Just as states with progressive lawmakers and activists have themselves initiated innovative programs over a wide range of issues, state-based progressive blogs have helped provide us with a point of view, inside information and often an edgy voice that we just don't get from the traditional media. This week in progressive state blogs is designed specifically to focus attention on the writing and analysis of people focused on their home turf. Let me know via comments or Kosmail if you have a favorite state- or city-based blog you think I should be watching.
Inclusion of a diary does not necessarily indicate my agreement or endorsement of its contents.
At Blog for Arizona, AZ BlueMeanie writes—It’s our lax gun laws that left two cops dead, not the ‘tone’ of protestors:
The Rush Limbaugh of The Republic, Doug MacEachern, in his latest right-wing rant takes two diametrically opposed positions to blame the “tone” of protestors for the death of two New York police officers. NYPD murders a failure of leadership:
Leaders are supposed to be the antithesis of opportunistic moral poseurs. They do not assign group responsibility for tragedies to one side of a dispute, or the other. They don’t point fingers. They don’t insist the problem is with the behavior of that other group of citizens.
All of the presumed leaders who have seized on the bare outlines of entirely separate police-related shootings in recent months bear some responsibility for the tragic — and increasingly destructive —direction of these events. […]
|
Shorter MacEachern: “It’s wrong for political leaders to play the blame game and to point fingers, but for an unaccountable right-wing pundit like me, it’s perfectly fine” — I’m going to play the blame game: “From the mayor of New York City to self-appointed race-activists to the media, we have drawn a stick-figure picture of a complex series of unrelated events. And, now, two cops in New York lie dead as a result.”
Below the orange gerrymander are more excerpts from progressive state blogs.
At Uppity Wisconsin, Jud Lounsbury writes—Bipartisan Report: Johnson Wrong to Blame Obama for Secret Service Woes:
Last September, U.S. Senator Ron Johnson faced a tough situation: Blame President Obama, or blame government in general, for Secret Service agents failing to stop an armed intruder from scaling the fence, running across the front yard, and coming in through the front door of the White House.
Johnson chose both, saying that this was yet another example of Obama's "inability to manage," and then also blaming the "dysfunctional" Federal Government:
"What we're seeing across the board with this administration is the inability to manage events and manage the agency. The government is out of control. That's one takeaway that Americans really need to realize is that the federal government is dysfunctional, ineffective, inefficient so my suggestion is to stop growing it." |
Apparently, in Johnson's view, Obama should be doing a better job of managing something that is intrinsically dysfunctional and unmanageable.
However, a new bipartisan report, put together by four experts including two former President George Bush appointees, says that the root problem is that the Secret Service is “stretched to and, in many cases, beyond its limits.”
The New York Times reported that the "most revealing parts" of the report were about the impact that deep budget cuts have had on the Secret Service […]
At
Appalachian Voices,
Brian Sewell writes—
EPA finalizes long-awaited coal ash regulations:
As expected, the rule it took the EPA five years to finalize is modest at best, falling short of what it takes to truly address the prevalent problems associated with coal ash such as contamination of waterways and drinking water supplies.
Rather than classifying coal ash as the hazardous waste it clearly is, the EPA rule places it under Subtitle D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the nation’s primary law for regulating solid waste. Other types of waste regulated under Subtitle D include household garbage—you know, banana peels, candy wrappers and the like.
“For the thousands of citizens whose groundwater is no longer safe for consumption due to leaching ponds or whose air is contaminated by fugitive dust, failing to regulate coal ash as hazardous is a slap in the face,” says Amy Adams, Appalachian Voices’ North Carolina campaign coordinator. “While we’re pleased that we finally have federal regulations, they are far from perfect and demand we continue fighting for cleanup of these toxic sites.” […]
But while the regulations set a minimum federal criteria, states are not required to adopt them, develop a permitting program, or submit a program to the EPA for approval. That’s all more of a suggestion, really. So while the EPA says it expects states to be “active partners” in regulating coal ash, well, states unfriendly to the EPA may feel differently. And should states refuse to clean up coal ash pollution or fail to meet the new standards, the EPA will not step in to enforce the rule. That job will still fall to citizens who identify the insidious pollution and file lawsuits to correct it.
