RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
The Case for Wearing a Mask and Voting Early in Person Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=56597"><span class="small">Steven Hill, In These Times</span></a>   
Sunday, 11 October 2020 08:43

Hill writes: "In normal times, I am a proponent of having a vote by mail option. But these are not normal times. For the November 3 election, it makes much more sense to promote ?'early voting' in battleground states rather than vote by mail."

A voter fills out a ballot in Baltimore, Maryland in April during the height of the coronavirus pandemic. (photo: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Getty Images)
A voter fills out a ballot in Baltimore, Maryland in April during the height of the coronavirus pandemic. (photo: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Getty Images)


The Case for Wearing a Mask and Voting Early in Person

By Steven Hill, In These Times

11 October 20


In battleground states, vote by mail could contribute to Trump’s “red mirage” lead on election night.

oe Biden and the Democ­rats are walk­ing into a trap in the key bat­tle­ground states that will decide the upcom­ing pres­i­den­tial race, as well as key Sen­ate elec­tions. That trap is called “vote by mail” or “absen­tee voting.”

In nor­mal times, I am a pro­po­nent of hav­ing a vote by mail option. But these are not nor­mal times. For the Novem­ber 3 elec­tion, it makes much more sense to pro­mote “ear­ly vot­ing” in bat­tle­ground states rather than vote by mail. If they want to be sure that their votes will count, able-bod­ied vot­ers in com­pet­i­tive races should not mail in their bal­lots. Instead, they need to show up in per­son to vote, either before or on Elec­tion Day. Despite the dan­gers of the pan­dem­ic, vot­ers who do not have a com­pro­mised immune sys­tem need to do the hero­ic act of stand­ing in line with their masks on, just like we stand in line at the gro­cery store.

The fact is, even if there was no whiff of elec­toral fraud in the air, vote by mail has led to the loss of mil­lions of bal­lots due to errors on the part of the vot­ers, elec­tion admin­is­tra­tors and the postal ser­vice. Demo­c­ra­t­ic vot­ers, espe­cial­ly minor­i­ty vot­ers and young peo­ple, are dis­pro­por­tion­ate­ly hurt. The data is over­whelm­ing­ly clear on this, yet Democ­rats are ignor­ing it at their peril.

In the recent New York pri­ma­ry elec­tions, tens of thou­sands of mailed bal­lots were nev­er count­ed due to bureau­crat­ic mis­takes. Some bal­lots were post­marked after the elec­tion or nev­er post­marked at all by the postal ser­vice, mak­ing them invalid under state law. Oth­ers were dis­qual­i­fied because vot­ers did­n’t sign on an easy-to-miss sig­na­ture line on the back of the bal­lot enve­lope. Anoth­er 32,000 absen­tee bal­lots were mailed to vot­ers so late that they could­n’t return them in time to be count­ed. Just in New York City’s Demo­c­ra­t­ic pres­i­den­tial pri­ma­ry, over 400,000 mail-in bal­lots were received, but elec­tion offi­cials inval­i­dat­ed more than 84,000?—?over a fifth of those ballots.

Across the coun­try, in 24 pri­ma­ry elec­tions this year, more than 500,000 mail-in bal­lots were reject­ed. In Penn­syl­va­nia alone, mail bal­lot prob­lems pre­vent­ed 92,000 peo­ple from cast­ing a valid vote (Don­ald Trump won Penn­syl­va­nia in 2016 by just 44,000 votes). An MIT study of the 2008 pres­i­den­tial elec­tion uncov­ered that near­ly 4 mil­lion vot­ers said they request­ed mail bal­lots but nev­er received them. Anoth­er 2.9 mil­lion bal­lots that were sent out did not make it back to elec­tion offi­cials, and about 800,000 were reject­ed due to vot­er, elec­tion offi­cial or postal ser­vice errors.

Vot­ers in many polling sta­tions ben­e­fit from tech­nol­o­gy like “error noti­fi­ca­tion,” which alerts the vot­er if she has made a dis­qual­i­fy­ing mis­take on her bal­lot. But you don’t have that with absen­tee vot­ing. “The pipeline that moves mail bal­lots between vot­ers and elec­tion offi­cials is very leaky,” the study concluded.

