Today's will be the last edition of progressive state blogs until August 8.
|
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 Eclectablog of Michigan, Eclectablog writes—New polling shows just how gerrymandered the blue state of Michigan really is:
Given the results of the last few elections in Michigan where Democrats received the majority of the votes but Republicans won a majority of the seats in the state legislature, there is little to argue about when it comes to discussing gerrymandering and how terribly gerrymandered our state is. There are hardly any competitive seats in our state anymore. Period.
However, a new poll out from Public Policy Polling brings the reality of this into sharp relief. Without question, the voters in our state lean toward progressive, sometimes sharply, on a wide array of issues while our state legislature is as Republican as any southern state,].
However, a new poll out from Public Policy Polling brings the reality of this into sharp relief. Without question, the voters in our state lean toward progressive, sometimes sharply, on a wide array of issues while our state legislature is as Republican as any southern state.
Have a look:
• Approval of Gov. Snyder: 47% disapprove, 40% approve
• Support of the Affordable Care Act: 44% support, 42% oppose
• Allowing adoption agencies to deny services to families based on religious beliefs: 52% oppose, 34% support
• Support for Todd Courser’s bill to allow only clergy to perform marriages: 69% oppose, 16% support
• Support for legalizing pot: 48% support, 42% oppose
• Approval of the state legislature: 54% disapprove, 20% approve
• Support for requiring businesses to allow workers to earn paid sick days: 78% support, 15% oppose
• Support for replacing flat income tax with a graduated income tax: 64% support, 28% oppose
• Revising the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act to protect the LGBT community: 68% support, 25% oppose
These are poll numbers from a democratically blue state. A liberal state. A progressive state. And yet our state Senate is 71% Republican (74% if you include Virgil Smith) and the state House is 57% Republican (59% if you include Harvey Santana.)
More excerpts can be found below the orange gerrymander.
At Blue Virginia, lowkell writes—Two Simple Questions on "Corporate Welfare Programs" for "Free-Market Economist" Dave Brat:
Given Ayn Rand afficionado Rep. Dave Brat (R-VA07)'s Facebook post yesterday (see below) attacking "corporate welfare programs" and patting himself on the back for supposedly being a "free-market economist," I've got a couple simple questions for the fine Congressman.
1. Since you're against "corporate welfare programs," would you support getting rid of taxpayer-funded corporate welfare by "U.S. federal and state governments [that] gave away $21.6 billion in subsidies for oil, gas, and coal exploration and production" in 2013 (and every year)?
2. OK, Mr. "Free Market," would you favor getting rid of the massive indirect subsidies we provide to the fossil fuel industry, including massive sums of money to encourage petroleum-based transportation choices; subsidization - in a wide variety of ways - of suburban/exurban sprawl; huge national security costs related to defense of oil fields and shipping lanes; and last but certainly not least the enormous health care and environmental costs that are not currently "internalized" in the cost of fossil fuels, simply because the government has not done so by putting a price on fossil fuel pollution? If you don't support getting rid of direct and indirect subsidies to fossil fuels, and also incorporating negative "externalities" into the price of fossil fuels (e.g., through a revenue-neutral carbon tax), why don't you?
And no, I'm not holding my breath waiting for an honest answer from you, because I know you don't have one.
At
Show Me Progress of Missouri,
WillyK writes—
Is Greece going to be the Republican Social Security stalking Horse - again:
It had to happen. The disaster unfolding in Greece is just too susceptible to over-simplification not to be seized upon by Republicans looking to go after Medicare and Social Security. First up in Missouri? Why none other than that astute economic thinker, Rep. Billy Long (R-7), who had this to say on the topic:
[...] Currently, the U.S. national debt stands near $18.3 trillion. To put that in context, the total size of the U.S. economy is $17.7 trillion. It is frightening to think our nation's debt outpaces our economic activity; and, even worse, China holds 30 percent of our debt and counting. As the interest we pay on our debt continues to increase, I am concerned we may be on a similar path as Greece, which has debt close to double the size of its economy. That is why my colleagues and I are committed to sound fiscal solutions to curb America's rising debt. [...]