At
South Dakota Madville Times,
caheidelberger writes—
Democrats Lost Souls to Corporations? Progressives Better Off Breaking from Party?
Last I checked, South Dakota Progress is looking to play very, very nicely with the South Dakota Democratic Party.
Maybe they shouldn't. Bill Curry, a former Clinton White House advisor who has batted .333 in his own election efforts, says the Democratic Party got beat up nationwide this election year because, since the late 1970's, it has sold out to Wall Street and shut out its problem-solving progressive voices. Curry recommends liberals take charge, go their own way, and dare Democrats to follow […]
I do not think Curry's analysis ports neatly from the national level to South Dakota. Our state Dems are not in Washington collaborating with Republicans to gild Wall Street's throne. Our state Dems aren't in Washington, period, now that Tim Johnson is out. Unlike national Democrats, South Dakota Dems responded to the midterm election by electing new leadership. South Dakota Democrats may be in as good a position to break with Washington and sound Curry's progressive populist bugle as a separate progressive group like South Dakota Progress.
But the question remains, for South Dakota Progress as well as for anyone else hoping to restore progressive fortunes in South Dakota: do we work within the machine, or do we build a new one?
At
Bluestem Prairie of Minnesota, writes—
Sally Jo Sorensen:
Today marks the anniversary of the largest mass execution of United States history. On this day in 1862, 38 Dakota POWs in the 1862 United States-Dakota War were hanged in Mankato.
The day has become one of remembrance and reconciliation. […]
The Dakota 38 + 2 Ride was begun in 2005 by Jim Miller from a vision he had to commemorate and promote healing and reconciliation over the 1862 mass hanging of 38 (and later two more) Dakota men ordered by President Lincoln in Mankato, Minnesota the site of the largest mass hanging in U.S. History. The Dakota men were being executed on December 26, the day after Christmas for a Dakota uprising when the United States did not honor treaties signed with four Dakota bands giving up 35 million acres of land which left their families facing starvation. […] |
At
Dirigo Blue of Maine,
Gerald Weinand writes—
Why split 127th Legislature is worse for Democrats than Republican control of both chambers:
After the dust had settled from November’s elections, Democrats found that they had lost control of the Maine Senate to a Republican majority, and that their grip on the Maine House was weakened. Behind the scenes, Gov. Paul LePage, fresh from a convincing win over his Democratic challenger Mike Michaud, began pulling strings to ensure that positions of power went to Republican legislators closely aligned with his office.
In 2010, Republicans swept into office, winning the Governor’s office and both chambers of the 125th Legislature. Yet despite this complete control of the legislative process, Republicans were unable to enact many long sought goals of the far right To be sure, the far right did score some victories, but much of their agenda proved to be unpalatable to some of the less radical members of their party.
Oddly, the split nature of the incoming 127th Legislature will enable even moderate Republicans to vote for every extreme piece of legislation put forth by their far right colleagues. Moderates know that Democratic Party members of the House will vote to block the most egregious bills put forth – centrist Republicans can rely on their Democratic brethren to vote the way that they dare not.
Gov. LePage and his advisers understand this calculus. They will blame Democrats at every opportunity for blocking legislation that Republicans were unwilling to jam through when they had complete control four years ago. House Speaker Mark Eves will be sensitive to his party being labeled as the “Party of No,” and will want to only fight selected battles.
This is a mistake. […]
At
Show Me Progress of Missouri,
WillyK writes—
Roy Blunt: Confusing the symptoms with the disease:
Remember after Sandy Hook when Roy Blunt was adamant that he would not support legislation that might restrict Second Amendment rights? By which he meant the right of citizens to amass stockpiles of just about any type of weapon. Which was, incidentally, the right of the same folks to enrich organizations that sponsor the NRA, which, in turn, offers tangible aid to politicians like Roy Blunt. Instead he sought to blame government for failing to keep those pesky mentally ill folks under control:
Blunt said in an interview that federal funds have been handed to some communities in states that move people from mental institutions, where federal dollars were used to help them, "and put them back into the community without much monitoring whether people are ready to be in the community or not." |
So guess who he blames when a mentally troubled individual shot two policemen in New York? His constituents, Missourians who exercised their 1st amendment rights to free speech in Ferguson this summer. Evidently the 2nd amendment trumps just about every concern, including public safety. First amendment? Not so much - at least when it involves issues that get old white guys, the only constituency that matters to Blunt, all itchy and bothered. God forbid that police should be accountable.