With vot­ing by mail surg­ing for this elec­tion, the num­ber of reject­ed mail-in bal­lots has been esti­mat­ed to eas­i­ly sur­pass a mil­lion. And those will over­whelm­ing­ly be vot­ers for Joe Biden and Demo­c­ra­t­ic Sen­ate can­di­dates. Far more Biden vot­ers are plan­ning to vote by mail than Trump vot­ers. One recent study found that near­ly half of Democ­rats said they intend to vote by mail, com­pared to just 28% of Repub­li­can and inde­pen­dent vot­ers. Just as impor­tant, the neg­a­tive impacts will hit minor­i­ty vot­ers and young peo­ple hard­est. A study of Geor­gia’s 2018 midterm elec­tions found that mail-in bal­lots of “younger, minor­i­ty and first-time vot­ers are most like­ly to be thrown out.” A study of Flori­da’s 2018 elec­tion deter­mined that mail-in bal­lots “cast by Black, His­pan­ic, and oth­er racial and eth­nic minori­ties were more than twice as like­ly to be reject­ed as … bal­lots cast by White absen­tee mail voters.”

That means hun­dreds of thou­sands of more Demo­c­ra­t­ic votes will be thrown out than Repub­li­can votes. The pos­si­bil­i­ty of wide­spread dis­en­fran­chise­ment from mail-in bal­lots is real, yet the Democ­rats have been ignor­ing this and pro­mot­ing vote by mail. That is a big mistake.

To be clear, most elec­tions are won by large mar­gins, such as those in heav­i­ly Demo­c­ra­t­ic or Repub­li­can states or dis­tricts, so these vot­ing fail­ures will not over­turn those elec­tion results. But in the bat­tle­ground states, such as Penn­syl­va­nia, Wis­con­sin, Michi­gan, North Car­oli­na or Flori­da, this could well be the decid­ing fac­tor in a close pres­i­den­tial or Sen­ate elec­tion. Add the poten­tial for par­ti­san inter­fer­ence by the U.S. Postal Ser­vice, since Pres­i­dent Don­ald Trump’s recent­ly appoint­ed post­mas­ter gen­er­al is a big GOP cam­paign donor, or even par­ti­san Sec­re­taries of State over­see­ing the elec­tions, and you arrive at the dis­turb­ing pos­si­bil­i­ty of mil­lions of mailed-in bal­lots poten­tial­ly nev­er being count­ed, and hun­dreds of thou­sands of Demo­c­ra­t­ic vot­ers being disenfranchised.

Where is the Biden cam­paign and Demo­c­ra­t­ic Par­ty lead­er­ship on this? The Demo­c­ra­t­ic Nation­al Com­mit­tee has been push­ing vote by mail to the point that some activists have become ner­vous. “I do wor­ry about some of the vote-by-mail push,” said Steve Schale, a Flori­da-based Demo­c­ra­t­ic strate­gist who works with Unite the Coun­try, a pro-Biden super PAC. “We should help peo­ple vote in the way they’re most com­fort­able vot­ing. We shouldn’t force them into vote-by-mail.”

Red mirage

But it actu­al­ly gets worse. Even if you mail in your bal­lot well before elec­tion day, and it arrives in time, in a num­ber of states you still have a prob­lem: In most states, elec­tion offi­cials do not start count­ing those bal­lots right away. Of great­est con­cern, the swing states of Michi­gan, Penn­syl­va­nia, Wis­con­sin and New Hamp­shire do not even allow mail-in or absen­tee bal­lots to be processed or vot­ers’ sig­na­tures ver­i­fied before elec­tion day.

So imag­ine this Night­mare Sce­nario: With so many more Biden sup­port­ers vot­ing by mail, that means in a close elec­tion it is pos­si­ble Pres­i­dent Trump will be ahead on elec­tion night, based on par­tial returns in a num­ber of bat­tle­ground states (a sce­nario that has been called “a red mirage”). Pres­i­dent Trump already has furi­ous­ly deployed his Twit­ter soap­box to dis­cred­it mailed in bal­lots as fraud­u­lent (even though he him­self has often vot­ed absen­tee). He also has hint­ed that he may not accept the elec­tion results. Dur­ing Flori­da’s guber­na­to­r­i­al and sen­ate elec­tions in 2018, as absen­tee bal­lots were count­ed and the Demo­c­ra­t­ic can­di­dates nar­rowed the vote gap to a sliv­er, Trump tweet­ed that “large num­bers of new bal­lots showed up out of nowhere, and many bal­lots are miss­ing or forged.”

So what hap­pens if Trump declares vic­to­ry on elec­tion night, and then tries to dis­pute any “late” uncount­ed bal­lots, both in the courts and in the free-for-all of pub­lic opinion?

