People have been bothering Sen. Kyrsten Sinema.
Harassing her.
Even committing a crime against her!
You may have heard such descriptions if you’ve been paying attention to the news or social media the last few days. Sinema, a Democrat, continues to withhold support for the Biden reconciliation bill that would cost around $350 billion a year for 10 years — $3.5 trillion total. That has made Sinema the center of attention, where she appeared to like to be until now.
Now people aren’t just writing angry editorials or mocking her on Saturday Night Live, as they did over the weekend. They’re getting in her face. Getting personal.
This became a big deal on Sunday, when a group of activists for immigrant rights from the group Lucha AZ gathered outside a classroom where she was teaching at Arizona State University. They even followed her into the bathroom, demanding she take a stand for legalization of undocumented people.
Later, a woman, Karina Ruiz, politely confronted Sinema on a flight to Washington D.C., and the senator wouldn’t even look up to respond. Others greeted her with protests at the airport there. She didn’t respond.
Sure, following her into the bathroom crossed a line. It may even have been illegal, because videotaping a person in a bathroom without their permission is a crime in Arizona.
But honestly, these are minor points in the bigger context.
The real question is the issue these activists were pressing Sinema on: What exactly does she stand for?
She has positioned herself as a wily negotiator, withholding a vote her party depends on to advocate for smaller spending increases. But she says almost nothing publicly except that she won’t “negotiate in public.”
It’s almost as if she’s become such a creature of Washington that she thinks her real obligations are to the people and the process there, not to the people here.
Only a creature of Washington would define centrism, or pragmatism, as finding a midway point between the parties’ positions.
In real life, the positions that Sinema appears to be taking are outliers relative to public opinion — in that sense, neither pragmatic nor centrist.
The worst is her apparent opposition, reported by Politico, to the reconciliation bill’s language allowing Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices. This provision is supported by 85% to 90% of the people in Arizona and the United States, polling shows.
She has not stated her position on this publicly.
Sinema also opposes the Biden proposal to raise some taxes on the wealthy and on corporations to pay for the plan, the New York Times reports. That taxing proposal is popular too.
Polling by the left-of-center Future Majority group shows that these tax proposals actually increase support in Arizona for Biden’s plan. For example, Future Majority’s polling found that support for the broad plan went from 54% in favor to 43% against to 63-33 in favor when respondents were told of the plan to impose a 2% wealth tax on households with net worth over $50 million.
She has not stated her position publicly.
On important planks involving immigration, climate change and the expansion of Medicare to cover vision, dental and hearing service, we don’t know where she stands.
In fact, despite the crucial position she’s assumed, she hasn’t talked publicly with Arizonans for a long time. She did have a fundraiser in Phoenix over the weekend though, and impolite activists shouted over the walls to make her hear them — until they were forced away by police.
Her spokeswoman, Hannah Hurley, told me in an email Tuesday evening that Sinema supports various goals, such as cheaper health care and prescription drugs, but would not reveal more specific positions.
“Given the size and scope of the proposal — and the lack of detailed legislative language, or even consensus between the Senate and House around several provisions — we are not offering detailed comments on any one proposed piece of the package.”
Sinema took great umbrage Friday when the House decided not to vote on a trillion-dollar infrastructure plan. Progressive Democrats refused to do so until they had reassurances about what would happen to the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill.
Sinema called that decision “inexcusable” and a betrayal of trust.
But when I talked with Rep. Raúl Grijalva on Tuesday, the Tucson Democrat, he said he opposed voting on the infrastructure bill because Sinema and others had made no commitment to proceed with the reconciliation bill.
“It’s up to her to tell us what she believes should be in there,” he said. “With this much attention comes some responsibility.”
Now, it’s worth mentioning Sen. Mark Kelly here — the other Democratic U.S. senator from Arizona, who has not had so much attention. He has also avoided taking some stands on important issues
But on some of these planks of the reconciliation bill, he’s stated his stand. On giving Medicare the ability to negotiate prescription drug prices, on expanding Medicare coverage to dental and other services, on extending a path to citizenship for DACA recipients, he’s a clear yes. He's also voiced some opposition to the Trump tax cuts, some of which could be reversed under the Biden proposal.
But of course Kelly has not been at the center of negotiations or a leading critic of the reconciliation bill, as Sinema has.
If you’re going to put yourself in that position of power, and if you’re going to claim to be a centrist voting in Arizona’s best interest, then you need to be prepared to explain where you stand and why, especially on popular proposals like the prescription-drug plan.
Maybe you shouldn’t have to explain in the bathroom, but just about anywhere else.
