|
This week at progressive state blogs is designed specifically to focus attention on the writing and analysis of people focused on their home turf. Here is the October 27th edition. Inclusion of a blog post does not necessarily indicate my agreement with—or endorsement of—its contents.
|
At Plunderbund of Ohio, Kellie Copeland writes: With Roe Expected To Get Overturned, Ohio Needs Pro-Choice Governor, AG:
Nov. 6 is a landmark election for reproductive freedom in Ohio and who wins the governor’s race will determine whether our reproductive rights stay [or] are taken from us. Republican Mike DeWine has pledged to criminalize abortion if he is elected governor. Democrat Richard Cordray promises to protect access to abortion and contraception.
Along with electing a new governor, Ohio will elect a new attorney general. Both offices are vital to preserving abortion access and reversing the setbacks Ohio has endured under Gov. John Kasich and Attorney General DeWine. Ohio has gone from 16 abortion clinics to eight, and a recent court ruling could force the Dayton Area’s remaining clinic to close. Ohio also has seen 20 new restrictions on reproductive health care under Kasich and DeWine.
DeWine is so eager to outlaw abortion that he’s pledged to ban abortion as early as six weeks into pregnancy. He would likely go even further by signing House Bill 565, which would outlaw all abortions, without exception, subjecting anyone who receives or provides one to murder charges. Either bill would force tens of thousands of women each year to continue pregnancies against their will–even the critically ill, and rape and incest survivors—or face the death penalty.
At Blue Virginia, A Siegel writes: Showing up is part of the job: Highlighting another Comstock fail:
Political representatives in democracies have many roles and responsibilities. One of these is to provide their constituents the chance to engage with them openly and honestly in reasonable ways. These ‘ways’ can be through making oneself available for open discussion regularly at, for example, community events or holding planned sessions (most notably townhalls).
Barbara Comstock has been an elected official, holding political office, since 2010. First in the Virginia House of Delegates (2010-2014) and now in the US House of Representatives (Jan 2015 to present).
Perhaps the two consistent elements of Comstock‘s nearly eight years of holding elected political office are:
• a position leading the pack among her peers of ‘photo op’ events and photo op social media postings; and,
• a dogged refusal to allow her constituents any form of open, honest engagement to discuss policy, raise concerns, and otherwise interact with her (where others might witness that engagement).
When it comes to refusal for open engagement in public events:
• Comstock has literally run from non-supporters trying to engage with her (even quite reasonably/calmly) and had staff (how many paid with taxpayer funds is a legitimate question) physically intrude themselves between constituents and Comstock to keep her from having to deal with the riff-raff (e.g., anyone not supportive of Comstock’s enabling of Trump and voting record at odds with the District’s voters preferences).
At Blue Jersey, deciminyan writes: Buying Elections:
I received an email today from Ballotpedia (an organization that provides election information) that contained some interesting statistics about election self-funders.
Do you know who has the record for the largest self-funding campaign?
It’s our former Governor and Goldman Sachs Executive Jon Corzine, who gave his 2000 US Senate campaign $60 million ($83 million in today’s dollars), only to resign from the Senate when he was elected Governor five years later. That’s more than the “president” received in 2016 from the Trump Crime Syndicate.
The two biggest self-funders in this year’s Senate campaign are both wealthy executives who made their fortunes off of sick people. Rick Scott of Florida leads the pack with $51 million of his own money, followed by New Jersey’s Bob Hugin, in second place, who wrote his campaign a check for $27.5 million.
In his initial run for the US House to become the wealthiest member from New Jersey in 2014, Tom MacArthur gave his campaign $5 million. As far as I can tell, this year, he “only” self-funded to the tune of $800,000 this year, although it’s difficult to track giving to shadow organizations.
You can find more interesting statistics at this site.
At Bluestem Prairie of Minnesota and South Dakota, Sally Jo Sorensen writes: GOP Rule of Law: Jeff Johnson won't say what he thinks of president trampling on Constitution:
We grew up hearing one version of a president's reaction to a supreme court decision, but the New Georgia Encyclopedia sets the record straight in Worcester v. Georgia (1832):
(Although Jackson is widely quoted as saying, "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it," his actual words to Brigadier General John Coffee were: "The decision of the supreme court has fell still born, and they find that it cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate.") [...]