And, of course, there's the mental health dodge that was trotted out in the wake of Sandy Hook, but not so much in the case of the NYPD shooter. When a NRA-loving, gun enthusiast shoots a school full of little children, we blame the shooting on his mental problems, not his collection of lethal weapons. But when a troubled and violent man, angered by one more miscarriage of justice, goes off the deep end and the innocent suffer, Blunt wants to blame the folks who expose the bigger, original problem and demand that it be addressed. Nice distraction.
At
Something Like the Truth of Louisiana,
Matt Higgins writes—
In Louisiana, a reincarnation of the Bourbons?
Louisiana may have a history of colorful politicians, but this populist approach has only been characteristic of Louisiana politics since the 1930s and now that Mary Landrieu lost, this type of politician is no more in Louisiana politics but will resurge if the state continues its “government of the few, for the few, and by the few.”
Prior to the late 1920s, the state was in the hands of a ruling elite, known historically as the Bourbons. This group was the wealthy landowners, but by the 20th century, it was mineral wealth, not agricultural wealth, that made this group a fortune. […]
Huey Long became governor in 1928. He is well known for his accomplishments. Highway construction, Charity Hospital and free textbooks to students are the most known. Many benefited from these initiatives, well after Long’s assassination.
The man who ran on a platform of “Every man a king” managed to begin a loose confederation of the white working and middle classes along with African-Americans that would be solidified by the 1970s when Edwin Edwards entered state politics. The common thread was the “greatest good for the greatest number,” one that, if not overshadowed race, at least kept race from dividing blacks from middle- and working-class whites.
The 2014 Senate election was a death knell for populist Democrats in Louisiana, of which Mary Landrieu was nominally one. The trend toward a solid red state has been happening for the last 20 years, but now it seems Louisiana politics has come full circle. The Solid South still exists, but it is now solidly Republican, not Democratic, as it had been for more than a century.
Only 15 percent of white males voted for Landrieu. Gov. Bobby Jindal openly slashes government budgets and supports tax breaks for companies, even Wal-Mart, which make billions in profits. Few in the Legislature challenge the governor’s legislative agenda. […]
At
Raging Chicken Press of Pennsylvania,
Sean Kitchen writes—
Pennsylvania Republicans Name Union Busting Law After Conservative Activist:
[L]ast week, Pennsylvania Republicans introduced Mary’s Law, a coy “right-to-work”esque law that is named after a conservative activist and attacks a union’s ability to collect dues.
Mary’s Law, formerly known as “Paycheck Protection,” is named after Mary Trometer,” a college professor whose husband received a letter from two teachers’ unions urging him to join his wife in voting for Democratic gubernatorial nominee Tom Wolf in the Nov. 4 election.” Republican Senators John Eichelberger, Gene Yaw and Ryan Aument signed onto a co-sponsorship memo that props up Mary’s heartbreaking, life altering and tragic set of circumstances to diminish public sector unions ability to collect dues money and ultimately attacking the rights of working class people.
At
Scrutiny Hooligans of North Carolina,
Tom Sullivan writes—
Why you … you want to punish success!
I wanted to follow up on Steve Fraser’s comments to Bill Moyers. Fraser is wondering when people in this new Gilded Age age will rise up to oppose the robber barons, as our forebears did 100 years ago. He spoke of how, out of the social upheavals that ended the Gilded Age, Americans created a social safety net, a “civilized capitalism that protects people against the worst vicissitudes of the free market.” But the wealth worshipers of the second Gilded Age have shredded it, and an even deeper, more pervasive corruption has overtaken Washington, and with a direct line to Wall Street:
It is the consummate all embracing expression of the triumph of the free market ideology as the synonym for freedom. In other words, it used to be you could talk about freedom and the free market as distinct notions. Now, and for some time, since the age of Reagan began free market capitalism and freedom are conflated. They are completely married to each other. And we have, as a culture, bought into that idea. It’s part of what I mean when I say the attenuating of any alternatives. |
That is, TINA. (There Is No Alternative.) Yet that’s just what many jobless Millennials are searching for.