Sud­den­ly the nation will be gripped in a replay of Bush v. Gore in the 2000 elec­tion?—?but in sev­er­al bat­tle­ground states. Recall the par­ti­san clash­es and low-inten­si­ty intim­i­da­tion that occurred in 2000 on the pick­et lines out­side the hand counts in Flori­da. Dur­ing the course of a five-week legal war over hang­ing chads and the rules for bal­lot count­ing, pro­test­ers in com­bat fatigues held aloft signs say­ing things like “Bush or Rev­o­lu­tion,” with “rev­o­lu­tion” in bloody scrawl. Threat­en­ing let­ters were mailed to judges, includ­ing one with an illus­tra­tion of a skull and cross­bones. When George W. Bush was final­ly declared pres­i­dent, thou­sands of Florid­i­ans’ bal­lots still sat in piles across the state, not prop­er­ly count­ed, because the U.S. Supreme Court abort­ed the process.

Now imag­ine the unleash­ing of those tox­ic pas­sions in mul­ti­ple states. Dur­ing the run-up to this 2020 elec­tion, already an alarm­ing num­ber of pro­test­ers have been killed in the ten­sions swirling around the protests amid police over-reac­tion. This has all the mak­ings of a con­sti­tu­tion­al cri­sis loom­ing like a Cat­e­go­ry 5 hur­ri­cane just off­shore. Once the elec­tion is thrown into the hands of a con­ser­v­a­tive-major­i­ty Supreme Court, as the nation saw in Bush v. Gore, “five votes beats a rea­son any day.” The recent pass­ing of Ruth Bad­er Gins­burg tilts the court even more toward pro-Trump partisanship.

Pre­vent­ing a con­sti­tu­tion­al crisis

How can we pre­vent this elec­tion melt­down? One impor­tant step is that vot­ers in most bat­tle­ground states should for­get vot­ing by mail. Instead, those vot­ers should con­sid­er putting on their masks and stand­ing in line to vote, either before or on elec­tion day. That way, their vote will be tab­u­lat­ed imme­di­ate­ly by the vot­ing equip­ment. Yes, it’s riski­er for per­son­al health, but in the cur­rent cli­mate, vote by mail is riski­er for our rep­re­sen­ta­tive democ­ra­cy. It’s a ter­ri­ble choice to have to make in the mid­dle of a pan­dem­ic. But unless you have a com­pro­mised immune sys­tem, you should not mail in your bal­lot. Instead, you should refo­cus on mak­ing a plan to do the hero­ic act of show­ing up to vote.

For­tu­nate­ly, a num­ber of states allow you to vote in per­son before elec­tion day. Spread­ing out vot­ing over many days and weeks will cut down con­sid­er­ably on long lines. Oth­er states allow you to drop off your absen­tee vote with elec­tion offi­cials before elec­tion day, which is prefer­able to mail­ing it in?—?but the prob­lem with that strat­e­gy is that your absen­tee bal­lot may not get count­ed before the tal­ly is released on elec­tion night. It all depends on the elec­tion pro­ce­dures in each state, which vary widely.

For exam­ple, in the bat­tle­grounds of Wis­con­sin, Penn­syl­va­nia, Michi­gan, New Hamp­shire and Iowa, the count­ing of dropped-off absen­tee bal­lots can­not begin before elec­tion day. By elec­tion night, many of those bal­lots will like­ly still lie uncount­ed. It depends on how over­whelmed the vot­ing bureau­cra­cy is, or even the whim of par­ti­san elec­tion offi­cials. In those states, Biden vot­ers need to show up in per­son wear­ing their masks and vote. Don’t even drop off your bal­lot before elec­tion day, because your bal­lot will not be count­ed until after the elec­tion, and that will con­tribute to the “red mirage.”

But in oth­er bat­tle­ground states?—?notably Flori­da, North Car­oli­na, Ohio, Col­orado, Neva­da and Ari­zona—elec­tion offi­cials are allowed to count ear­ly absen­tee bal­lots before elec­tion day, and then release those vote totals right after the clos­ing of the polls on Novem­ber 3. These states also open vote cen­ters many days or weeks before the polls, where any vot­er can imme­di­ate­ly vote. In these states, vot­ers with absen­tee bal­lots should drop them off ear­ly in an offi­cial drop­box or at one of the vote cen­ters, rather than mail­ing them. Even bet­ter would be to show up ear­ly with your mask on and vote at one of the vote centers.

