be able to tip on Uber, but now it offers the opportunity to do so. I always take it.

It’s pretty cool that you were able to talk to any politician at all, OP. Most of them are totally closed-off from their constituents.

The “invest and build” is a really good way to spin the situation, honestly. Good on you for figuring that out. What’s important though is that the specific projects that they promote as the ones that your tax dollars are going towards, need to be ones that middle-America i.e. white people who are on the fence, can get behind 100% without any reservations. Not saying that other projects can’t be accomplished, but the ones that need to be the “public face” of the invest-and-build project (which I agree needs to happen) should be things like space exploration, energy development (and the idea of having more powerful engines and machines needs to be pushed as much as the ‘green’ angle), public works and infrastructure, and jobs that will put big burly all-American tobbaco-chewin’ American blue collar tough guys to work with their muscles and brains.

Ease off of the social-justice issues and for fuck’s sake shut up about gun bans.

They can pull this off if they strategize wisely. If they don’t, and wait until the last minute, they will fail.

I love the “invest and build” phrase and will use it myself in future discussions. I hope the Dems do the same.

I’ve always tipped Uber and Lyft drivers in cash. They’re not exactly getting rich off the fares, and it seems like the right thing to do.

Thank you, I appreciate the kind words.

I have given a little thought to running, but I’ve got a bit of a temper and it would only be a matter of time before my “promising political career” blows up in a “firestorm of controversy” because I was snarky to some old lady in a wheelchair who was complaining to me about her neighbors cat.

If I had my druthers, my BIG PROJECT in the “Invest and Build” category would be to capture and bring into LEO an iron-nickel satellite. Doesn’t even have to be a “big” one, just big enough to put some smelters on it. Mine it so that you can extract ore for other space-based projects, of course, but do so in a way in which you’re left with a hollowed out core, within which you can convert into a habitat.

… Because why the fuck not. We built this country up to this level, it’d be a damned shame if we didn’t use all this work done by our mothers and forefathers to expand off the planet. I mean, we’re so close…

Thanks again for the compliment.

In regards to tips, here’s how it works. Any tips made through the apps (Lyft/Uber) are reported as income on your 1099 provided by the companies. Any tips made in cash are not reported as income on their 1099s. In some ways, it’s like I’ve never received a cash tip! :wink:

Yes. This is what always bugs me about the Democratic positions, they let their opponents pick the terms of the debate, then they use those same terms to defend it. “Entitlements” is another one. I’ve been paying into Social Security and Medicare for over 40 years, so I feel I’m “entitled” to those benefits much in the same way that I’m entitled to the money in my retirement accounts. Yet the Dems always counter the “we need to stop giving people other people’s money” line with “No, No No we need to keep giving out other people’s money.”

It also annoys me to no end when the health care debate devolves into the tales of woe of the uninsured - which pulls no weight with Republicans and brings the debate back around to “giving away money”. I seldom hear any Democrat talk about the advantages and increased productivity of a healthy and secure work force. Which is what they should be discussing.

And they’re not going to bring Republicans around on Russia. Because they all know the Trump campaign is guilty. And they don’t care. Because they think that there was nothing wrong with the collusion in pursuit of the higher cause of slaying the Hillary dragon. They think it was a patriotic endeavor to save the nation.

Wow! Well done! And thank you for sharing.

BURN THE BASTARD! :slight_smile:

I wonder if Castro is also going to be sharing his account of the same conversation. It’s a common-enough technique in political speeches: “The other day, I was having a conversation with a blue-collar worker like yourselves, and he said that we need to invest and build in America, and that’s just what I intend to do!”.

I agree that a Dem CWA would be a very constructive thing.

Obviously we’re not talking about stuff the Dems can actually implement, even if they retake the Senate as well as the House. But what they can say is that, given control, they will put this legislation on Trump’s desk, and force him to choose between signing it and vetoing it.

This would mean that a Dem-controlled Senate would have to be willing to kill the filibuster. (Or at a minimum turn it into something that required mucho time and effort on the part of the minority party to maintain.)

It should also consist of things they can pass in 2019. Big stuff like single-payer that can’t be done overnight can certainly be part of Dems’ aspirational speeches - I think the Dems should say where they’d take the country if there were no work to be done, no obstacles in the way - but the Dem CWA should be for the here and now.

I’ll have some specific suggestions for the Dem CWA later, but ISTM like some thought about what sorts of things should/shouldn’t be a part of it should come first.

Part of the advantage of a multi-item list is that it can include both short-term and long-term goals.

And the filibuster is already dead, anyway. The Republicans stopped pretending otherwise when they passed the tax cuts.

As ever, what, specifically, are you going to invest in, and what, specifically, are you going to build? More health care spending? More social spending? More infrastructure spending?

I agree - very interesting. When Republicans accuse you of “tax and spend”, change the subject to Russia.

Very interesting indeed.

Regards,
Shodan

JohnT, if all goes well, have you decided what Cabinet post you want?

I literally do not think you read what I wrote. Where in God’s name did you get the idea that Castro “changed the subject to Russia” because a “Republican accuse(d)” him of tax and spend?

  1. I’m not a Republican. That would require me to support pedophiles, environmental rape, and Nazis, so no, thank you.
  2. I wasn’t “accusing” him of anything. I was offering advice on how to counter the anti-civitas mantras of the Republican party.

May wish to reread it again, this time with an eye towards what it says, not towards what you wish it says.