Reducing our spending, creating a balanced budget and responsibly continuing deficit reduction are the steps to take to reduce our debt, and I believe we are getting off on the right foot. Our next move should be concerning reforms must focus on Medicare, Social Security and entitlement programs. [Emphasis added.]
This refrain has been sporadically played on the right since 2010 - and none of the predictions of debt-related disaster have been realized. There are a number of reasons why the U.S. is not nor never will be like Greece [...]
While Long is right about the fact that the ratio of debt to GDP in the U.S. is very high, he, like many other Republican fear-mongers making the same claim, are wrong about the conclusions to be drawn from that fact. Many are still citing past research purporting to show that a high debt-to-GDP ratio damages economic growth. This research has been shown to be incorrect, and, in addition, there are many examples of countries that have a high debt level while enjoying respectable economic growth. One need look no farther than our own economy which in spite of our high debt-to-GDP ratio has also been enjoying sound economic growth.
At
Montana Cowgirl,
Cowgirl writes—
Fact Checking The Billings Gazette On State Budget:
An editorial in today’s Billings Gazette about a recent budget audit reads like a political hit job and gets several important facts wrong.
Of course, a recent budget audit, which found that the depreciation of assets had mistakenly not been factored into a budget report, is an issue that Republicans are trying to make hay over, and were the Governor a Republican, the Democrats would probably be trying to do the same. But it’s the job of the newspapers to cut through the political posturing and get to the facts of the matter, and that’s where the Gazette editorial really fails. More experienced reporters could probably have helped the Gazette’s ed board see through the political hype, but Lee Newspapers shuttered its state bureau after the legislative session.
The point is that facts matter, and the facts show that the error did not create a budget problem for the state, the AP reported that the state’s credit rating is not impacted, there is no money missing, there is no change in size of massive surplus that Bullock made sure was left at the end of the session–and no decisions were made based on the errors. What’s more, the accountant responsible has already been replaced, and the state brought in an outside firm to recommend additional controls to ensure the errors would not be repeated.
At
Ohio Daily,
Anastasia Pantsios writes—
Of Course Kasich Did Not Veto the Attacks on Abortion Clinics:
It was pretty much a foregone conclusion that Kasich, believing he’s on a special mission from God to impose his alleged religious beliefs on others and save “babies” until they can be born and suffer from his endless cuts to education and other services, would not veto the absurd and irrelevant regulations written, inappropriately, into the budget bill.
These had nothing to do with health or safety. They were simply hoops to jump through, intended to close clinics and make choice and freedom a joke for the women suffering the most from Kasich’s miserable, backpedaling economy.
What was also a foregone conclusion, alas, was that he would not stand up and be open and honest about what he intended to do and why, even knowing how strongly his opposition felt and how many women would be badly hurt by his actions. For a man who allegedly has such strong religious beliefs, he’s a coward. A bold man of true belief would have stated publicly, “I know you disagree with me, but I feel I have t go through with this because of my beliefs.”
But Kasich is not such a man and he made a mockery of his claims that he is so “direct.” He’s indirection incarnate. I’m actually looking forward to his presidential campaign because I think it will expose him for the dishonest charlatan that he is.
At
BlueNC,
Betsy Muse writes—
Dem to Watch: John Carry Easterling, III:
We may not see John Carry Easterling, III's name on a ballot yet, but at some point in the next ten years we are certain to see this young man serving us in elected office. He is smart, energetic, and committed to making life better for others.
Why ten years? Easterling has just graduated high school and plans to double major in political science and history at UNCG. He also plans to graduate before venturing into public service. He isn't waiting until after college to get involved, though. Easterling has just been appointed the chair of the Rural Caucus for North Carolina College Democrats and is serving as the chair of the High School Caucus for Young Democrats of America. He recently completed his tenure as the President of North Carolina Teen Democrats.
When asked about his accomplishments in these groups, John quickly gives credit to those who served or are serving with him. He said that among his favorite accomplishments was that his administration increased participation in Teen Dems in North Carolina by adding 20 county chapters and more than 300 members in a six-month time span.