The desire by a president to trample on the Constitution is nothing new, though like Jackson's response to Worcester, President Trump's desire to void the 14th Amendment is unsettling.
You'd think that Minnesota Republican gubernatorial candidate Jeff Johnson would either go big with Trump or get out, but instead Minnesotans get silence. [...]
Such courage from a person from the party pushing the phrase "rule of law" in Minnesota's statewide races.
At Eclectablog of Michigan, LOLGOP writes: Make voting easy? Vote YES on Proposal 3 for #AFreshMichigan:
Republican nominee for governor Bill Schuette is against Proposal #3, which would make it radically easier to vote, because he says he opposes straight-ticket voting, a one reform of many in the bill that speeds up lines at the polls and Republicans say helps Democrats (with absolutely no proof behind this claim).
But here’s everything else Schuette opposes:
- Automatic registration whenever you get or renew your driver’s license or state ID for all U.S. citizens 18 or older.
- Same-day voter registration through Election Day. The current deadline is 30 days before the election.
- An absentee ballot for any voter who wants one. Absentee balloting is currently limited to people who are age 60 and older, disabled, poll workers or traveling on Election Day.
Why Republicans don’t want most Americans to vote is obvious, but it has rarely been stated so clearly as it was in a column by conservative Nolan Finley last week. We at Eclectablog are no fans of Finley who is like a local George F. Will if Will didn’t own books or make a good point every few months.
“Whether Republicans win or lose depends on Democratic turnout, which varies wildly,” he wrote.
Republican like to blame the swings in Democratic turnout on Democrats, the same way they blame their illegal gerrymandering on us for living in or near cities. Both claims have a slight whiff of truth soon overcome by bull feces.
At Blog for Iowa, Trish Nelson writes: How To Decide What Judges To Vote For:
Most voters do not encounter judges in their day to day life. So when November comes and it’s time to vote, what to do about the judges up for retention on the ballot? Maybe you’ve never even heard their names. Turns out there is a tool that you can use to inform your vote. It is called the 2018 Judicial Performance Review by the Iowa State Bar Association. Judges are evaluated and rated by attorneys on the following criteria:
- Perception of factual issues
- Punctuality for court proceedings
- Attentiveness to evidence and arguments
- Management and control of the courtroom
- Temperament and demeanor
- Clarity and quality of written opinions
- Promptness of rulings and decisions
- Avoids undue personal observations or criticisms of litigants, judges and lawyers from bench or in written opinions.
- Decides cases on basis of applicable law and fact, not affected by outside influence.
- Is courteous and patient with litigants, lawyers and court personnel.
- Treats people equally regardless of race, gender, age, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, socio-economic status or disability.
Voters can look up judges by district. Counties are listed so you can determine which judicial district you reside in.
At BlueNC, scharrison writes: Senator Dan Bishop helped create Alt-Right platform GAB:
And he needs to answer some questions about that synagogue massacre:
A Republican politician is an investor in Gab, the now-shuttered social media network used by the Pittsburgh synagogue gunman, DailyMail.com can disclose. Dan Bishop, a state senator in North Carolina who is up for re-election next week, boasted in August 2017 that he had backed the site because he was 'about done with SF [San Francisco] thought police tech giants.'
Bishop is one of the only known investors in the tech startup, which had billed itself as 'a free speech platform' for anyone who wanted to join.
And one of the many questions he needs to answer is: How much money did you earn by capitalizing on hatred and anti-Semitism? After what happened in Pittsburgh, we're just going to go ahead and call that blood money. The synagogue shooter (Robert Bowers) not only announced his intent on GAB, he has a history of posting anti-Semitic rants on there, including the personal information of Jews. [...]
Like I said, Dan Bishop needs to answer some damn questions. He's apparently dodging Dailymail's efforts to get a quote, so that leaves it up to local reporters to put him in the hot-seat. And the election clock is ticking...