“It is axiomatic in our current political culture,” says Fraser, “that when we say freedom we mean capitalism.” I would add, that when we say capitalism, we mean, principally, one particular style for organizing a business: the modern corporation.
What Milton Friedman called capitalism in 1962 looks more like an economic cult today. Question the basic assumptions behind corporate capitalism, publicly point out its shortcomings and suggest we are overdue for an upgrade, and the Chamber of Commerce practically bursts through the door like the Spanish Inquisition to accuse you of communism and heresy. Why you … you want to punish success! It’s weirdly reflexive and a mite hysterical. What their blind fealty and knee-jerk defense of this one particular style for organizing a capitalist enterprise says about them, I’ll leave for now. It suffices to say I find it rather peculiar.
We think we invented capitalism. Yet there have been “capitalist acts between consenting adults” since before Hammurabi. We don’t call one capitalist enterprise the world’s oldest profession for nothing. There’s a restaurant in China that has been in operation for nearly 1000 years. And pubs in England that have been in business for 900. All without being incorporated in Delaware or the Cayman Islands. (Communists?) […]
At
Mississippi Economic Policy Center Blog,
Deeneaus Polk writes—
Higher Education … Higher Cost:
Mississippi’s universities will once again raise their tuition rates. The universities cite reduced investment from the state, coupled with increasing costs on their campuses, such as faculty salaries and operational costs as reasons for the increase. As a result, six of eight state universities will raise tuition when classes start in the fall. The tuition hike occurred on top of increases of approximately 25% over the past five years.
As tuition continues to rise, Mississippi students are increasingly finding themselves in a difficult position. These tuition increases far outweigh median incomes for Mississippi families, which often times leaves families unable to afford the costs of higher education, if they’re able to pay at all. Students receive approximately $6,500 in federal and state financial aid, but this only covers a third of the total cost of attendance, which includes books, housing and/or transportation. If there is no institutional aid to make up the difference, students and their families rely on student loans to fill the gap in financing their higher education. This increased reliance on loans burdens families with thousands of dollars of debt, which is worsened if students are unable to persist to a degree.
The ability to invest in cornerstones such as a home or retirement plan is inhibited as a result. More than half of Mississippi’s college students take on some form of loan to finance their education. Mississippi currently has a three-year loan default rate of 16.3%, ranking us seventh highest in the nation. The need to obtain higher education places many individuals and families in financial strain that threatens their economic security. Financial aid is crucial to college completion.
At
R.I. Future.org,
Steve Ahlquist writes—
The war on secularism:
For his last Christmas in office before handing the reigns of government over to Gina Raimondo, Governor Lincoln Chafee mostly avoided the idiotic lambasting he has received in previous years over his decision to refer to the large decorated evergreen placed in the State House rotunda as a “Holiday Tree” rather than a “Christmas Tree.” Locally speaking, the annual “War on Christmas” was relatively quiet this year, mostly, I believe, because of the election and because of the attention being given to the #BlackLivesMatter protests.
As president of the Humanists of Rhode Island, I waited until the day after the election to formally request a spot in the State House for our Roger Williams banner. This banner, placed for the first time in the State House last year, has been relegated to a spot on the second floor of the State House, in an area designated for displays by local ethnic and civic groups.
The idea of such an area is to allow a “free speech zone,” a place for symbols and ideas of a religious nature to be displayed on public property. In this way has the law evolved so that the separation of church and state may be violated. Here you will find all sorts of statements and displays about religion. There are mangers and baby Jesuses Jesii?, Christmas trees and icons of saints. In fact, far from being a public space free of religious endorsements, the State House has become a public space chock full of religious endorsements: Christian, Jewish, atheist and other.
This is why I don’t call the battles over such displays a “War on Christmas.” These battles should more properly be called a “War on Secularism,” and we are all losing.