At
Bluestem Prairie of Minnesota,
Sally Jo Sorensen writes—
MN01 Republican hopeful Jim Hagedorn trolls media with anti-equality, anti-immigrant schtick:
Desperately seeking to gain more attention than Stewart Mills' hair, First Congressional District candidate Jim Hagedorn is doing what he did before seeking office twice before.
Trolling on the internets about hot button issues like same sex marriage and immigration reform.
It's true that some of those buttons are cooling rapidly. On June 30, 2015, Rachel Stassen-Berger reported in Why were Minnesota Republicans quiet about the Supreme Court's marriage decision?
... when the court decided to legalize same-sex marriage across the nation, we in Minnesota again heard an overwhelming outburst. The reactions came pouring in -- from state and federal leaders -- even though Minnesota had legalized same-sex marriage in 2013.
On that day, the statements were one-sided. "A great day," "love is love," "I could not be more proud," the statements said.
|
Official statements from opponents were absent.
Bluestem later found some reactions from Republican state lawmakers via Facebook, but like Stassen-Berger, we missed one official statement: the Hagedorn Statement on SCOTUS Marriage Ruling. Hagedorn, the GOP candidate in the First in 2014, bucks the trend of Minnesota Republicans by urging action, while calling the ruling "extra-constitutional misconduct" committed by "five lawyers acting as an oligarchy." [...]
At
Delaware Liberal,
El Somnambulo writes—
Schwartzkopf’s Budget Deal Deplorable. Was It Also Illegal?:
I think the answer may well be yes.
But first, let’s talk about how Pistol Pete threw over his own caucus in order to crawl into bed with the Rethugs. According to several Leg Hall sources, Speaker Schwartzkopf had pledged to reconvene with his caucus to try to recalibrate any budget agreement that could impact core D constituencies. Specifically, those who were at risk of losing 10% in public assistance for health care. He did not hold that promised meeting. Instead, he called the Budget Bill up for a vote, which is why so many D progressives voted no. And, yes, those receiving public assistance saw their monthly stipend cut from $90 monthly to $81. Meanwhile, $1.2 mill worth of additional state police coverage to Sussex County and $3 mill of Ag Lands preservation were the booty claimed by the Rethugs and, not coincidentally, by Sussex County’s most powerful legislator, Schwartzkopf. Oh, and the $5 mill that was transferred from the Transportation Trust Fund in the name of ‘reform’, ended up … nope, not telling you yet.
Soon. Have patience.
At
Colorado Pols,
Colorado Pols writes—
As Jeffco Recall Heats Up, So Does The BS:
The recall campaign against conservative majority members of the Jefferson County school board is almost certain to be one of the biggest political stories of the year in Colorado politics, and subject to tremendous amounts of money and energy from both sides of the aisle–think of it as a “proxy war” for much larger opposing factions in American politics, like Vietnam was to the Cold War.
The application of big-ticket political tactics in a school board race means usual suspects involved in state legislative and federal races in Colorado are now bringing their operations to the Jeffco school board. We noted back in April a fundraising letter from the Independence Institute’s Jon Caldara, in which Caldara promised to bring the full resources of his organization to bear on Jeffco Public Schools. Since then, the Independence Institute’s closely-related news site Complete Colorado has been heavily focused on Jeffco, with a series of stories by Independence Institute “education reporter” Sherrie Peif. Yesterday, Peif published a lengthy story claiming that petition language for the recalls is incorrect on the matter of superintendent Dan McMinimee’s salary [...]
In short, Peif argues that the petition language is falsely stating McMinimee’s compensation. Now, we could revisit glaring inaccuracies in the petition language used in 2013 to recall Democratic Senators over the gun safety bills, like claiming that Evie Hudak “voted for legislation to raise taxes” (we’re a TABOR state, you can’t do that) or that Angela Giron didn’t “respect” the “fundamental right to the private ownership of firearms” (which doesn’t exist, sorry Dudley Brown).
But none of that really matters, because Peif isn’t telling you the whole story.