Some Democ­rats and their allies are start­ing to fig­ure out the “mail bal­lot dead end” they have steered them­selves into. Rep. Alexan­dria Oca­sio-Cortez (D?N.Y.) recent­ly tweet­ed that she will be “vot­ing ear­ly and in per­son.” Geor­gia leader Stacey Abrams and her vot­er empow­er­ment group Fair Fight are encour­ag­ing vot­ers to “make a plan and vote as soon as pos­si­ble.” They empha­size vot­ing ear­ly either in per­son, using an offi­cial drop-off box, or by mail. Also, the deal struck by NBA play­ers with team own­ers to use their facil­i­ties as sites for ear­ly vot­ing with enough room for social dis­tanc­ing is a step in the right direction.

But these efforts could well be inef­fec­tive for those vot­ers who live in one of the swing states that will not count absen­tee bal­lots until elec­tion day. Those vot­ers run the risk of their bal­lots not being includ­ed in the elec­tion night tal­ly, which in turn will con­tribute to the “red mirage” of Trump false­ly appear­ing to lead and imme­di­ate­ly declar­ing vic­to­ry. Cue con­sti­tu­tion­al cri­sis, 2020.

We can best safe­guard our democ­ra­cy this Novem­ber by uti­liz­ing ear­ly vot­ing and, if nec­es­sary, show­ing up to vote with our masks, in as many bat­tle­ground states as pos­si­ble. The Unit­ed States has reached such a per­ilous state that this sim­ple act has become heroic.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Building and Strengthening Our Movement Around the Country Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=44284"><span class="small">Bernie Sanders, Medium</span></a>   
Saturday, 10 October 2020 12:45

Sanders writes: "We have just 25 days left until the most important election in the modern history of our country."

Sen. Bernie Sanders. (photo: Getty)
Sen. Bernie Sanders. (photo: Getty)


Building and Strengthening Our Movement Around the Country

By Bernie Sanders, Medium

10 October 20

 

e have just 25 days left until the most important election in the modern history of our country.

Yes — we all must do everything we can to defeat Donald Trump who is a threat to the very future of our democracy. But it’s not just the White House or seats in the U.S. Congress that are up for grabs in this election.

In every corner of the country, strong progressives are running at the state and local level to represent our movement and lead the fight to transform this country.

These races are incredibly important — that’s why I am endorsing progressive, down-ballot candidates across the country. If you can, I hope you’ll cast your ballot for them when you vote.

We need to continue building and strengthening our movement from the ground up by electing more progressives to state and local positions. Because the truth is that the victories we accomplish in this election will lay the groundwork for the future of our political revolution. With just 25 days to go, these candidates are counting on our support.

ARIZONA

  • Andres Cano for State Representative, LD 3

  • Athena Salman for State Representative, LD 26

  • Melody Hernandez for State Representative, LD 26

  • Diego Rodriguez for State Representative, LD 27

  • Reginald Bolding for State Representative, LD 27

  • Richard Andrade for State Representative LD 29

  • Raquel Teran for State Representative, LD 30

  • Juan Mendez for State Senator, LD 26

  • Martin Quezada for State Senator, LD 29

  • Adelita Grijalva for Pima County Supervisor, District 5

  • Gabriella Cázares-Kelly for Pima County Recorder

  • Laura Conover for Pima County Attorney

CALIFORNIA

  • Kansen Chu for Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors, District 3

