Our goal is to have intelligent discussion of the topics of the day. We realize everyone has their opinion and they should be allowed to express it in a discussion forum without calling each other names. We learn from discussion and not from name calling or argument.We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. See details
Contact Form
Showing posts with label voting rights act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label voting rights act. Show all posts
After nearly three years since getting steamrolled in the 2016 election by President Donald Trump, Democrats are mad. Very, very mad.
They didn’t want to accept reality in 2016 — and they’re willing to do anything they can to make sure it doesn’t happen again.
Even rig the election.
Sound familiar?
2020 hopeful Kamala Harris, D-Calif., claims that Democratic former gubernatorial candidates Stacey Abrams (of Georgia) and Andrew Gillum (of Florida) would have won their’ elections if not for voter suppression.
“The truth is, we need a new Voting Rights Act in this country with automatic voter registration, Election Day as a national holiday, and we need to fight back against Republicans who suppress our constitutional right to vote,” she said.
The truth is, we need a new Voting Rights Act in this country with automatic voter registration, Election Day as a national holiday, and we need to fight back against Republicans who suppress our constitutional right to vote. #NAACPDetroit
Now she wants revenge — and it’s happening across the country.
In her home state of California, Democrats passed through the Senate a bill that to keep Trump off the election ballot in 2020 because the Department of Treasury won’t release his tax returns.
The Golden State joined the ranks of Illinois, Washington, and Hawaii, where similar bills have passed their respective Senate chambers.
Proof that the Democratic establishment has plans to confuse millions of voters who fully intend to vote for Trump — but won’t find him listed on the election ballot.
Sounds a lot like voter suppression.
America is at a juncture where political engagement is only skyrocketing as the stakes are raised and the citizens are speaking up about it.
But voters aren’t choosing Democrats, and Harris and her pals don’t like that — so they’re trying to silence these voices.
It would be an understatement to suggest that Democrats haven’t accepted or handled particularly well the election of President Donald Trump, especially as paired with Republican control of Congress and a now conservative-leaning Supreme Court, in a government ostensibly unified by the political right.
Indeed, many on the left remained engaged in what can easily be likened to a toddler’s temper tantrum nearly two years since failed Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton was soundly defeated by Trump in the 2016 election.
Now that temper tantrum has taken on a decidedly vindictive tone for some on the left, as evidenced by a lengthy piece in Politico by a political theorist named Rob Goodman, a piece titled, “Hey Democrats, Fighting Fair is for Suckers.”
The article began with the typical lamentations from the left about how Trump and Republicans are systematically destroying all of the “norms,” or unwritten rules of the political game, to seize and maintain their grip on power and influence in the country — ignorant of the fact that many of the “norms” Trump is accused of breaking were already broken by Democrats in the prior administration.
In response to the alleged destruction of political norms across the board by Trump and Republicans, Goodman suggested that Democrats should — when and if they ever resume unified control of the three branches of government, as they once held between 2008 and 2010 — take drastic steps to ensure they never relinquish their grip on power ever again.
To be sure, there is a solid contingent of folks on the left — joined by some NeverTrumpers from the GOP — who pine for the day when Democrats, or at least an establishment Republican, will take power and institute a “return to normalcy” that will re-enshrine all of the policy supposedly laid to waste by the Trump administration.
But Goodman appeared to have been inspired to urge a different route for Democrats by a new book written by political scientist David Faris about how Democrats should “fight dirty” in order to build and maintain a “lasting majority in American politics.”
That book asserts that it will be impossible for the nation to “return to Normalcy” in the aftermath of Trump, and instead posits that “Normal is over” and Democrats should act accordingly, busting any remaining norms standing in the way of their implementing a “progressive direction” for the nation that can’t be easily stopped or reversed anytime soon, if ever.
In order to achieve that “lasting majority” of progressive Democrat rule in America, Faris offered up several examples of drastic actions that could be taken by Democrats to ensure they never lose hold of their power again, which were dutifully echoed by Goodman.
Do you believe this power-grabbing plan is fueled solely by the left's hatred for Trump and Republicans?
That would include such actions as: “Grant statehood to D.C. and Puerto Rico, and break California in seven, with the goal of adding 16 new Democrats to the Senate. Expand the Supreme Court and the federal courts, packing them with liberal judges.”
“Move to multi-member House districts to roll back the effects of partisan gerrymandering. Pass a new Voting Rights Act, including nationwide automatic voter registration, felon enfranchisement and an end to voter ID laws. Grant citizenship to millions of undocumented immigrants, creating a host of new Democratic-leaning voters,” wrote Goodman.
Faris wrote, “Republicans have always feared that immigration would change the character of American society. Democrats should reward them with their very worst nightmare.”