At
Democratic Diva of Arizona,
Donna writes—
Pro-Choice Movement (Finally) Gets Proactive on Demanding End to Funding Bans on Abortion:
Now that President Obama is a lame duck and clearly done with GOP bullshit, I wonder if this bill just introduced in the House would have a fighting chance if Democrats controlled both houses. [...]
Today Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-CA), along with Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Congresswoman Diana DeGette (D-CO) and 61 other Congressional co-sponsors, introduced the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance (EACH Woman) Act. The bill would ensure health coverage for abortion for every woman however much she earns or however she is insured. The bill is backed by 36 national and state organizations united under the campaign All* Above All.
“The passage of the EACH Woman Act would stop the terrible wrongs of the Hyde Amendment, which, for 37 years, have fallen hardest on people of color, low-income, and youth,” said Yamani Hernandez, Executive Director, National Network of Abortion Funds.
|
The All Above All cites a poll they commissioned that found that when Americans are asked the questions in the right way, they respond favorably to covering low-income women’s abortion care in the same way that their other reproductive health needs are covered under Medicaid. They state right up front that they over-sample young Americans, but you can see in the age breakdowns that older groups strongly support Medicaid coverage of abortion. This flies in the face of the standard line anti-choice groups are feeding us about how insurance coverage and taxpayer funding bans are popular and “commonsense.”
The bold move on the part of pro-choice Representatives to repeal Hyde and this poll speak to the need to challenge accepted “moderate” narratives on abortion.
At
Blog for Iowa,
Paul Deaton writes—
Lincoln Chafee In A Small Field:
That Lincoln Chafee’s presidential campaign gets noticed is largely attributable to the small field of five announced Democratic contenders. Just by the fact of inclusive blogger to-do lists, Chafee gets an article mention here and there… not unlike this one.
Maybe it would be best if Chafee became president and imposed his will on a disgruntled nation. “Dammit,” he might say, “we’re switching to the metric system, and that’s that.”
Not really. As Arlo Guthrie said, “we have to solve our problems the way we made them, inch by inch, and mile by mile.”
If Chafee has been to Iowa this year, it was a forgettable moment. When he speaks at the Iowa Democratic Party Hall of Fame Dinner in Cedar Rapids on July 17, Democratic eyes will be watching just by the fact of his being there. For my part, I hope the event is broadcast on YouTube or CSPAN, as I am already scheduled to volunteer at my local community town festival that night. Politics takes a holiday for that.
Chafee’s views are Democratic ones, according to his website. He hammers Hillary Clinton for her vote for the Iraq War, and as the only Republican senator to vote against authorization, Chafee has standing to do so. But what else Lincoln Chafee? What differentiates your campaign?
Maybe the metric system is it.
At
Burnt Orange Report of Texas,
Joe Deshotel writes—
Democrats seek Taskforce On Confederate Statues, SBOE Whitewashes History Books:
When some Texas politician is embarrassing our state in the news, we can usually take some solace in the old saying “thank God for Mississippi.” But when it comes to recognizing that slavery was the primary “states’ right” that the Civil War was fought over, we’re even behind those rebels of Ole Miss. Florida was years ahead of the curve, and now South Carolina and Alabama have joined the movement to remove the flag.
Now in Texas, some Democrats are asking Governor Greg Abbott, Lt. Governor Dan Patrick, and Speaker Joe Straus to appoint a task force to evaluate the future of Confederate statues on Capitol grounds and whether they are, “historically accurate, whether they are appropriately located on the Capitol grounds, and whether any changes are needed.” The effort is being led by Texas’ only black state senators Rodney Ellis and Royce West. Their joined in the letter by their colleague Senator Judith Zaffirini and the longest serving black House members Senfronia Thompson and Sylvester Turner.
So far only Straus’ office has responded saying that the Speaker, “looks forward to visiting with these legislators about their concerns and would welcome a discussion with them and others about all monuments on the grounds of the Capitol.”
This call comes in the wake of positive steps by UT student government to petition their university’s administration to remove the long controversial statue of Confederate President Jefferson Davis. UT President Fenves has appointed a panel to make a recommendation on the future of several Confederate statues on the flagship campus in Austin, Texas.