  • Abigail Medina for State Senate, District 23

  • Alex Lee for State Assembly, District 25

  • Ash Kalra for State Assembly, District 27

  • Reggie Jones-Sawyer for State Assembly, District 59

  • Fatima Iqbal-Zubair for State Assembly, District 64

  • Lacei Amodei for City Council, Hayward

  • Nestor Castillo for City Council, Hayward

  • Elisha Crader for City Council, Hayward

  • Cheryl Davila for City Council, Berkeley

  • Carroll Fife for City Council, Oakland

  • Nithya Raman for City Council, Los Angeles

  • Suely Saro for City Council, Long Beach

  • Tunua Thrash-Ntuk for City Council, Long Beach

  • Cari Templeton for City Council, Palo Alto

  • Jovanka Beckles for AC Transit Board of Directors, Ward 1

  • Holly Mitchell for Board of Supervisors, Los Angeles County

  • Al Clark for Vice-Mayor, Carpinteria

  • George Gascón for District Attorney, Los Angeles County

COLORADO

  • Serena Gonzales-Gutierrez for State Representative, District 4

  • Alex Valdez for State Representative, District 5

  • Emily Sirota for State Representative, District 9

  • Monica Duran for State Representative, District 24

  • Yadira Caraveo for State Representative, District 31

  • Iman Jodeh for State Representative, District 41

  • Alexis King for District Attorney, JD 1

  • Alonzo Payne for District Attorney, JD 12

  • Amy Padden for District Attorney, JD 18

  • Ilana Spiegel for CU Board of Regents

FLORIDA

  • Monique Worrell for State Attorney, 9th Circuit

  • Harold Pryor for State Attorney, 17th Circuit

  • Alton Edmond for Sheriff, Brevard County

  • Marco Lopez for Sheriff, Osceola County

  • Eliseo Santana for Sheriff, Pinellas County

MAINE

  • Troy Jackson for State Senate, District 1

  • David Miramant for State Senate, District 12

  • Stacy Brenner for State Senate, District 30

  • Patricia Kidder for State House, District 19

  • Ben Collings for State House, District 42

  • Jim Handy for State House, District 58

  • Ken Morse for State House, District 71

  • Lydia Crafts for State House, District 90

  • Amy Roeder for State House, District 125

  • Lillie Lavado for State House, District 147

MICHIGAN

  • Abe Aiyash for State Representative, District 4

  • Abdullah Hammoud for State Representative, District 15

  • Chris Slat for State Representative, District 17

  • Julia Pulver for State Representative, District 39

  • Nicole Breadon for State Representative, District 43

  • Yousef Rabhi for State Representative, District 53

  • Felicia Brabec for State Representative, District 55

  • Tamara Barnes for State Representative, District 58

  • Lily Cheng-Schulting for State Representative, District 72

  • Chokwe Pitchford for State Representative, District 79

  • Brian Mosallam for Michigan State University Board of Trustees

  • Eli Savit for County Prosecutor, Washtenaw County

NEW HAMPSHIRE

  • Manny Espitia for State Representative, Nashua 4

  • Carlos Cardona for State Representative, Belknap 3

  • Sherry Frost for State Representative, Strafford 16

  • Tim Smith for State Representative, Hillsborough 17

  • Renny Cushing for State Representative, Rockingham 21

  • Mackenzie Murphy for State Representative, Hillsborough 21

  • Jan Schmidt for State Representative, Hillsborough 28

  • Mark King for State Representative, Hillsborough 33

  • Mark MacKenzie for Executive Council, District 4

  • Mindi Messmer for Executive Council, District 3

NEW YORK

  • Jessica González-Rojas for State Assembly, AD 34

  • Zohran Mamdani for State Assembly, AD 36

  • Ron Kim for State Assembly, AD 40

  • Yuh-Line Niou for State Assembly, AD 65

  • Anna Kelles for State Assembly, AD 125

  • Dia Carbajal for State Assembly, AD 126

  • Christine Pellegrino for State Senate, SD 4

  • James Sanders for State Senate, SD 10

  • Mike Gianaris for State Senate, SD 12

  • Jessica Ramos for State Senate, SD 13

  • Julia Salazar for State Senate, SD 18

  • Jabari Brisport for State Senate, SD 25

  • Luis Sepúlveda for State Senate, SD 32

  • Patrick Nelson for State Senate, SD 43

  • Samra Brouk for State Senate, SD 55

PENNSYLVANIA

  • Sara Innamorato for State Representative, District 21

  • Summer L. Lee for State Representative, District 34

  • John Padora for State Representative, District 37

  • Nicole Miller for State Representative, District 87

  • Tara Shakespeare for State Representative, District 88

  • Tara Zrinski for State Representative, District 138

  • Elizabeth Fiedler for State Representative, District 184

  • Rick Krajewski for State Representative, District 188

  • Nikil Saval for State Senate, District 1

  • Amanda Cappelletti for State Senate, District 17

  • Shanna Danielson for State Senate, District 31

RHODE ISLAND

  • Brandon Potter for State House, District 16

  • Megan Cotter for State House, District 39

  • Leonela Felix for State House, District 61

  • Michelle McGaw for State House, District 71

  • Kendra Anderson for State Senate, District 31

  • Jen Volpe Douglas for State Senate, District 34

  • Charmaine Webster for City Council, Woonsocket

  • Marlene Guay for City Council, Woonsocket

  • Vaughan Miller for City Council, Woonsocket

  • Alex Kithes for City Council, Woonsocket

  • Adamaris Villar for City Council, Central Falls