None of those actions would require a constitutional amendment and could be achieved via legislation, but it would require Democrats to utterly smash any “norms” they currently hold or have held in the past with regard to protecting the foundations of our nation’s political system.
All of that said, Goodman recognized that such an effort by Democrats would inevitably bring about incredible — and justifiable — opposition from Republicans, thus the effort couldn’t use half-measures, as the right would eventually regain control and use the precedents set by the left to do the same in a tit-for-tat spiral of escalation that would inevitably lead to violence and bloodshed if not brought to a halt at some point.
The folks at Legal Insurrection could only laugh at these suggestions by Goodman and Faris and pointed out that the process of unraveling the “norms” that the left now misses so much was begun under the guidance of former President Barack Obama and former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
But at least some Democrats are being open and honest about their vindictive plans to exact vengeance on Republicans if they ever hold unified power again, and we can only encourage them to run openly on a platform of blatant political revenge as they seek to reclaim their lost power in the upcoming 2018 and 2020 elections.
Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers' newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.
President Barack Obama was swept into office in 2008 on hopes that he would unite the country. (Photo: Kevin Dietsch/UPI/Newscom)
Americans voted in November for seismic change,
but our outgoing president is still as clueless as
ever about the nation he governed.
In his farewell speech-cum-lecture earlier this month,
President Barack Obama proclaimed that he made
America better by “almost every measure.”
The statement goes far beyond optimism, and
lands squarely in the realm of delusion.
Eight years of Obama’s leadership has left
America demonstrably weaker and more divided.
Rather than the promised “healing”—racial
and other—the Obama era frayed the ties that
bind us.
It began when his Justice Department dropped an
open-and-shut voter intimidation case against the
New Black Panther Party. It was essentially a
declaration that his administration would use
the Voting Rights Act to protect only certain races.
There followed a steady stream of false claims
that America was an inherently racist society
with a biased judicial and law enforcement system.
Obama rekindled a racial divide that had been
steadily disappearing in American society.
In fostering group identity politics for political
advantage, the Obama administration only
divided the American people. And the people
know it.
A recent Rasmussen poll found that 60 percent
of Americans felt “race relations have gotten
worse since Obama’s election”—a far cry from
the president’s claim of “better” race relations
under his administration.
The president also boasted of controlling
health care costs while bringing Americans
better insurance coverage. Neither claim is true.
This year, insurance premiums skyrocketed by
an average of 25 percent in states with exchanges.
Deductibles are through the roof. And people
shopping for more affordable insurance are
finding far fewer options.
Most states this year have even fewer insurance
providers participating in health care exchanges
than last year.
As for “better coverage,” the vast majority of
previously uninsured people now covered are
enrolled in Medicaid—a troubled and increasingly
stressed program that actually delivers poorer health outcomes than those of people with no insurance at all.
It’s no wonder that more Americans want to
repeal the consistently unpopular law than keep] it, according to a recent Kaiser Health tracking poll.
The president proudly stated that he opened
a “new chapter with the Cuban people,” but it
appears the new chapter for the Cuban people
is one behind bars. Since Obama began
“normalization,” arrests of Cuban political
dissidents have escalated, with over 9,000
political arrests made in 2016.
It is no secret that the tyrannical Castro regime
has a dismal human rights record. The influx
of American capital blessed by normalization
will only bolster the regime.
It was a huge mistake to give Havana diplomatic
recognition with no conditions and no requirements
to stop the oppression. In Cuban-American
communities, the widespread celebrations of
Fidel Castro’s death stood in stark contrast to
the bitter disappointment in Obama’s failure to
stand for freedom and liberty in Cuba.
Returning to domestic policy, the president
ignored his real record: eight years of economic
stagnation. Instead, he offered happy talk:
“The good news is that today the economy is
growing again.”
Really? Our economy continues to underperform,
with low increases in gross domestic product, a
low labor participation rate, increased cost of
living in cities, and lower-than-expected wage
growth.
Rather than implement policies that encourage
business creation and investment, the president
fostered an environment of class warfare and
instituted policies, including Obamacare and
overregulation in many other areas, which
increased the barriers to entry for small
businesses and entrepreneurs.
This no-regrets president remained unapologetic
of his “pen and phone” approach to governance.
First expressed in 2014, it reflects his belief that
the limits of the Constitution on the power of the
presidency do not apply to him.
Obama has engaged in more unilateral
policy-making through executive fiat than almost
any previous president—bending, changing,
rewriting, and ignoring the law at will.
From refusing to enforce federal immigration
law or welfare work requirements, to ignoring
statutory deadlines, to making illegal recess
appointments, Obama abused his office and
his power. That is not something to be proud of.
In his typical lawyerly fashion, the president
skirted around the truth of cities riddled with
racial tension and soaring crime rates, small
businesses ruined by rising health care costs
and crushing regulations, a metastasizing
national debt, and a foreign policy that seems
to favor authoritarian regimes over our allies.
Perhaps all the spin worked on the reporters
attending Obama’s last speech. But the broad
swathes of the American people who have
suffered the consequences of his misgovernance
for eight long years stopped buying it months,
if not years, ago.
In a
tumultuous election year climate where Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump is doubling down on “rigged election” claims and encouraging supporters to monitor polls when Americans vote Nov. 8 — the first presidential election in 50 years without the full protections of the Voting Rights Act — the Justice Department plans to deploy hundreds of federal election monitors in about half of U.S. states.
On
Wednesday, on the heels of U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch's
announcement last week, a consortium of 87 national civil rights and
voting groups — The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human
Rights, the NAACP, the AFL-CIO and others — called for more
oversight in a letter imploring election officials in all 50 states to
develop plans to deal with what they worry will be a circus-like
atmosphere at some polls.
The Justice Department has been able to push back against a spate
of laws passed by states after a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court ruling
stripping the Voting Rights Act of provisions that required election
officials in some states in the South to get pre-approval of their
election processes from the federal government, the groups said in
a statement, but warned: “Voters have very little protection from
local election changes, the misapplication and misunderstanding
of new voting restrictions by poll workers, or threats from
intimidation from polling place vigilantes.”
In her video statement last week, Lynch said that to ensure voters
can cast ballots free of intimidation and discrimination, monitors
would be watching for things like whether voters are treated
differently because of their race, whether polling stations are
accessible to the disabled, and whether bilingual material and
assistance is provided in areas where they’re needed.
In the 2012 election, the Justice Department deployed more than
780 monitors in 23 states. Since then, new voter identification laws
have been approved in several states, including some the Justice
Department has fought in court. The way for those laws was paved
by the 2013 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Shelby v. Holder.
The ruling, Lynch said, “limited one of our most important tools to
fight laws and policies that make it harder for many Americans,
especially low-income citizens and citizens of color, to cast their ballots.”
States Have a Role, Too: Activists
In the Wednesday letter to the election officials in the 50 states, the
civil rights and voting groups said they were disturbed about the
potential for voter discrimination in the general election.
The Voting Rights Act changes and “the most racially bigoted
presidential campaign in generations [have] created the perfect
storm for voter intimidation and voter discrimination,” Wade
Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on
Civil and Human Rights, said in the statement.
“State election officials must address these unprecedented threats
head on by creating and publicizing clear plans to prevent intimidation
and discrimination, and to make it unequivocally clear to the voters
they serve that the elections they oversee will be safe, fair, and free
from intimidation, violence, and discrimination,” Henderson said.
Trump Doubles Down: Zombie Voters
With less than two weeks remaining before Americans cast ballots in
a historic election, Trump has stepped up his claims that the election
has been “rigged” in favor of his Democratic opponent, former
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
His most recent claim is that dead voters will tip the election toward
Clinton. “You have 1.8 million voters who are dead, who are registered
to vote, and some of them absolutely vote,” Trump told Sean Hannity
of Fox News in an interview last week. “Now, tell me how they do that.”
He also claimed that 2.5 million people in the country are registered
in two states and are “voting twice.” Trump’s statistics come from a 2012 report by the Pew Center on the States, but there’s no evidence of large-scale fraud involving dead voters or voters whose registrations
haven’t caught up with them after a move to another state, Politico
reported.
Get free real-time news alerts from the Farmington-Farmington Hills Patch.
SUBSCRIBE
As Politico explained it:
“For starters, he Pew report was written at the time to explain how
voter registration dates to the 19th century and is very much out of
step with modern technology and Americans’ mobile lifestyles. It
had nothing to do with the idea that people were actually voting in
two separate states in the same election, a scenario that the report’s
co-author said has resulted in just a ‘handful’ of prosecutions in
recent election cycles. Instead, the report was trying to highlight
a problem states face keeping tabs on their transitory residents as
they move from one place to another without also updating their
voter registration data.”
But Trump isn’t backing down. In the final presidential debate last
week, the New York businessman, real estate tycoon and reality
television star flashed his trademark impish grin when moderator
Chris Wallace pressed him to answer whether he would accept the
results of the election.
“I will look at it,” Trump responded. “I’ll keep you in suspense.”
Conservative Fox News talk show host Bill O’Reilly turned on Trump
Tuesday night, saying “the vote cannot possibly be rigged two weeks
from tonight.” On “The O’Reilly Factor,” he said Trump “should accept
whatever happens at that vote unless there is some compelling evidence
of corruption.”
O’Reilly went on to say that “undermining our electoral system is not
a patriotic thing,” but said Trump’s complaint that “so many journalists
are committed to the left” that news coverage has been “rigged” is valid.
Trump’s running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, has said that
volunteers are the “greatest vanguard for integrity in voting.” More
recently, he has asked supporters to “respectfully” participate in the
election as poll watchers and other volunteers.
What the Law Says
Federal election law prohibits fraud and discrimination at the polls,
including intimidating or bribing voters, buying and selling votes,
impersonating voters, altering vote tallies, stuffing ballot boxes and
marking ballots for voters against their wishes or without their input.
The law also contains special protections for the rights of voters and
provides that they can vote free from acts that intimidate or harass
them.
Harassment or intimidation, which might include videotaping,
questioning or challenging a voter’s right to cast a ballot under the
guise of trying to uncover illegal voting, may violate federal voting
rights law, U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade of Michigan’s Eastern
District said in a statement. Further, federal law protects the right
of voters to mark their own ballot or to be assisted by a person of
their choice.
“The franchise is the cornerstone of American democracy,” McQuade
said. “We all must ensure that those who are entitled to the franchise
exercise it if they choose, and that those who seek to corrupt it are
brought to justice.”
Assistant U.S. Attorney Dawn N. Ison will lead oversight for the
Eastern District of Michigan and will report complaints of election
fraud and voting rights abuses to Lynch’s office in Washington, D.C.
Feature image by NicoleKlauss via Flickr Commons; video via YouTube
but our outgoing president is still as clueless as
ever about the nation he governed.
President Barack Obama proclaimed that he made
America better by “almost every measure.”
lands squarely in the realm of delusion.
America demonstrably weaker and more divided.
Rather than the promised “healing”—racial
and other—the Obama era frayed the ties that
bind us.
open-and-shut voter intimidation case against the
New Black Panther Party. It was essentially a
declaration that his administration would use
the Voting Rights Act to protect only certain races.
that America was an inherently racist society
with a biased judicial and law enforcement system.
Obama rekindled a racial divide that had been
steadily disappearing in American society.
advantage, the Obama administration only
divided the American people. And the people
know it.
of Americans felt “race relations have gotten
worse since Obama’s election”—a far cry from
the president’s claim of “better” race relations
under his administration.
health care costs while bringing Americans
better insurance coverage. Neither claim is true.
an average of 25 percent in states with exchanges.
Deductibles are through the roof. And people
shopping for more affordable insurance are
finding far fewer options.
providers participating in health care exchanges
than last year.
previously uninsured people now covered are
enrolled in Medicaid—a troubled and increasingly
stressed program that actually delivers poorer
health outcomes than those of people with
no insurance at all.
repeal the consistently unpopular law than keep]
it, according to a recent Kaiser Health tracking poll.
a “new chapter with the Cuban people,” but it
appears the new chapter for the Cuban people
is one behind bars. Since Obama began
“normalization,” arrests of Cuban political
dissidents have escalated, with over 9,000
political arrests made in 2016.
has a dismal human rights record. The influx
of American capital blessed by normalization
will only bolster the regime.
recognition with no conditions and no requirements
to stop the oppression. In Cuban-American
communities, the widespread celebrations of
Fidel Castro’s death stood in stark contrast to
the bitter disappointment in Obama’s failure to
stand for freedom and liberty in Cuba.
ignored his real record: eight years of economic
stagnation. Instead, he offered happy talk:
“The good news is that today the economy is
growing again.”
with low increases in gross domestic product, a
low labor participation rate, increased cost of
living in cities, and lower-than-expected wage
growth.
business creation and investment, the president
fostered an environment of class warfare and
instituted policies, including Obamacare and
overregulation in many other areas, which
increased the barriers to entry for small
businesses and entrepreneurs.
of his “pen and phone” approach to governance.
First expressed in 2014, it reflects his belief that
the limits of the Constitution on the power of the
presidency do not apply to him.
policy-making through executive fiat than almost
any previous president—bending, changing,
rewriting, and ignoring the law at will.
law or welfare work requirements, to ignoring
statutory deadlines, to making illegal recess
appointments, Obama abused his office and
his power. That is not something to be proud of.
skirted around the truth of cities riddled with
racial tension and soaring crime rates, small
businesses ruined by rising health care costs
and crushing regulations, a metastasizing
national debt, and a foreign policy that seems
to favor authoritarian regimes over our allies.
attending Obama’s last speech. But the broad
swathes of the American people who have
suffered the consequences of his misgovernance
for eight long years stopped buying it months,
if not years, ago.