At The Last Ogle of Oklahoma, Patrick writes: Markwayne Mullin describes Trail of Tears as “Volunteer Walk”:
The painting [at the top of this page] is titled “Trail of Tears.” It’s a 1942 work by Robert Lindneux and is currently on display at the Woolaroc Museum and Wildlife Preserve in Bartlesville. It depicts the brutal and atrocious forced removal of the Cherokee nation from its lands east of the Mississippi to present day Oklahoma in what became known as… the Volunteer Walk?
Well, that’s what Oklahoma Congressman Markwayne Mullin now appears to call it. Check out this clip from a recent appearance the congressman made on Fox News. It was caught by Brandon Scott with the Cherokee Phoenix [...]
Question for all the people out there who know a JoeBob, RickyBobby or WaynePayne—when your parents name you something like Markwayne does it automatically drop your IQ a couple of points? Considering this is the same guy who told people at a town hall that he pays his own congressional salary, it’s an interesting hypothesis.
Seriously, Volunteer Walk? Wouldn’t that imply the Cherokee tribe’s trek to Oklahoma was voluntary? Unless Oklahoma History books lied to us as kids, which you never know with the Oklahoma educational system, I don’t think that’s the case.
Either way, I performed a basic Google search to see if “Volunteer Walk” is a new alt-right term like alternative fact, snowflake or pussy-grabber. I couldn’t find one instance on the Internet where anyone had used it in place of Trail of Tears.
At The Bayou Brief of Louisiana, Sue Lincoln writes: Constitutional Amendments: Where Do “Union, Justice and Confidence” Fit In?
On November 6th, Louisiana’s voters again face the decision of whether to make more amendments to the state constitution – six more, to be exact.
Since this state Constitution was enacted in 1974, it has been amended 189 times. Yet one of the reasons for composing this, Louisiana’s eleventh primary governing document, was because the 1921 version which preceded it had been amended 536 times.
Compare that to the United States Constitution. In 231 years, it has acquired just 27 amendments.
A constitution is supposed to outline the organization of government, set forth (and limit) governmental powers, and list citizens’ rights. We have other laws,, called “statutes”, which deal with nitty-gritty details of governance, including tax rates, special state funds, crimes, and the punishments for convictions.
With that in mind, let’s examine the proposed amendments, asking three questions of each:
What are we being asked to add, change, or tweak this time?
Is that modification appropriately done constitutionally, or can it be accomplished by statute?
And who will benefit if we, the people, say yes to the alterations?
At FortBoise of Idaho, Tom von Alten writes: Two roads diverged in a yellow wood:
The President* of the United States is poisoning our political discourse, every single day. (He's not the ONLY one doing it, but he is leading the charge.) "There is great anger in our Country," he tweeted yesterday, as preamble to his usual unspecific libel of "The Fake News Media, the true Enemy of the People," feeding the anger of his base.
David Corn: In the Wake of the Pittsburgh Massacre, Sarah Huckabee Sanders Gaslights America ... gives a quick outline of the president's expressed hatred, bigotry, prejudice, and incitement to violence:
"The nature of conventional political media reality is allowing Trump, Sanders, and their whole crew to get away with this gaslighting. There is no penalty for such lies. There are no mechanisms for tossing these players out of the national discourse. There is no penalty for such profound prevarication. MSNBC commentators will howl. CNN anchors will point out the contradictions. But Fox News will defend, as many Republican elected officials will duck and cover, and, in the current tribalized environment, Trump supporters will cling ever tighter to his false statements and claims.
"This is how the political market works these days: For Trump’s backers, the lies—his promotion of racism, misogyny, and violence—do not matter. If they did, he would not have bagged 63 million votes in the 2016 election. Many, if not most, of these voters are beyond the persuasive reach of media reports focused on the facts of Trump’s hatred—or his conflicts of interest, or his policy ignorance, or his fill-in-the-blank. ...
"This is a deep hole. The Trumpers are promoting an alternative and perverse reality their supporters deeply need."
We are one week from the day voters and our voting systems, as corrupted as they may be by gerrymandering and the fraud of voter suppression, determining whether the Trump agenda will be amplified or squelched.