SOUTH CAROLINA

  • Terry Alexander for State Representative, District 59

  • Leon Howard for State Representative, District 76

  • Ivory Thigpen for State Representative, District 79

  • Justin Bamberg for State Representative, District 90

  • Cezar McKnight for State Representative, District 101

  • Wendell Gilliard for State Representative, District 111

  • Krystle Matthews for State Representative, District 117

  • Michael Rivers for State Representative, District 121

TEXAS

  • Alex Annello for City Council, El Paso District 2

  • Greg Casar for City Council, Austin District 4

  • Erin Zwiener for State Representative, District 45

  • José Garza for District Attorney, Travis County

VERMONT

  • David Zuckerman, Governor

  • TJ Donovan, Attorney General

  • Jim Condos, Secretary of State

  • Beth Pearce, State Treasurer

  • Doug Hoffer, Auditor

  • Chris Pearson, State Senate

  • Cheryl Hooker, State Senate

  • Anthony Pollina, State Senate

  • Andrew Perchlik, State Senate

  • Tanya Vyhovsky, State Representative

  • Mari Cordes, State Representative

  • Matt Birong, State Representative

  • Jubilee McGill, State Representative

  • Joseph “Chip” Troiano, State Representative

  • Scott Campbell, State Representative

  • Dennis LaBounty, State Representative

  • Emily Hecker, State Representative

  • Emma Mulvaney-Stanak, State Representative

  • Selene Colburn, State Representative

  • Taylor Small, State Representative

  • Bob Hooper, State Representative

  • Brian Cina, State Representative

  • Martha Allen, State Representative

  • Mike McCarthy, State Representative

  • Dennis Williams, State Representative

  • Jo Sabel Courtney, State Representative

  • Dave Yacovone, State Representative

  • Avram Patt, State Representative

  • Susan Hatch Davis, State Representative

  • Larry Satcowitz, State Representative

  • Katherine Sims, State Representative

  • Robin Chesnut-Tangerman, State Representative

  • Mollie Burke, State Representative

  • Kevin “Coach” Christie, State Representative

  • Elizabeth Burrows, State Representative

  • Heather Surprenant, State Representative

WEST VIRGINIA

  • Rusty Williams for House of Delegates, District 35

WISCONSIN

  • Kendra Anderson for State Senate, District 31

  • Supreme Moore Omokunde for State Assembly, AD 17

  • Sarah Yacoub for State Assembly, AD 30

  • Kristina Shelton for State Assembly, AD 48

  • Kriss Marion for State Assembly, AD 51

  • Dan Schierl for State Assembly, AD 55

  • Emily Berge for State Assembly, AD 68

  • Samba Baldeh, Assembly District 48
e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
America Wants to Put the Brakes on Judge Amy Coney Barrett's Nomination. Senate Leadership Should Listen. Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=56591"><span class="small">Southern Poverty Law Center</span></a>   
Saturday, 10 October 2020 12:43

Excerpt: "This Monday, the Senate Judiciary Committee, under Republican leadership, is scheduled to begin hearings to fill the vacant seat of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg."

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett. (photo: Anna Moneymaker/Getty)
Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett. (photo: Anna Moneymaker/Getty)


America Wants to Put the Brakes on Judge Amy Coney Barrett's Nomination. Senate Leadership Should Listen.

By Southern Poverty Law Center

10 October 20

 

his Monday, the Senate Judiciary Committee, under Republican leadership, is scheduled to begin hearings to fill the vacant seat of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The rush to fill the vacancy with less than a month before the general election is nothing less than a power grab that ignores the unprecedented circumstances our nation faces.

By putting this nomination process ahead of the desperate needs of millions of American families who are being financially devastated during the pandemic, the Senate leadership is showing its true colors.

COVID-19 has killed more than 210,000 people in the United States, left millions unemployed and brought pain and loss to virtually every community – with experts predicting another surge of infections and deaths this fall. The pandemic has also revealed dramatic racial disparities in health care and housing, in the workplace, and in financial and educational systems. The American public needs relief and they need it now. Not after the general election. Not after the new Congress is seated. The need is immediate and urgent.

The majority of Americans agree. Not only do they want the Senate and White House to come back to the negotiation table and hammer out a relief package with the U.S. House of Representatives, they strongly believe that Ginsburg’s replacement should be selected by the winner of the presidential election.

The Senate Judiciary Committee should listen to the will of the people. Yet, instead of working to address the many hardships caused by the pandemic, Senate Republicans are single-mindedly mustering their majority to ram through a nominee whose record raises serious doubts about whether she can be trusted to safeguard the rights of everyone in the United States – particularly women, communities of color, and LGBTQ people – if she’s appointed to the high court for life.

In their race to confirm Judge Barrett, GOP senators have jettisoned their own recent precedent – denying a hearing to the Supreme Court nominee President Obama presented eight months before the 2016 election, stating “this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.”

It’s impossible to ignore their hypocrisy and lack of empathy for millions of suffering families, but there is far more to be considered.

First, by the time Senate Judiciary confirmation hearings begin Monday, millions of people will have already voted. With two senators on the committee having tested positive for COVID-19 in the last week, they should prioritize their own safety – and the health of those who work with them – cancel the hearings, and, when it is safe to do so, concentrate on passing legislation (as the House has already done) to address the pandemic’s devastation.

Second, Judge Barrett is the wrong nominee to replace Ginsburg. Barrett’s past actions, writings, and judicial rulings reveal her ultra-conservative judicial philosophy – threatening to reverse progress made in protecting the rights of women, people of color, and members of LGBTQ communities. Justice Ginsburg championed such protections.

Having Judge Barrett on the U.S. Supreme Court would have seismic consequences – putting millions in peril of losing access to health care and equal justice. It would endanger public education funding as well as health and safety regulations. It also would threaten protections against religious discrimination and safeguards for immigrant communities and lower-income Americans. In fact, many of these critical issues will come before the Court during its current term.

Further, Judge Barrett has made several appearances at advocacy and training events for Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), which we have designated as an anti-LGBTQ hate group. ADF has supported the recriminalization of sexual acts between consenting LGBTQ adults in the U.S. and its criminalization abroad. It has defended state-sanctioned sterilization of trans people abroad; contended that LGBTQ people are more likely to engage in pedophilia; and claimed that a “homosexual agenda” will destroy Christianity and society. The ADF also works to develop “religious liberty” legislation and case law that would allow business owners to deny goods and services to LGBTQ people, women and religious minorities on the basis of their own personal religious beliefs.

Finally, voting rights and immigrant justice issues are at stake. Another ultra-conservative justice could extend strict, discriminatory voter ID laws, and stop progress on mail-in balloting and the restoration of full voting rights for previously incarcerated people. Judge Barrett dissented from a ruling that struck down the Trump administration’s discriminatory “public charge” rule (which would have penalized immigrants for using benefits Congress had explicitly made available to them) and dismissed humanitarian asylum claims under the Convention Against Torture. Another crucial issue, whether noncitizens should, for the first time, be excluded from the Census, is on the Court’s docket.

These are unprecedented times and our nation needs leadership right now, not partisan politics. The majority of Americans agree that the person elected president on Nov. 3 should nominate the individual who will fill Justice Ginsburg’s seat. Ignoring the will of Americans and our democratic system of checks and balances to jam through this highly controversial nomination threatens to diminish faith in the Court for decades to come.

We must fight this desperate attempt to reshape our nation’s highest court against the will of the people.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Inside the Trump Campaign's Strategy to Make Voting a Tooth-and-Nail Fight Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=56590"><span class="small">Danny Hakim and Stephanie Saul, The New York Times</span></a>   
Saturday, 10 October 2020 12:42

Excerpt: "When President Trump used the prime-time debate last week to urge his supporters to 'go into the polls and watch very carefully,' he wasn't just issuing a call for a grass-roots movement or raising the prospect of intimidation tactics at voting sites."

A voter drops a ballot at a mail-in ballot drop off box location in Hoboken. (photo: Michael Nagle/Blooberg)
A voter drops a ballot at a mail-in ballot drop off box location in Hoboken. (photo: Michael Nagle/Blooberg)


Inside the Trump Campaign's Strategy to Make Voting a Tooth-and-Nail Fight

By Danny Hakim and Stephanie Saul, The New York Times

10 October 20


The campaign’s focus on Election Day operations has intensified, with aggressive plans for poll monitoring and other tactics that Democrats say are efforts at vote suppression.


hen President Trump used the prime-time debate last week to urge his supporters to “go into the polls and watch very carefully,” he wasn’t just issuing a call for a grass-roots movement or raising the prospect of intimidation tactics at voting sites. He was also nodding to an extensive behind-the-scenes effort led by the lawyers and operatives on his campaign.

Over the summer, Mr. Trump named a new campaign manager, Bill Stepien, who was once a top aide to former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey before being fired amid the “Bridgegate” scandal. Mr. Stepien swiftly elevated a group of lieutenants focused on using aggressive electoral tactics, moves that led Marc E. Elias, the leading election lawyer for the Democratic Party, to tweet that Mr. Trump was “tripling down” on “opposing voting rights.”

One of the main architects of the effort is Justin Clark, whom Mr. Stepien promoted to deputy campaign manager. He has been viewed with suspicion among Democrats since he was recorded last year saying, “Traditionally it’s always been Republicans suppressing votes in places,” and adding that in 2020 the party would “start playing offense a little bit.”

READ MORE

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: The Big Question I Want Answered Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=56588"><span class="small">Robert Redford, CNN</span></a>   
Saturday, 10 October 2020 11:50

Redford writes: "Recently, I've been thinking of a scene from a film I did in 1972 called 'The Candidate.'"

Robert Redford says a few words at the opening news conference for the 2019 Sundance Film Festival at the Egyptian Theatre in Park City, Thursday, Jan. 24, 2019. (photo: Rick Egan/The Salt Lake Tribune)
Robert Redford says a few words at the opening news conference for the 2019 Sundance Film Festival at the Egyptian Theatre in Park City, Thursday, Jan. 24, 2019. (photo: Rick Egan/The Salt Lake Tribune)


The Big Question I Want Answered

By Robert Redford, CNN

10 October 20

 

'm not in the habit of quoting lines from movies I've appeared in, but every once in a while, something brings one of those old lines to mind. Recently, I've been thinking of a scene from a film I did in 1972 called "The Candidate."

My character, Bill McKay, is running for the US Senate from California. At the end of a televised debate, McKay is prompted to give his closing statement. He veers off script -- casting aside the careful messages his consultants had crafted -- and speaks from the heart. "I think it's important to note what subjects we haven't discussed," he says. He mentions race, and poverty and urban blight. "We haven't discussed any of the sicknesses that may yet send this country up in flames."

I've thought of that scene as I've watched the land near my home in California go up in flames -- literally. The wildfires there, like the ones in Oregon and Washington and Colorado, did draw some news coverage, as you'd expect them to. But climate change -- which is creating the conditions for fires like these and for extreme, destructive weather of other kinds -- isn't being discussed to any meaningful degree.

According to a new analysis of Americans who rely on major broadcasters as their source of news, only 20% feel "very well-informed" about climate change. Other than the time last month that Donald Trump said "science doesn't know" whether our planet is overheating, climate change has barely registered in media coverage.

The equatorial rainforests of South America, Africa, and Asia are being destroyed at a staggering rate -- and at a rising cost to biodiversity and the quality of our air and water -- yet outside of environmental circles, this is largely not considered news.

Of course, I'm as aware as anyone that we're only weeks away from Election Day. Our country, reasonably enough, is consumed with questions about the pandemic; the state of the President's physical and mental health after his Covid-19 diagnosis; the federal government's failure to extend relief for unemployed Americans and struggling small businesses; concerns about the integrity of our election; our ongoing reckoning with systemic racism. And that's hardly a complete list. It's a lot to lie awake thinking about. In the tech world, they talk about information overload. We've all got it.

Couple that with the President's constant attempts to change the subject, and it's not surprising that key issues get ignored -- particularly the root causes of issues, which require the press to dig deeper.

So we hear about the plot by a group of men to "storm" the Michigan capitol building and kidnap the governor, but not about the laws and court rulings that allowed far-right protesters to bring guns into the state Senate gallery last spring and loom above the lawmakers.

We hear a lot about the shocking rate of Covid-19 infections affecting senior citizens, but much less about the chronically crowded, unsafe conditions in nursing homes -- "death pits," as a former New York lieutenant governor has called them. And for all the valid concern about the peaceful transfer of power after an election, when the President has refused to commit to it, there is too little discussion of the structural reasons our democracy fails to represent a majority of the American people.

Maybe it's too much to suggest, at the peak of a presidential campaign, that we have a serious discussion about burning rainforests or understaffed long-term care facilities. Complex problems don't make great campaign issues. They don't rally your base; they don't get people to the polls (or the post office). But these are not subjects that are going to patiently wait their turn, that are going to hang back in line until we're ready to talk about them.

For all these reasons, it's my hope that this November will provide a hard reset -- of our national direction, most of all, but also our national attention.

An election is democracy's pivot point. It's a moment that should prompt us, all of us, to refocus on what really matters. That list of issues is longer and more daunting than it has been for generations.

When the campaign merry-go-round finally stops, when the cycle of charges and counter-charges finally ceases, we can turn to the subjects we haven't discussed. And we can begin to answer the question that my character, Bill McKay, asks at the end of the movie: "What do we do now?"

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 Next > End >>

Page 328 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN