#Trump is Trying to Take Control of Congress through Its Library | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

dreaminginthedeepsouth · 4 years ago

Link

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

September 8, 2021

Heather Cox Richardson

On this day in 1974, President Gerald Ford granted “a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974.” Ford said he was issuing the pardon to keep from roiling the “tranquility” the nation had begun to enjoy since Nixon stepped down. If Nixon were indicted and brought to trial, the trial would “cause prolonged and divisive debate over the propriety of exposing to further punishment and degradation a man who has already paid the unprecedented penalty of relinquishing the highest elective office of the United States.”

Ford later said that he issued the pardon with the understanding that accepting a pardon was an admission of guilt. But Nixon refused to accept responsibility for the events surrounding the break-in at the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, D.C.’s fashionable Watergate office building. He continued to maintain that he had done nothing wrong but was hounded from office by a “liberal” media.

Rather than being chastised by Watergate and the political fallout from it, a faction of Republicans continued to support the idea that Nixon had done nothing wrong when he covered up an attack on the Democrats before the 1972 election. Those Republicans followed Nixon’s strategy of dividing Americans. Part of that polarization was an increasing conviction that Republicans were justified in undercutting Democrats, who were somehow anti-American, even if it meant breaking laws.

In the 1980s, members of the Reagan administration did just that. They were so determined to provide funds for the Nicaraguan Contras, who were fighting the leftist Sandinista government, that they ignored a law passed by a Democratic Congress against such aid. In a terribly complicated plan, administration officials, led by National Security Adviser John Poindexter and his deputy Oliver North, secretly sold arms to Iran, which was on the U.S. terror list and thus ineligible for such a purchase, to try to put pressure on Iranian-backed Lebanese terrorists who were holding U.S. hostages. The other side of the deal was that they illegally funneled the money from the sales to the Contras.

Although Poindexter, North, and North’s secretary, Fawn Hall, destroyed crucial documents, enough evidence remained to indict more than a dozen participants, including Poindexter, North, Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane, Assistant Secretary of State Elliott Abrams, and four CIA officials. But when he became president himself, Reagan’s vice president George H.W. Bush, himself a former CIA director and implicated in the scandal, pardoned those convicted or likely to be. He was advised to do so by his attorney general, William Barr (who later became attorney general for President Donald Trump).

With his attempt to use foreign policy to get himself reelected, Trump took attacks on democracy to a new level. In July 2019, he withheld congressionally appropriated money from Ukraine in order to force the country’s new president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to announce he was opening an investigation into the son of then–Democratic presidential hopeful Joe Biden. That is, Trump used the weight of the U.S. government and its enormous power in foreign affairs to try to hamstring his Democratic opponent. When the story broke, Democrats in the House of Representatives called this attack on our democracy for what it was and impeached him, but Republicans voted to acquit.

It was a straight line from 2019’s attack to that of the weeks after the 2020 election, when the former president did all he could to stop the certification of the vote for Democrat Joe Biden. By January 6, though, Trump’s disdain for the law had spread to his supporters, who had learned over a generation to believe that Democrats were not legitimate leaders. Urged by Trump and other loyalists, they refused to accept the results of the election and stormed the Capitol to install the leader they wanted.

The injection of ordinary Americans into the political mix has changed the equation. While Ford recoiled from the prospect of putting a former president on trial, prosecutors today have seen no reason not to charge the people who stormed the Capitol. More than 570 have been charged so far.

Yesterday, a 67-year-old Idaho man, Duke Edward Wilson, pleaded guilty to obstruction of an official proceeding and assaulting, resisting or impeding certain officers. He faces up to 8 years and a $250,000 fine for assaulting the law enforcement officers. And he faces up to 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine for obstruction of an official proceeding.

This law was originally put in place in 1871 to stop members of the Ku Klux Klan from crushing state and local governments during Reconstruction.

If Wilson is facing such a punishment for his foot soldier part in obstructing an official proceeding in January, what will that mean for those higher up the ladder? Representative Eric Swalwell (D-CA) has sued Trump; Donald Trump, Jr.; Representative Mo Brooks (R-AL), who wore a bullet-proof vest to his speech at the January 6 rally; and Trump’s former lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who also spoke at the rally, for exactly that: obstructing an official proceeding.

Representative Bennie Thompson (D-MS) launched a similar lawsuit against Trump, Giuliani, the Proud Boys, and the Oath Keepers, but withdrew from it when he became chair of the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. Ten other Democratic House members are carrying the lawsuit forward: Representatives Karen R. Bass (CA), Stephen I. Cohen (TN), Veronica Escobar (TX), Pramila Jayapal (WA), Henry C. Johnson, Jr. (GA), Marcia C. Kaptur (OH), Barbara J. Lee (CA), Jerrold Nadler (NY), Maxine Waters (CA), and Bonnie M. Watson Coleman (NJ).

Lawyer and political observer Teri Kanefield writes on Just Security that there is “a considerable amount of publicly available information supporting an allegation that Trump and members of his inner circle intended the rallygoers to impede or delay the counting of electoral votes and certification of the election.” She points out that the rally was timed to spur attendees to go to the Capitol just as the counting of the electoral votes was scheduled to take place, and that in the midst of the attack, Giuliani left a voicemail for a senator asking him to slow down the proceedings into the next day.

At the end of the Civil War, General U.S. Grant and President Abraham Lincoln made a decision similar to Ford’s in 1974. They reasoned that being lenient with former Confederates, rather than punishing any of them for their attempt to destroy American democracy, would make them loyal to the Union and willing to embrace the new conditions of Black freedom. Instead, just as Nixon did, white southerners chose to interpret the government’s leniency as proof that they, the Confederates, had been right. Rather than dying in southern defeat, their conviction that some men were better than others, and that hierarchies should be written into American law, survived.

By the 1890s, the Confederate soldier had come to symbolize an individual standing firm against a socialist government controlled by workers and minorities; he was the eastern version of the western cowboy. Statues of Confederates began to sprout up around the country, although most of them were in the South. On what would become Monument Avenue, the white people of Richmond, Virginia, erected a statue to General Robert E. Lee in 1890, the same year the Mississippi Constitution officially suppressed the Black vote. Black leaders objected to the statue, but in vain.

Today, 131 years later, that statue came down.

Notes:

https://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/library/speeches/740061.asp

https://www.cfr.org/blog/orlando-massacre-and-global-terrorism

https://www.brown.edu/Research/Understanding_the_Iran_Contra_Affair/prosecutions.php

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/swalwell-lawsuit-trump/6d4926e63b9a8fcd/full.pdf

https://www.justsecurity.org/75032/litigation-tracker-pending-criminal-and-civil-cases-against-donald-trump/#Thompson

https://www.justsecurity.org/78035/why-a-trump-lawsuit-to-protect-executive-privilege-could-backfire/

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/idaho-man-pleads-guilty-assault-law-enforcement-and-obstruction-during-jan-6-capitol?s=03

Dr. Hilary Green @HilaryGreen77With Lee Monument coming down, I know that this site will be filled with apologists decrying the process. As someone who wrote about Richmond in book 1 and currently in book two, Black Richmonders rejected the Lost Cause monuments and routinely vocalized their discontent. 1/8

278 Retweets1,076 Likes

September 8th 2021

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/robert-e-lee-statue-removal/2021/09/08/1d9564ee-103d-11ec-9cb6-bf9351a25799_story.html

Sha

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

#Letters From An American #Heather Cox Richardson #The Law #political #equal under the law #presidential pardons #above the law #consequences #sedition #treason #Civil War #history

8 notes · View notes

dpanuncialwriter · 4 years ago

Photo

Librarians, Start New Game

November-December 2019, American Libraries Magazine

For librarians at universities with videogame design programs, maintaining a large, accessible gaming collection isn’t a Final Fantasy. It’s a Call of Duty. Beginning a collection may be as easy as pressing start to play, but storing and preserving complex materials is a tough battle—and academic librarians want to level up.

The University of Michigan’s (UM) Computer Video and Game Archive (CVGA) in Ann Arbor boasts more than 8,000 videogames and 60 consoles dating back to the 1970s. “Because we have such a large collection, there are many examples from which to pull and get inspiration, things [students] would never be able to afford on their own,” says David Carter, videogame archivist at UM. “Almost nobody has a collection this big, especially a college student.”

“[People] don’t think of libraries as a destination for digital scholarship,” says Anne Morrow, associate librarian and head of digital scholarship services at the University of Utah’s J. Willard Marriott Library, which has more than 500 videogames and serves almost 400 game design students. “There’s an incentive to see what the obstacles are for bringing these types of original work into the collection.”

Objective: playability

As the owner of more than 2,000 commercial games, 300 student games, and 40 consoles (some as old as the 1985 Nintendo Entertainment System), the University of California, Santa Cruz’s (UCSC) Science and Engineering Library prioritizes authentic playability. Its goal is to provide students with not only a game but also the console it was made for, a compatible controller, and an era-appropriate TV to play it on.

With so many moving pieces, says Christy Caldwell, science and engineering librarian at UCSC, “providing usage of increasingly ‘antique’ [materials] is an ongoing challenge.”

UM has the same goal. “We don’t have to do a lot of tracking down, thankfully,” says Valerie Waldron, UM computer and videogame archive manager. About half of its collection is donated, and as with other academic libraries that own game collections, staffers turn to eBay if they need to repair or buy a missing item. Or they get creative.

“Something broke on our Atari 7800, and we actually 3D-printed a replacement part,” Carter says.

Why is maintaining playability of older games important? Students are mainly studying design and software. “What does the game look like, and what does the controller feel like?” Caldwell says. “Are you seeing something similar to what someone who played the game earlier would have seen and experienced?”

Students are also looking at artwork, game mechanics, subjects, and even source code as inspiration for their own games. “They’re using [archives] for competitive intelligence, and looking at what’s been done already,” says Tallie Casucci, assistant librarian at Marriott Library.

Space is another issue. At Marriott Library, students must go to different floors to pick up a videogame, grab a console and matching controllers, and actually play, since the stations are separated and require checkouts for loss prevention. “It’d be nice to have everything all in one place,” Casucci says.

In Ann Arbor, the CVGA houses both the collection and spaces to play the games on consoles, since the collection doesn’t leave the library. “It’s a very crammed room,” Carter says.

Save game?

UM staffers say they have two missions: to serve the teaching and research needs of faculty and students in order to promote usage of the games, and to preserve those games. “There’s an inherent tension. Usage is the enemy of preservation,” Carter says. “Academic usage trumps preservation. We don’t want to have something just to have it and not let people use it.”

After students from the Entertainment Arts and Engineering program at Utah lost all the materials for Erie, a popular student-made game from 2012, Casucci and Morrow investigated their options. With help from an Institute of Museum and Library Services grant, they published an ebook this fall on how to best archive, preserve, and disseminate student videogames.

“People have been looking at digital preservation seriously, [but] we haven’t made progress with objects that are really complex, like videogames, that have many interactions between files,” Morrow says. “We thought about the existing services in a library and how games might be supported by those services.”

“In our case, it would be the sheer number of analog games to process and store that would be difficult, especially year after year,” Caldwell says. “You’re asking people in cataloging who have never even played a game to suddenly start cataloging media. You need to support them.” The best way to do that, she says, is to develop accurate metadata and consistent, detailed cataloging practices.

But academic libraries still need to strategize.

At Marriott Library, Casucci and Morrow created a tiered retention system for archiving student games, through which students can choose the process that best suits their needs. In earlier tiers, students can contribute visuals such as screenshots or game trailers. As they go further into the system, students can contribute their games in their entirety, allowing future students complete access to its features.

Commercial games have not been forgotten. Carter and Waldron are finding ways to preserve legacy formats of videogames like floppy disks and cartridges. “We’re trying to discover ways of taking the game off its original format and creating an image for it,” Waldron says. “There are still a lot of things to work out, like how to store it properly, retrieve it, or put it back in its original format.” As for regular discs, UM keeps multiple copies and stores them in archival-quality sleeves behind the circulation desk.

According to Heather Maxwell Chandler’s Game Production Handbook, after producing a videogame, developers organize the game’s source assets and archive them in a closing kit—a common practice in the industry to help developers install updates or patches to their games. UCSC would like to implement closing kits down the line.

“The faculty wants to have a record of what students have created,” Caldwell says. “They want students to be inspired by what other students have done and build on that work.”

Carter and Waldron say that videogame preserving and archiving has been underdeveloped in libraries because it is still an emerging format. “Until recently, the history of the videogame industry has been left in the hands of private collectors,” Carter says. “Not to discount the work that private collectors have done—that’s one portion of preservation, but you need academic libraries in the mix.”

“For a long time, [game companies] weren’t really interested in preserving their games, either,” Waldron says. According to Kotaku, this is due to legal gray areas, lack of industry support, and turnover of games. “I think that’s slowly starting to change.”

Conquering copyright issues

Potential copyright problems exist in every layer of videogame collecting, especially regarding older materials with expired copyrights. In October 2018, a decision from the Library of Congress and US Copyright Office allowed institutions to lawfully own copies of older videogames if they were acquired from the original companies in order to make preservation copies—a separate challenge for librarians and archivists as many companies are no longer in business or have discontinued server support.

“Assuming that all videogames are governed by terms of use, it’s likely that any exceptions one would expect in the copyright law are not allowed,” says Carrie Russell, senior program officer and copyright specialist at the American Library Association. “If students are doing close analysis of the games or something similar, it’s likely that license terms don’t forbid just studying and researching the game unless the research involves the need to circumvent digital rights management (DRM) that may be employed by the rights holder.”

DRM is a form of copyright protection licensing for digital media implemented by embedding code that prevents copying, specifying a time period in which content can be accessed, or limiting the number of devices content can be installed on. For example, games with expired or maxed-out licenses may not be library friendly.

Another consideration is that certain PC games come with keys—a string of unique characters—that a user must input in order to play. “But then that [game] is registered, and it’s only good for one use,” Carter says. “If someone donates a PC game to us, if they’ve used the key, we can’t use that game. We have to somehow get another key.”

Currently, libraries’ and archives’ rights to preserve videogames are allowed under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. “That exemption, however, will expire in 2021 and need to be requested again,” Russell says.

Student-made videogames are easier to preserve since students get to decide what university libraries can keep. The student work that libraries archive mostly consists of digital files. They can either archive the entire game or different elements of it, like an abstract, artwork, or gameplay footage.

“We never make the students put up everything,” Caldwell says. “They could say, ‘I don’t want to upload my actual code. I’ll upload my abstract.’”

Students can claim complete copyright of their games or use a Creative Commons license, which allows others to share, use, and build on their work. They can even decide if they want their work to be available to university affiliates or the public.

Librarians, too, try to educate students about the importance of archiving their work at the library, studying other games, and how copyright plays into both. “You have to believe that [students] are going to use [the collection] responsibly,” Caldwell says.

Next-level libraries

Librarians agree they’re just beginning to assimilate game scholarship into academic libraries; progress will continue as the industry and programs evolve.

Caldwell says librarians should be working collaboratively to keep games accessible by lobbying for copyright law exceptions, partnering with game companies, and improving metadata and catalog descriptions.

“Games are to the 21st century what films were to the 20th,” she says. “How long did it take libraries to start collecting film? I think what we can do is start working together sooner, because we’ve already lost so many games.”

UM also wants to encourage students who may not be game design majors to help normalize videogames in the library. “In humanities or social science classes, instead of writing a paper, students are creating games,” Carter says. “We’ve been working with the design lab [at UM] to figure out ways to support the lighter-weight aspect of game creation.”

“[Games are] a part of society,” Waldron says. “It speaks to what our culture is in any given era, like any other format.”

3 notes · View notes

howardschatzphotography · 7 years ago

Text

On Seeing, A Journal. #284 Above and Beyond: Marian Wright Edelman. December 18th, 2018

Few Americans deserve the term “public servant” more than Marian Wright Edelman, who, for most of her 79 years, has been a dedicated activist for the rights of children. Born in Bennettsville, S.C., Edelman has been recognized with awards too numerous to list fully here. They include: The Presidential Medal of Freedom, MacArthur Fellowship, and the Albert Schweitzer Prize for Humanitarianism. She graduated from Spelman College as valedictorian, and earned her Juris Doctor degree at Yale Law School in 1963. Following that, she became the first African American woman admitted to the Mississippi Bar. In 1973, she founded the Children's Defense Fund as a voice for poor children, children of color, and children with disabilities.The organization has served as an advocacy and research center for children's issues, documenting the problems and possible solutions for children in need. As leader and principal spokesperson for the CDF, Edelman worked to persuade United States Congress to overhaul foster care, support adoption, improve child care and protect children who are disabled, homeless, abused or neglected. As she has said of her work, "If you don't like the way the world is, you have an obligation to change it. Do it one step at a time.” Edelman’s many books include:

HS: Your three sons, with an African American mother and a Jewish father are at the intersection of two terrible things, racism and anti-Semitism. What did you teach them about these things? MWE: We’d have dinner table conversations. We discussed the newspapers, we discussed killings, we discussed mistreatment. And we always read everything that went on in the civil rights movement, I never hid anything from them. And so they grew up very aware of the dangers. They were so clear about the outside world. And my grandchildren are, too. We lived in a privileged neighborhood. But race was always present. God did not make two classes of people, of children, and every human being is sacred, and nobody has the right to invade that set of basic principles. When I was a child, we knew about the outside world, but we also knew we were sacred and that we could make a difference. And every issue that the Children’s Defense Fund works on today comes out of an experience in my own childhood. I was a rebel from the time I was four or five. While the outside world was there telling us we were not equal and not worth anything, our parents, our community co-parents, our faith made it very clear that we were sacred. The public library was closed to us. However, my father and mother always had books in our home, books would come before a second pair of shoes.

I've had the most extraordinary role models from my community co-parents, my own parents, and then, my goodness, I met all these saints in Mississippi. Talk about courage. They wanted their children to have a better life and we would file segregation case for them. They knew that they would be kicked off their plantations, they knew they would be shot at. The people of faith that I have seen and the courage of those people keeps me going. We have been making a dent. There are major laws on the books that are feeding millions of people, that have changed and put early childhood system in place. We have civil rights laws that came out of the most ordinary people. But we need to affirm what is done. The Children’s Defense Fund is the child of the Legal Defense Fund. Every 50 years we have spurts of progress and then we have “birth defects" flare up, because we’re a very ahistorical people. But we’ve got to confront the truth. We’re in another one of those periods where you have progress and then regression.

HS: If you had every congressman as your sister or brother, what would they need to do to end that? MWE: We’ve got a legislative agenda that we put out every year. We’re trying to end child poverty and inequality among children. Our government has got to do more of what they did last year. We pay a lot of attention to budget processes: Whoever controls the money controls the policy. We report how much it costs to keep these kids in poverty. How you can alleviate that poverty. We say what the policies are. It’s complicated. There's no single bullet, but we lay it out, and we’ve made a huge amount of progress on early childhood. When we put out our End Child Poverty report and our Portrait of Inequality, and our State of American Children, we’re going to show what it costs, and what it saves. That money goes to making sure that we have a high quality, early childhood system for every child.

HS: What does that look like, specifically? MWE: Every child in America should have prenatal care. Every child should be immunized so that we keep children out of hospitals. And we try to say you can't afford not do it; here’s what it costs you to immunize a child, here’s what it costs to keep them in the hospital. HS: How do you get the government to spend less on a new jet plane and more on its teachers? MWE: We are always talking about redefining national investment theories. We say how we would pay for everything and we say what a bargain it is. How dumb it is to put children in the cradle-to-prison pipeline. States are spending, on average, three times more per prisoner than for the public-school pupil. That's about the dumbest thing in the world. And we also always say this is the right thing to do. It’s the decent thing to do, as well as the self-interested thing to do.

There's an awful lot of hopelessness around. I will never forget two experiences I had with children, one after the riots in Harlem. After Doctor King’s assassination, I went to public schools in inner-city Washington, and told these children not to riot and not to ruin their future. And a little boy, about ten, looked me in the eye and said: “Lady, what future? I haven't got no future. I haven’t got nothing to lose." Pretty sophisticated. After Katrina, and all these children from inner-city New Orleans were washed out. And they went over to Houston, and I went through the schools where these children were. And, again, I said, "If you have one thing that you wanted to have me say to the American people, what would it be?" And they said, "Tell them we need hope." We made a lot of progress, but we’re such a stupid country. I'm determined. I'm not going to have my grandchildren fight these same battles all over again. And Mr. Trump is not going to win. He’s the personification of every value you want your children not to have. He’s a reflection of the system that has locked in the greed of the few at the expense of the many. That's why we’re trying to say: Listen, our children are our future. And you may not like these poor black kids, okay, but they're going to determine how well we compete in the world. HS: Would you discuss the two sides of affirmative action? MWE: How do you level the playing field? I don't talk about affirmative action, I just say, "Invest in this child because it’s going to save you this amount of money." You've got to get a child ready for public school and you’ve got to reform public schools. We should want for other people’s children what we want for our own. HS: What’s next for you and who’s going to take over?

MWE: I'm absolutely going to be spending 100 percent of my time on movement. You've got to reform the basic institutions that form children. We know what works.

#advocacycivilrightsmarianwrightedelmaninterviewportraithowardschatzphotographychildrensrightsicon

6 notes · View notes

patriotsnet · 4 years ago

Text

How Did Radical Republicans Gain Power In Congress

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/how-did-radical-republicans-gain-power-in-congress/

How Did Radical Republicans Gain Power In Congress

What Are The Similarities And The Differences Between Lincoln The Radical Republicans And Johnsons Plan For Reconstruction

Lecture 33: Radical Reconstruction

Johnsons plan wasnt as willing to give as much freedom to newly free slaves as Lincolns was. Johnson wanted to give the land back to the south unlike the RR. Johnsons plan gave less protection to freed slaves then the Radical Republicans plan. Unlike the 10% plan, the plan they had wanted to punish the south.

Why Did Radical Republicans Disagree With Lincoln

The Radical Republicans opposed Lincolns plan because they thought it too lenient toward the South. Radical Republicans believed that Lincolns plan for Reconstruction was not harsh enough because, from their point of view, the South was guilty of starting the war and deserved to be punished as such.

Glimpses Of The Freed Women

Northern teachers, many of whom were white women, traveled into the South to provide education and training for the newly freed population. Schools from the elementary level through college provided a variety of opportunities, from the rudiments of reading and writing and various types of basic vocational training to classics, arts, and theology. This school in Richmond shows women of color learning the fine points of sewing.

James E. Taylor. The Freedmens Union Industrial School, Richmond, Va. From Frank Leslies Illustrated Newspaper, September 22, 1866. Copyprint. , Library of Congress. Reproduction Number: LC-USZ62-33264

Bookmark this item: //www.loc.gov/exhibits/african-american-odyssey/reconstruction.html#obj8

You May Like: Donald Trump 1998 Republicans Are Stupid

An Intense Debate Begins

The moderate Republicans in Congress were not initially prepared to go as far as the Radicals in reconstructingthe shattered South. Nevertheless, when the roll was called on the first day of the Thirty-ninth Congress, the Radicals were in agreement: The names of the Southern senators and representatives elected under Johnson’s program were not to be recognizedthey would not be permitted to take their seats. Thus Johnson was put on notice that the plan he had implemented in the nearly eight months of his presidency had not been found acceptable by the legislators chosen by U.S. citizens to represent their interests. From this point on, Johnson would face an uphill battle.

Nevertheless, the moderate Republicans still dominated Congress. These moderates included U.S. senators Lyman Trumbull of Illinois, John Sherman of Ohio, and William Pitt Fessenden of Maine and U.S. representatives James G. Blaine of Maine and John A. Bingham of Ohio. Although unwilling to seat the new Southern legislators, they continued to hope for a compromise with the president. As 1866 began, an intense debate commenced as the senators and representatives discussed the role that black people would play in the life of the nation. Although the Republican majority did not yet accept black suffrage, they did support civil rights for blacks .

Freed Persons Receive Wages From Former Owner

Some emancipated slaves quickly fled from the neighborhood of their owners, while others became wage laborers for former owners. Most importantly, African Americans could make choices for themselves about where they labored and the type of work they performed. This account book shows that former slaves who became free workers after the Civil War received pay for their work on Hampton Plantation in South Carolina.

Hampton Plantation Account Book, 18661868. South Carolina. Handwritten manuscript. Page 68 – Page 69. Miscellaneous Manuscript Collection, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress

Bookmark this item: //www.loc.gov/exhibits/african-american-odyssey/reconstruction.html#obj6

Read Also: Trump On Oprah Saying Republicans Are Stupid

Freedmen Navigate Legislative Shoals

In order to regulate the activities of newly freed African Americans, national, state, and local governments developed a body of laws relating to them. Some laws were for their protection, particularly those relating to labor contracts, but others circumscribed their citizenship rights. This volume, compiled by the staff of General Oliver O. Howard, the director of the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Landsusually called the Freedmen’s Bureauprovides a digest of these laws in ten of the former Confederate states up to 1867.

Laws in Relation to Freedmen, U.S. Sen. 39th Congress, 2nd Sess. Senate Executive Doc. No. 6. Washington: War Department, Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands, 1866-67. Pamphlet. Law Library, Library of Congress

Bookmark this item: //www.loc.gov/exhibits/african-american-odyssey/reconstruction.html#obj13

Why Did Federal Troops Occupy Much Of The South During Reconstruction

Federal troops occupied much of the South during the Reconstruction to insure that laws were followed and that another uprising did not occur. Many people wanted the South to be punished for trying to leave the Union. Other people, however, wanted to forgive the South and let the healing of the nation begin.

Recommended Reading: Republican Majority In The House

The Freedmen’s Bureau Bill

One of the first actions Congress had taken after refusing to recognize the Southern legislators was to create a Joint Committee on Reconstruction to investigate and report on conditions in the South. Already reports were arriving that documented the mistreatment of blacks in the South. Perhaps the most revealing report was compiled by ex-Union general Carl Schurz . As the new year began, it was clear that the agents of the Freedmen’s Bureau, the federal agency established in March 1865 to assist the former slaves in their transition to freedom, needed more power to punish those who denied blacks their rights or physically assaulted them. To that end, Senator Trumbull introduced a bill to extend the life of the Freedmen’s Bureau and broaden the power of its agents to protect blacks.

It came as a surprise to almost everyone when President Johnson vetoed the Freedmen’s Bureau bill. He claimed that it was not necessary and too expensive to extend the Bureau’s life and even asserted, as noted in A Short History of Reconstruction, that giving blacks assistance was unfair to “our own people” . Even Johnson’s supporters had urged him to sign the bill, as it would help to keep the moderate Republicans on his side. Congress immediately overrode the bill, and it became law.

Why Did The Radical Republicans Eventually Abandon Reconstruction

Radical Reconstruction

Slaves had little rights or opportunities, such as the freedom of assembly or the right to an education. Why did the Radical Republicans eventually abandon Reconstruction? Reconstruction was no longer progressing as they had hoped. Northerners were outraged at the Souths secret attempt to expand slavery.

You May Like: Did Trump Say Republicans Are Stupid

The Radical Republicans Take Control

Northern voters spoke clearly in the Congressional election of 1866. Radical Republicans won over two-thirds of the seats in the House of Representatives and the Senate. They now had the power to override Johnson’s vetoes and pass the Civil Rights Act and the bill to extend the Freedmen’s Bureau, and they did so immediately. Congress had now taken charge of the South’s reconstruction.

What Happened To The Radical Republicans

4.5/5Radical RepublicansRepublicanRadicals

The Radical Republicans were a faction of the Republican Party during the American Civil War. They were distinguished by their fierce advocacy for the abolition of slavery, enfranchisement of black citizens, and holding the Southern states financially and morally culpable for the war.

Also Know, how did the radical Republicans differ from the Republican majority? Moderate Republicans, and the majority of the Republican Party, wanted assurance that slavery and treason were dead. Radical Republicans, on the other hand, hoped that reconstruction could achieve black equality, free land distribution to former slaves, and voting rights for African Americans.

In this way, why did Radical Republicans lose their power?

The Radical Republicans believed blacks were entitled to the same political rights and opportunities as whites. They also believed that the Confederate leaders should be punished for their roles in the Civil War.

How did radical Republicans help African Americans?

White Southerners also needed to end slavery for moral reasons. Radical Republicans believed that African Americans deserved immediate freedom from bondage and should receive the same rights as whites. Radical Republicans favored granting civil rights to African Americans for various reasons.

You May Like: Did Trump Say Republicans Are Stupid

Thaddeus Stevens: The Great Leveler

Thaddeus Stevens was a champion of ordinary people, especially slaves. Out-spoken and sometimes harsh, Stevens is remembered for his commitment to democratic values and his leading role in the congressional Reconstruction plan.

Stevens was born in 1792 in Danville, Vermont, the second of four sons. His mother, a nurse, ran the family farm after Stevens’s father left the family. Accompanying his mother on her nursing rounds, Stevens saw how the poor suffered, and his experiences probably influenced his dislike of class divisions and inequality.

In 1807, Stevens’s mother sold the farm and moved her family to nearby Peacham, so her boys could attend school. Stevens graduated from Dartmouth College in 1814, then moved to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, where he taught school while preparing for a law career. He also became interested in politics and joined the Anti-Masons Party, which shared his distrust of secret organizations like the Masons.

Elected to Pennsylvania’s state legislature, Stevens gained a reputation as a strong-minded, uncompromising, outspoken idealist. He served for six terms, during which time he began his lifelong crusade against slavery and in favor of civil and political rights for blacks. He continued to practice law, often defending runaway slaves and others who could not pay him.

Understanding The Old Confederate Anti

The following paragraph is meant to illustrate the logic of the old Confederates, this is not my stance, this is just an example of the type of justification an anti-Radical Republican like Clymer might have given ,

The Rich Elite Radical Republicans want;Black suffrage;so they can;make African Americans;THE EQUALS of the poor white man . Those newly granted votes will;be used to assert the Republican ideology, to ensure their rule, and to punish the south. With that the Republican elite will rule both the negro and the poor white man, stripping their liberties one-by-one. Their radical reconstruction policy and call for Negro suffrage;isnt a compromise like the three-fifths or the other compromises their social policy is just a thinly veiled;attempt at taking control away from the states and ensuring Republican control of the central government.

So, like it was with states rights and individual liberty being a justification for slavery pre-Civil War, the post-War logic of the Confederates is a little hard to grapple with today.

With that said, even if their logic was valid, doesnt it make the;modern Democratic Party, who had;93% of the black vote under Obama, into the Rich Elite Radical Social Liberal of today?

Even by the old logic of the anti-Radical-Republican of the 1860s, the parties switched.

You May Like: Mike Pence Lapel Pin

Making Black Demands Known

For now, the only leverage blacks could apply in making their demands was the threat of the continued presence of federal troops and agentsespecially of the Freedmens Bureau, which whites particularly hatedin the South. These demands included, first and foremost, the right to vote, to serve on juries, and to obtain education. Although economic issuesparticularly that of landownership, and whether the federal government would compensate the former slaves with free landwere of great concern to blacks, they generally avoided making demands in this area because they did not want to alarm whites. Their statements were sprinkled with the references to such popular nineteenth-century values as hard work, honesty, thrift, neatness, morality, and Christianity. They asked for civil and political rights but not for social equality with whites, emphasizing that they did not wish to socialize with whites if whites did not desire such contact.

You May Like: How Many Republicans Need To Vote Against Kavanaugh

The Radical Republicans Clash With The President

Panel: Republicans Are Still Trying To Convince The Public Biden Is Radical

For some African Americans, the end of slavery came with the January 1863 signing of the Emancipation Proclamation, the document that proclaimed most of them free. For others, it came in April 1865 with the end of the Civil War . This bloody, four-year conflict had divided the nation, pitting the Northern Union against the Confederacy, the eleven Southern states that had seceded from the United States. In any case, all of the four million former slaves rejoiced in their freedom.

The end of slavery did not, however, bring with it an easy solution to the problems facing black people. As noted in The Era of Reconstruction: 18651877, according to respected African American leader Frederick Douglass , a former slave who fought first for the abolition of slavery and later for black civil rights, the freed people “were sent away empty-handed, without money, without friends, and without a foot of land to stand upon. Old and young, sick and well, they were turned loose to the open sky, naked to their enemies.”

Don’t Miss: How Many Senate Seats Do The Republicans Have

Answer To Review Question

The Fifteenth Amendment granted the vote to all black men, giving freed slaves and free blacks greater political power than they had ever had in the United States. Blacks in former Confederate states elected a handful of black U.S. congressmen and a great many black local and state leaders who instituted ambitious reform and modernization projects in the South. However, the Fifteenth Amendment continued to exclude women from voting. Women continued to fight for suffrage through the NWSA and AWSA.

What 2 Things Did Radical Republicans Want To Do With Their Plan For Reconstruction

The Radical Republicans reconstruction offered all kinds of new opportunities to African Americans, including the vote , property ownership, education, legal rights, and even the possibility of holding political office. By the beginning of 1868, about 700,000 African Americans were registered voters.

You May Like: What Color Tie Do Republican Wear

What Were The Main Factors In Both The North And The South For The Abandonment Of Reconstruction

Social effects were bringing families back together, the Emancipation act, and churches and schools being available to former slaves. What were the main factors, in both the North and South, for the abandonment of Reconstruction?- Land, jobs, and establishing the Bureau were the main factors for both.

Radical Republican Reconstruction Plan

The postwar Radical Republicans were motivated by three main factors:

Revenge a desire among some to punish the South for causing the war

Concern for the freedmen some believed that the federal government had a role to play in the transition of freedmen from to freedom

Political concerns the Radicals wanted to keep the Republican Party in power in both the North and the South.

Liberal land policies for settlers

Federal aid for railroad development

Recommended Reading: Who Is Richer Democrats Or Republicans

Republicans Prepare To Shape Reconstruction

Near the end of April, the Joint Committee on Reconstruction submitted its report on conditions in the South. Thetestimony that witnesses provided caused alarm and shock. Many instances of violence and injustice against blacks were reported by military officers, Freedmen’s Bureau agents, former slaves, and others, as was the continuing, bitter resentment that white Southerners held toward the U.S. government. The committee concluded that until the Southern states could guarantee civil rights for all citizens, and until the former leaders of the Confederacy had been excluded from holding public office, their legislators must not be allowed to participate in the federal government.

Johnson’s refusal to support the legislation that had united the Republican majority in Congress proved fatal to his program, for it had driven the moderates into the Radical camp. Johnson now lacked the support he needed to get his own policies approved and enacted. The Republicans, meanwhile, would now be able to create the kind of Reconstruction plan they had long and idealistically envisioned.

What Were The Goals Of Reconstruction For Radical Republicans

They wanted to prevent the leaders of the confederacy from returning to power after the war, they wanted the republican party to become a powerful institution in the south, and they wanted the federal government to help african americans achieve political equality by guaranteeing their rights to vote in the south.

Recommended Reading: Why Do Republicans Want To Take Away Health Care

Read Also: How Many States Are Controlled By Republicans

African American Men In Government

The Fifteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gave the vote to all male citizens regardless of color or previous condition of servitude. African Americans became involved in the political process not only as voters but also as governmental representatives at the local, state and national level. Although their elections were often contested by whites, and members of the legislative bodies were usually reluctant to receive them, many African American men ably served their country during Reconstruction. Pictured here are Senator Hiram R. Revels and Representatives Benjamin S. Turner, Josiah T. Walls, Joseph H. Rainey, Robert Brown Elliot, Robert D. De Large, and Jefferson H. Long.

Bookmark this item: //www.loc.gov/exhibits/african-american-odyssey/reconstruction.html#obj15

0 notes

mikemortgage · 7 years ago

Text

AP FACT CHECK: Trump fudges history on black vote, drug cost

WASHINGTON — Facing pivotal November elections, President Donald Trump is misrepresenting the history of African-American voting and exaggerating his influence in boosting income and controlling prescription drug prices.

He laments in campaign speeches on behalf of Republican candidates that blacks’ support for Democrats had become “habit,” having voted for them “for 100 years,” and insists his administration’s policies are changing that. In fact, most African-Americans were effectively blocked from the right to vote until 1965. Much of the income gains he claims for blacks and other minorities came during the Obama administration.

On drug costs, Trump says he is “bringing them down.” But few drugmakers have actually lowered prices as a result of his pressure.

And in remarks at the hot core of the debate over his new Supreme Court justice, Trump distorted the testimony of Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser in a mocking turn on a rally stage before the Senate elevated the judge to the high court on the weekend.

A look at the past week’s claims:

BLACK VOTE

TRUMP, on black support for Democratic candidates in recent elections: “It’s only habit. It’s habit, because for 100 years, African-Americans have gone with Democrats.” — Kansas rally Saturday.

THE FACTS: No, black Americans did not primarily vote Democratic for 100 years, or anywhere close to it.

Most African-Americans for much of U.S. history were disenfranchised, then effectively deterred from voting via poll taxes and literacy tests until passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which outlawed racial discrimination in voting.

African-Americans who could vote before then generally backed Republican candidates until the 1932 election of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. His New Deal programs of economic relief won their support and helped spur a longer-term shift of black voting from Republican to Democratic.

The Voting Rights Act eliminated literacy tests, clamped down on poll taxes that the 24th Amendment had banned in federal elections a year earlier and required a number of mostly Southern states with a history of discrimination to get advance federal approval to make changes to their election laws. Before that, only an estimated 23 per cent of voting-age blacks were registered nationally, says the Library of Congress , but by 1969 that had jumped to 61 per cent.

——

MEDIAN INCOME

TRUMP: “How does your African-American, how do you vote for somebody else? I’ve done more for them in two years… And their median income is the highest. But not only for African-Americans, for Asian.” — Minnesota rally Thursday.

THE FACTS: He’s wrong about median income now being the highest for African-Americans. He also exaggerates the economic gains he’s accomplished for blacks and Asian-Americans.

The median income last year for an African-American household was $40,258, according to the Census Bureau. That’s below a 2000 peak of $42,348 and also statistically no better than 2016, which was Democratic President Barack Obama’s last year in office.

Many economists view the continued economic growth since the middle of 2009, in Obama’s first term, as the primary explanation for recent hiring and income gains. More important, there are multiple signs that the racial wealth gap is now worsening and the administration appears to have done little, if anything, to address this problem specifically.

As to Asian-Americans, the median income for a typical household last year was $81,331. That’s no better than their median income of $83,182 in 2016.

——

KAVANAUGH

TRUMP, as if recounting the questioning of Christine Blasey Ford at her Senate hearing: ‘How did you get there?’ ‘I don’t remember.’ ‘Where is the place?’ ‘I don’t remember.’ ‘How many years ago was it?’ ‘I don’t know. I don’t know. I don’t know. I don’t know.’ ‘What neighbourhood was it in?’ “I don’t know.’ ‘Where’s the house’ ‘I don’t know.’ Upstairs, downstairs, where was it?’ ‘I don’t know. But I had one beer, that’s the only thing I remember.’ And a man’s life is in tatters. A man’s life is shattered. … They want to destroy people. These are really evil people.” — Mississippi rally Tuesday.

THE FACTS: He’s wrong to say Kavanaugh’s accuser could not recall whether the alleged sexual assault happened upstairs or downstairs or any level of detail regarding the likely location. She described in vivid detail being in a locked upstairs bedroom with Kavanaugh and his friend Mark Judge while others were downstairs at a small house party. Trump also falsely stated that she did not remember how many years ago this happened. She identified the summer of 1982, when she was 15.

It’s true she could not identify the house, or remember how she got there or home, but said it was within a “20-minute drive” between her house and a country club in the Bethesda, Maryland, area.

Researchers say it is common for people who have experienced a trauma to retain a searing memory of the event but not circumstances surrounding it.

——

DRUG PRICES

TRUMP: “You might have seen last month where I called up some of the drug companies. I said, ‘Folks, you just raised up the drug prices. You can’t do that.’ And they all reduced them. Do you believe it? That’s when I said, ‘I’ve a lot of power.’ Pfizer, right? You saw that. Pfizer, Novartis, they raised their drug prices and I’m bringing them down. I said, ‘What are you doing with raising them?’ ‘I’m sorry, Mr. President, we’ll reduce them immediately.’ I said, ‘Man, this is a powerful position.”‘ — Minnesota rally Thursday.

THE FACTS: His account is overstated.

His call with Pfizer was at the beginning of July, not last month. It came right after he criticized Pfizer on Twitter for raising prices of about 40 drugs on July 1. Pfizer reversed those increases, meaning prices returned to their June 30 levels, though only until Jan. 1, 2019, at the latest. Novartis was one of several drugmakers that said they wouldn’t raise any prices for the rest of 2018, but they’d already done so on nearly all of their drugs earlier in the year.

Few drugmakers actually lowered prices as a result of Trump’s pressure. A few drugs had price cuts for business reasons.

More broadly, an Associated Press investigation of brand-name prescription drugs found 96 price increases for every price reduction in the first seven months of this year. There were fewer price increases this year from January through July than in comparable prior year periods, but companies still raised prices far more often than they cut them.

AP analyzed 26,176 U.S. list price changes for brand-name prescription drugs from Jan. 1 through July 31 in the years 2015 through 2018, using data supplied by health information analytics firm Elsevier.

——

VETERANS

TRUMP: “We just passed Choice. That was 44 years they’ve been trying to pass Choice, so that if you have to wait in line for 9 days, 30 days, 21 days, months, you don’t do that anymore. If the line’s big, and if you’re unhappy with it, you go to a private doctor, they take care of you, and we paid the bill. It’s better. They’ve been trying to pass that one for many, many decades. They couldn’t do it. We got it passed.” — Tennessee rally on Oct. 1.

TRUMP: “We also passed Veterans’ Choice. Forty-four years they tried to do it.”– Mississippi rally Tuesday.

THE FACTS: He’s exaggerating improvements to the Department of Veterans Affairs by incorrectly stating a private-sector health care program was never passed by Congress before him. He also falsely suggests the newly expanded program will have immediate effect.

Congress first approved the Veterans Choice program in 2014 in the wake of a scandal at the Phoenix VA medical centre in which some veterans died while waiting months for appointments. The program allows veterans to see doctors outside the VA system if they must wait more than 30 days for an appointment or drive more than 40 miles to a VA facility.

Trump signed legislation in June to expand the Choice program by giving veterans even wider access to private-sector doctors at government expense, subject to yet-to-be-finalized rules that will determine eligibility as well as available funding.

Contrary to what Trump suggests, the effects of the newly expanded program are not immediate. Key to its success is an overhaul of the VA’s electronic medical records to allow seamless sharing of medical records not only with the Pentagon but also private physicians, a process expected to take up to 10 years. The VA also has yet to resolve long-term financing for the program due to congressional budget caps that could put funding for VA or other domestic programs at risk of shortfalls next year.

At a Senate hearing last month, VA Secretary Robert Wilkie made clear that full implementation of the expanded Choice program was “years” away.

——

IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT

TRUMP: “The new platform of the Democrat Party is to abolish ICE — the brave, brave people of ICE. In other words, they want to abolish immigration enforcement entirely.” — Mississippi rally Tuesday.

THE FACTS: While some Democrats in the House and Senate have raised the prospect of eliminating Immigration and Customs Enforcement, no top Democrats in the House or Senate have called for such a move. Those Democrats who have expressed openness to eliminating ICE have said they would not abandon border enforcement, which is largely carried out by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

——

U.S.-MEXICO-CANADA TRADE

TRUMP: “The agreement will govern nearly $1.2 trillion in trade, which makes it the biggest trade deal in the United States’ history.” — remarks Oct. 1.

THE FACTS: That’s wrong, simply by virtue of the number of trade partners involved.

The proposed new agreement, replacing the North American Free Trade agreement, covers the same three countries. The Trans-Pacific Partnership, negotiated by the Obama administration, included the three NAFTA partners — United States, Canada and Mexico — plus Japan and eight other Pacific Rim countries. Trump withdrew the United States from the pact on his third day in office.

Even the Pacific deal pales in comparison with one that did go into effect with the U.S. on board, the Uruguay Round. Concluded in 1994, the round of negotiations created the World Trade Organization and was signed by 123 countries. The Federal Reserve Bank of Boston found the following year that the WTO’s initial membership accounted for more than 90 per cent of global economic output.

——

TRUMP: “This deal will also impose new standards requiring at least 75 per cent of every automobile to be made in North America in order to qualify for the privilege of free access to our markets.” — remarks Oct. 1.

THE FACTS: That’s true. But as with any such requirement, it could make autos more expensive by discouraging the use of cheaper components from overseas. The same could be true of another provision, requiring at least 40 per cent of a car’s content to be built where workers earn $16 an hour. The new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement indeed contains greater worker protections, a trade-off that could mean higher costs.

The pact, if approved by Congress, will raise the percentage of a car’s content that must be built within the trade bloc to 75 per cent from 62.5 per cent if it is to qualify for duty-free status.

Similarly, the deal would give pharmaceutical companies that make biologics –ultra-expensive drugs produced in living cells — 10 years of protection from generic competition, two more years than the Obama administration had negotiated under the Pacific deal. That also comes with the possible trade-off of higher costs for users of the drugs.

——

TRUMP, on overcoming the major hitch with Canada: “Dairy was a deal-breaker. And now for our farmers it’s, as you know, substantially opened up much more. And I know they can’t open it completely. They have farmers also. You know, they can’t be overrun. And I fully — and I tell them that. I say, ‘Look, I understand you have limits.’ But they could do much better.” — remarks Oct. 1.

THE FACTS: That’s a fair reading of one of the agreement’s most significant changes — though dairy only accounts for about 0.1 per cent of U.S.-Canada trade. Canada’s tariffs on dairy imports can approach 300 per cent. U.S. dairy farmers have also complained about Canadian policies that priced the U.S. out of the market for some dairy powders and allowed Canada to flood world markets with its own versions.

The new agreement would end the discriminatory pricing and restrict Canadian exports of dairy powders. Still, it’s in some respects an incremental advance from the Pacific deal that Trump walked away from. It would expand U.S. access to up to 3.75 per cent of the Canadian dairy market, versus 3.25 per cent in the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Above that level, U.S. dairy farmers will still face Canada’s punishing tariffs.

——

TRUMP: “As one primary aspect, it will transform North America back into a manufacturing powerhouse.” — remarks Oct. 1.

THE FACTS: North America already is a manufacturing powerhouse. The United States ranks No. 2 in the world behind China in manufacturing output. Mexico ranks 11th and Canada 13th, according to U.N. numbers pulled together by the Brookings Institution.

——

TRUMP: “I think my biggest concession was making the deal, because we could have done it a different way. But it would have been nasty, and it wouldn’t have been nice, and I don’t want to have that.” — remarks Oct. 1.

THE FACTS: Other concessions were made, as is typically the case in trade agreements.

For one, the “supply management” system Canada uses to protect its farmers would remain largely intact. For another, 2.6 million passenger vehicles from Canada and Mexico each would be exempt from tariffs of up to 25 per cent that he has been threatening to impose on imported cars, trucks and auto parts. And Canada prevailed in insisting that a NAFTA dispute-resolution process be retained. The U.S. wanted to get rid of it.

——

Associated Press writers Linda Johnson in Trenton, New Jersey, and Paul Wiseman in Washington contributed to this report.

——

Find AP Fact Checks at http://apne.ws/2kbx8bd

Follow https://twitter.com/APFactCheck

EDITOR’S NOTE — A look at the veracity of claims by political figures

from Financial Post https://ift.tt/2Rz9Ngj via IFTTT Blogger Mortgage Tumblr Mortgage Evernote Mortgage Wordpress Mortgage href="https://www.diigo.com/user/gelsi11">Diigo Mortgage

#IFTTT #Financial Post

0 notes

democratsunited-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Fearing 'Bad Blood' in Primary, N.H. Democratic Leaders Tell Candidates to Play Nice

https://uniteddemocrats.net/?p=7267

Fearing 'Bad Blood' in Primary, N.H. Democratic Leaders Tell Candidates to Play Nice

Earlier this summer, eight Democratic candidates sat shoulder to shoulder before about 70 voters in the library of Kennett Middle School in Conway.

But before they could even introduce themselves to the voters in the audience, New Hampshire

Democratic Party Chairman Ray Buckley had a special request: Play nice, please.

Click play to hear the broadcast version of this story

“Folks, we only have eight weeks between the primary and general election,” Buckley said, referring to the September 11th primary and November general election. “And if you all get on your Facebook pages and your Twitter accounts and start thinking the best way you can help your candidate is to rip the living stuffing out of somebody else, you’re only creating bad blood.”

This is an election year where dissatisfaction with President Donald Trump is expected to pay off at the ballot box for Democrats. There’s a lot of talk about a potential “blue wave” that could wipe out Republicans and put Democrats in control of Congress.

But party leaders in New Hampshire are worried if 1st Congressional District candidates spend too much time fighting each other, they’ll squander that opportunity. And so they’re asking voters and candidates to try and stay positive through the general election in November.

This tactic has popped up in a few ways during the long primary season. A few Sundays ago, state Senator Martha Fuller Clark, the vice chair of the party, sent an email to reporters late at night, expressing displeasure that Democrats are attacking each other for raising money outside of New Hampshire.

Buckley sees this election cycle as especially unique. He’s led the state party for over 15 years, and in that role he’s worked to limit previous Democratic primaries.

But this year, in the 1st Congressional District, the field is the largest it’s ever been. And since the majority of Democrats running are first-time candidates, Buckley said he’s had to step in more, as “there are some things that they might intuitively not know.”

For Buckley, a lot of this anxiety can be traced back to a holiday party he attended after the 1996 Senate race, when Democrat Dick Swett narrowly lost to Republican Bob Smith. The gathering, as he recalled, was full of Democrats, and after a few drinks, Buckley found out that none of them voted in the general election, because they supported Swett’s opponent, John Rauh, in the contentious Democratic primary.

“It would be [a] shame that something somebody said during the course of this campaign would cause somebody else not to vote for the nominee,” Buckley said. “So we work very hard to make sure that we’re all one big happy family.”

But that family has seen its share of feuds lately. State Rep. Renny Cushing was in the thick of one of those fights. Cushing supported Sen. Bernie Sanders’ run in the Democratic presidential primary in 2016, and he said he still feels some leftover tension from that race.

“I think there’s a perception that the entire political establishment of the Democratic Party in the state of New Hampshire backed Hillary Clinton and they were tone deaf to the mood of the populace and there’s a bit of resentment for that,” Cushing said.

Regardless of the source, if Buckley hears about negative comments, he said he will call candidates or supporters and kindly ask them to knock it off.

Terence O’Rourke, a Democrat running for the 1st District seat, said he’s been on the other end of that call, and finds the tactic “ridiculous.”

“I’m an adult, I don’t need him to tell me how to run my campaign or run my life,” O’Rourke said.

O’Rourke and his supporters have called out another 1st District candidate Maura Sullivan on Twitter for, among other things, recently moving to the state. But for O’Rourke, the bigger issue is this idea of staying positive in the primary.

“Primaries are supposed to be the proving grounds, with the hope that the strongest candidate for the general election emerges. The first punch you take shouldn’t be on September 12th from the Republican candidate,” he said.

And other Democrats seem to share this sentiment, to varying degrees. Some really want to hash things out, and let the voters use the primary to decide how far to the left the party should go. Others, like Chris Pappas, another 1st District candidate, are trying to find a balance between being positive but still highlighting differences.

Pappas’ campaign also recently targeted Sullivan, by pointing out how much money she raises from corporate donors outside New Hampshire.

“At the end of the day, people of this district deserve a representative who is going to stand up for them, and they should have no question about whose bidding they’re going to be doing in Washington, DC,” Pappas said.

Campaigns often tend to get more heated as election day gets closer, but the one thing uniting all these candidates is a promise to work against President Donald Trump.

And in a district that voted for Trump two years ago, his presence will loom large in many ways.

Read full story here

#Democrats

0 notes

djgblogger-blog · 8 years ago

Text

With FCC's net neutrality ruling, the US could lose its lead in online consumer protection

http://bit.ly/2AI6DSZ

Three of these smiling people undid U.S. consumer protections online. Federal Communications Commission

The internet may be an international system of interconnecting networks sharing a rough global consensus about the technical details of communicating through them – but each country manages its own internet environment independently. As the U.S. debate about the role of government in overseeing and regulating the internet continues, it’s worth looking at how other countries handle the issue.

Our research and advocacy on internet regulation in the U.S. and other countries offers us a unique historical and global perspective on the Federal Communications Commission’s December 2017 decision to deregulate the internet in the U.S. The principle of an open internet, often called “net neutrality,” is one of consumer protection. It is based on the idea that everyone – users and content providers alike – should be able to freely spread their own views, and consumers can choose what services to use and what content to consume. Network neutrality ensures that no one – not the government, nor corporations – is allowed to censor speech or interfere with content, services or applications.

As the U.S. continues to debate whether to embrace internet freedom, the world is doing so already, with many countries imposing even stronger rules than the ones the FCC did away with.

The US as trailblazer and laggard

Before 2015, many internet businesses in the U.S. discriminated against or blocked customers from particular legal uses of the internet. In 2007 Comcast illegally blocked its customers from sharing files between themselves. In 2009, AT&T blocked access to Skype and FaceTime apps on its network. In 2011, MetroPCS blocked its customers from streaming Netflix and all other streaming video except YouTube (possibly due to a secretly negotiated deal). In 2012, Verizon disabled apps that let customers connect computers to their mobile data service. There were many other violations of the principle of net neutrality, too.

Customers and regulators tried to control these discriminatory practices over many years of public deliberation and multiple court cases. In 2015, under the Obama administration, the FCC finalized the Open Internet Order, a set of rules barring internet service providers from speeding up or slowing down traffic based on its content or whether the companies posting it had paid extra to the company delivering the data. It was far from perfect – but nonetheless a giant leap forward.

In early 2017, after his inauguration, President Trump appointed Ajit Pai, a former Verizon lawyer, as the FCC chairman. Pai, an Obama appointee to the FCC who had voted against the Open Internet Order in 2015, has moved rapidly to undo it. He and some other comentators believe that customers will get better service from a less-regulated market, ignoring that the rules only emerged in the wake of problems and consumer complaints.

Pai’s proposal has been criticized by former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler as “a shameful sham and sellout” to big telecommunications companies. A who’s-who list of the people who invented the technologies and systems underlying the internet denounced Pai’s policy as “based on a flawed and factually inaccurate understanding of internet technology.”

Other countries are facing similar dilemmas about how to deal with today’s digital realities, and are slowly and individually contributing to a patchwork of laws that differ from country to country. But many highly industrialized and rapidly developing countries share a general consensus that regulations ensuring an open internet are good for consumers and for civil society.

Opening the internet Brazilian-style

Brazil’s Civil Rights Framework for the Internet, enacted in 2014 and further refined in 2016, only allows internet service companies to prioritize certain types of traffic for technical reasons – such as overloaded networking capacity – or to allow network use by emergency services.

Yet, the country has been reluctant to enforce these rules and hold violators to account. Much like in the U.S., there is increasing concern that industry power has overwhelmed government regulatory agencies. Some of the largest telecommunications companies have been providing their mobile internet customers with preferential access to content on sites and services owned by business partners. Many Brazilian consumer rights groups are particularly alarmed because the companies receiving this privileged treatment are all large foreign corporations, including Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter and music-streaming service Deezer (the only non-U.S. company).

In addition, there are proposals in the works that would grant tens of millions of dollars in publicly owned telecommunications infrastructure to private companies for free. Brazilian internet freedom is further at risk because the country’s telecommunications companies are planning to insist that its regulators align with the weakened U.S. rules.

Active enforcement in Europe

The European Union approved strong rules in 2015, requiring companies that provide internet access to handle all traffic equally, leaving flexibility to restrict traffic when network equipment was operating at its maximum capacity. EU rules also allow traffic restrictions to protect network security and handle emergency situations.

In 2016, European Union electronic communications regulators detailed potential problems in agreements between telecommunications companies and content providers. And they explained that quality of service could vary, but no specific applications should be discriminated against.

In 2017, they highlighted the importance of Europe’s emphasis on proactively monitoring compliance with net neutrality rules, rather than waiting for violations to happen before reacting. This gives European residents much stronger consumer protection than exists in the U.S.

India takes a stand

India has taken similarly strong steps. In 2016, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India approved rules stating that “no service provider shall offer or charge discriminatory tariffs for data services on the basis of content.” In November 2017, the agency also issued “recommendations on net neutrality,” laying out rules of the road for internet service providers that incorporate substantial protections against content and application discrimination.

Indian regulators are looking to balance consumer and corporate priorities in areas such as security, privacy and ownership of data. Moreover, they are considering adopting regulations to spur competition in mobile data services.

Most importantly, Indian regulators make very clear that companies providing internet service should not do anything “that has the effect of discriminatory treatment based on content, sender or receiver, protocols or user equipment.” This puts openness at the core of internet service, the sort of clear consumer protection that public interest advocates and academics have called for.

The U.S. isn’t an island

The U.S. internet industry is a powerful global force, with billions of users of its websites and online services all around the world. Further, the U.S. government has traditionally been a leader in developing policies that balance free speech, consumer protection and other civil rights with strong opportunities for research and business innovation – but this too is now in decline.

Net neutrality protections might not be so necessary if the broadband market were more competitive. But 29 percent of Americans have no options for getting high-speed wired internet service at home. Another 47 percent have just one choice – and 20 percent have just two.

The telecommunications industry continues to consolidate – though the U.S. Department of Justice is trying to block the pending AT&T-Time Warner merger. In this market with few providers, and many companies seeking profits by promoting their own content via their own networks, net neutrality protections will only become more important – not less so.

Lastly, legally speaking, policy and regulatory decisions made in the U.S. don’t hold any direct power in other countries. However, domestic rules about the internet will indeed affect the global conversation around net neutrality. What the U.S. decides, through the FCC, the courts and potentially even through Congress, will determine whether U.S. leadership on the internet remains strong, or whether it will cede ground to other countries willing to protect their citizens.

Sascha Meinrath has previously received funding from Benton Foundation, Cellular South, COMPTIA, Consumer Electronics Association, European Union Delegation, Facebook, Free Press, Ford Foundation, Google, Internet Society, Kellogg Foundation, Knight Foundation, LightSquared, MacArthur Foundation, Media Democracy Fund, Microsoft, NAACP, NCTA, Netflix, Omidyar Network, One Economy, Open Society Institute, Philadelphia Free Library Foundation, Public Health Institute, Public Knowledge, Sprint/Nextel, Skype, SSRC, Sunlight Foundation, T-Mobile, Time Warner Cable & the Wyncote Foundation for work on Network Neutrality and related tech policy issues. He does not currently receive outside funding for this work. He is the founding director of the Open Technology Institute and X-Lab; a co-founder and former board member of the Alliance for Affordable Internet, and the Schools, Health and Libraries Broadband (SHLB) Coalition; co-founder and steering board member of MeasurementLab.net; member of the American Indian Policy Institute's Advisory Board of Directors; and chairman of the board, Rights and Dissent Foundation.

Nathalia Foditsch does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

0 notes

patriotsnet · 4 years ago

Text

What Are The Main Platform Ideas Of Republicans

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/what-are-the-main-platform-ideas-of-republicans/

What Are The Main Platform Ideas Of Republicans

National Republican Platform Adopted By The National Republican Convention Held In Chicago May 17 1860 Chicago Press And Tribune Office Chicago Illinois 1860 Library Of Congress Rare Book And Special Collections Division Alfred Whital Stern Collection Of Lincolniana Https://googl/lcbfpa

Resolved, that we, the delegated representatives of the Republican electors of the United States in Convention assembled, in discharge of the duty we owe to our constituents and our country, unite in the following declarations:

That the history of the nation during the last four years, has fully established the propriety and necessity of the organization and perpetuation of the Republican party, and that the causes which called it into existence are permanent in their nature, and now, more than ever before, demand its peaceful and constitutional triumph.

That the maintenance of the principles promulgated in the Declaration of Independence and embodied in the Federal Constitution, “That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” is essential to the preservation of our Republican institutions; and that the Federal Constitution, the Rights of the States, and the Union of the States must and shall be preserved.

. . .

Republican Platform Of 1860. A reprint of the original broadside containing the Republican Platform of 1860, adopted by the National Republican Convention held in Chicago, 1860. Library of Congress, http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.rbc/rbpe.0180010b.

Study Questions

Apply Special Scrutiny To Refugees Foreign Nationals From Countries Linked To Islamic Terror

Similar to Donald Trump’s proposals for “extreme vetting” of any immigrants and refugees from countries plagued by extreme terror groups, the Republican platform calls for “special scrutiny” to be applied to those seeking entry into the U.S. from “regions associated with Islamic terrorism.” The document, however, did not call for a temporary ban on Muslims stepping foot on U.S. soil — a proposal made by Trump during his presidential campaign.

“To ensure our national security, refugees that cannot be carefully vetted, cannot be admitted to the country, especially those whose homelands have been the breeding grounds for terrorism,” the GOP wrote in its platform.

It goes on, “To keep our people safe, we must secure our borders, enforce our immigration laws, and properly screen refugees and other immigrants entering from any country. In particular we must apply special scrutiny to those foreign nationals seeking to enter the United States from terror-sponsoring countries or from regions associated with Islamic terrorism.”

In 2012, the party platform only made one mention of refugees:

“We affirm our country’s historic tradition of welcoming refugees from troubled lands,” it read. “In some cases, they are people who stood with us during dangerous times, and they have first call on our hospitality.”

How Different Are The Policies Of The Republican And Democratic Parties

The public sees a clear distinction between the policy positions of the Republican and Democratic parties: About half say the positions of the two parties are very different, while another 34% say they are somewhat different. Just 14% say they are either not too or not at all different.

Partisans are especially likely to see the two parties as holding different views: 60% of Republicans and 62% of Democrats say the parties take very different policy positions.

Republicans and Democrats also do not see many good ideas coming out of the other party. Among Democrats, just 21% say the Republican Party has either a lot or some good ideas; 43% say it has a few and 34% say it has almost no good ideas. Views of the Democratic Party’s ideas among Republicans are similarly skeptical: Only 16% say the Democratic Party has a lot or some good ideas, while 40% say it has a few and 43% say it has almost none.

Why Trumps Team Initially Wanted To Rethink The Gop Platform This Year

Back in 2016, most of the delegates to the Republican National Convention were chosen while Trump’s hostile takeover of the party was still in progress. And as Trump started to clinch the nomination, he mostly ceded the platform-drafting task to those delegates, a process that was dominated by conservative activists.

This resulted in embarrassing stories about how, for instance, the Republican platform had language “conversion therapy”— sending a child to therapy to try to change their sexual orientation. There was also a messy controversy involving a proposed amendment in support of providing lethal aid to Ukraine. Trump advisers helped defeat the amendment, and critics argued that showed they were too supportive of Russia.

Overall, Republicans had a fairly typical platform-drafting process, one in which various delegates are named to a committee and negotiations take place in a way that’s guided but not always controlled by the presidential campaign. It’s a process that seems a bit antiquated. The end product is certainly not optimally designed to serve the interests of the presidential candidate or to speak to voters.

So this May, Axios’s Jonathan Swan reported that Kushner wanted to change all that.

Kushner was probably acting at Trump’s behest, if this later tweet from the president is any indication:

The Republican Party has not yet voted on a Platform. No rush. I prefer a new and updated Platform, short form, if possible.

— Donald J. Trump June 12, 2020

Exclusive: Dozens Of Former Republican Officials In Talks To Form Anti

5 Min Read

– Dozens of former Republican officials, who view the party as unwilling to stand up to former President Donald Trump and his attempts to undermine U.S. democracy, are in talks to form a center-right breakaway party, four people involved in the discussions told Reuters.

The early stage discussions include former elected Republicans, former officials in the Republican administrations of Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush and Trump, ex-Republican ambassadors and Republican strategists, the people involved say.

More than 120 of them held a Zoom call last Friday to discuss the breakaway group, which would run on a platform of “principled conservatism,” including adherence to the Constitution and the rule of law – ideas those involved say have been trashed by Trump.

The plan would be to run candidates in some races but also to endorse center-right candidates in others, be they Republicans, independents or Democrats, the people say.

Evan McMullin, who was chief policy director for the House Republican Conference and ran as an independent in the 2016 presidential election, told Reuters that he co-hosted the Zoom call with former officials concerned about Trump’s grip on Republicans and the nativist turn the party has taken.

Three other people confirmed to Reuters the call and the discussions for a potential splinter party, but asked not to be identified.

‘THESE LOSERS’

“The only way we’re going to win is if we come together,” she said.

Greater Agreement With Partys Positions Among The Politically Engaged

Republicans and Democrats who are highly engaged with politics are more likely to agree with their own party’s positions on issues than those who are less engaged.

Among Republicans who are highly engaged with politics , 88% say they agree with the Republican Party’s positions on at least five of seven major issues. Republicans who have medium or low levels of political engagement are less likely to express agreement with their own party on these issues .

The same relationship between political engagement and in-party issue agreement is seen among Democrats. Nine-in-ten highly engaged Democrats agree with their own party on most of the seven issues, compared with 72% of Democrats with medium levels of political engagement and 63% of Democrats with low levels of political engagement.

More politically engaged Republicans and Democrats also are more likely than the less engaged to see large differences between the policies of the two parties and to say the other party has almost no good ideas.

Why Republicans Didnt Write A Platform For Their Convention This Year

TEAM BEPINKU.COMSomething Special

The Republican Party took an unusual approach to writing its convention platform for 2020: It decided not to write one.

Rather, the GOP is reusing its platform from four years ago, which was written before Donald Trump became president. That means Republican delegates will not go through the usual process of deliberating over policies and principles to determine what the party stands for in 2020, as Democrats recently did.

A Republican National Committee resolution on the topic says the reason the party has no new platform is the Covid-19 pandemic, which has necessitated a scaled-back convention this year. Since all the delegates couldn’t gather in person, they claim, they’re not doing a platform.

But that’s not all there is to the story. Just a few months ago, word leaked out that Trump’s team, led by his son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner, had big plans to shake up the platform by dramatically shortening it — plans that drew the ire of some conservative activists, who were used to exerting their influence on the lengthy document.

So, back in June, the party made the decision to skip platform-drafting entirely and just reuse the 2016 document, citing the pandemic as the reason. It’s unclear if this was done deliberately to avoid messy party infighting over the platform, but it certainly had that effect.

Studying The Bible Should Be Offered In Public School Curricula

“A good understanding of the Bible being indispensable for the development of an educated citizenry, we encourage state legislatures to offer the Bible in a literature curriculum as an elective in America’s high schools,” the platform reads.

The 2012 platform made no such push for the Bible in public schools.

Why Did The Democratic And Republican Parties Switch Platforms

02 November 2020

Around 100 years ago, Democrats and Republicans switched their political stances.

The Republican and Democratic parties of the United States didn’t always stand for what they do today.

During the 1860s, Republicans, who dominated northern states, orchestrated an ambitious expansion of federal power, helping to fund the transcontinental railroad, the state university system and the settlement of the West by homesteaders, and instating a national currency and protective tariff. Democrats, who dominated the South, opposed those measures.

After the Civil War, Republicans passed laws that granted protections for Black Americans and advanced social justice. And again, Democrats largely opposed these apparent expansions of federal power.

Sound like an alternate universe? Fast forward to 1936.

Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt won reelection that year on the strength of the New Deal, a set of Depression-remedying reforms including regulation of financial institutions, the founding of welfare and pension programs, infrastructure development and more. Roosevelt won in a landslide against Republican Alf Landon, who opposed these exercises of federal power.

So, sometime between the 1860s and 1936, the party of small government became the party of big government, and the party of big government became rhetorically committed to curbing federal power.

In A First Republicans Solicit Ideas For Party Platform Online

Save Story

To revist this article, visit My Profile, then View saved stories.

Republican leaders on Friday launched an innovative new effort to solicit ideas from and gather information about its grassroots cohorts through a new website designed to build its party platform.

The move is a sharp departure from the party’s traditional top-down, one-voice messaging techniques, and is a bold one at a time when there is plenty of dissent within its ranks.

The web site GOPPLatform2008.com, was launched Friday morning, but news of its first broke on the microblogging service Twitter, where the RNC’s eCampaign Director Cyrus Krohn quietly announced it.

The site requires users to register, and offers them the ability to submit their ideas either through text or via video.

Voters can view each others’ submissions online, and they can discuss their ideas with each other on a .

The site offers users the choice of submitting ideas on any subject they choose, or on a pre-selected group of top issues that include: accountability in education; energy and gas prices; healthcare reform; the economy; judicial nominations; national security and “protecting American values.”

Republican leaders sounded several of this presidential campaign cycle’s popular themes in their video welcome messages.

“This web site really is about you: Your ideas, your issues, and most important of all, your aspirations,” said RNC Chairman Mike Duncan in a pre-recorded online video.

Government Is Not The Solution To Domestic Social Problems

This is pretty universal among Republicans. Government should not be providing solutions to problems that confront people . Those problems should be solved by the people themselves. A Republican would say that relying on the government to solve problems is a crutch that makes people lazy and feel entitled to receive things without working for them.

Religion And The Belief In God Is Vital To A Strong Nation

Republicans are generally accepting only of the Judeo-Christian belief system. For most Republicans, religion is absolutely vital in their political beliefs and the two cannot be separated. Therefore, separation of church and state is not that important to them. In fact, they believe that much of what is wrong has been caused by too much secularism.

Those are the four basic Republican tenets: small government, local control, the power of free markets, and Christian authority. Below are other things they believe that derive from those four ideas.

The Racist Theory That Inspired Murderers Is Now Gop Dogma

Daniel Acker/Bloomberg/Getty

Newt Gingrich, Stephen Miller, Paul Gosar and Marjorie Taylor Greene, among others, all keep alluding to the same vicious, violent idea.

The hoods are off, and Republicans are embracing the white supremacist “replacement theory.”

If you’re dismissing this as fear-mongering or click-bait, you probably missed Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House and renowned adulterer, espousing replacement theory rhetoric on Fox News earlier this week while talking to host Maria Baritromo, who always has time to offer a platform to dangerous conspiracy peddling. Speaking about Mexican immigrants coming to America during the pandemic, Gingrich said the “radical left” wants to “get rid of the rest of us” and would “love to drown traditional, classic Americans with as many people as they can who know nothing of American history, nothing of American tradition, nothing of the rule of law.”

He wasn’t talking about Donald Trump, notorious for being historically ignorant and profoundly incurious, but about those of us with darker skin, who are never seen as “traditional” or “classic” or “real Americans.” Gingrich, a craven political opportunist, parroted the talking points associated with “the great replacement” theory, also known as “white genocide,” which stipulates the white race and “Western civilization” are in dire threat of being weakened and ultimately usurped by immigrants of color, Muslims, feminists, and gays.

For Many Political Compromise Means Their Party Gets More

Most partisans say that, when it comes to how Democrats and Republicans should address the most important issues facing the county, their party should get more out of the deal.

On a scale of 0 to 10, where 10 means their party gets everything it wants and 0 means the other party gets everything it wants, about six-in-ten of those in both parties think their side should get more on the key issues facing the nation. Roughly three-in-ten Republicans and Democrats say both parties should get about half of what they want .

Partisans with colder feelings toward the other party are more likely to say that their own side should get more. Among Republicans, 44% of those who feel neutral or warm toward Democrats say their own party should get more than half of what it wants on key issues facing the country. That share rises to 62% of Republicans who give Democrats somewhat cold ratings, and 69% of those who rate Democrats very coldly.

The same pattern is evident among Democrats. Among those who give Republicans a very cold rating, 71% say Democrats should get more in partisan dealings; 69% of those who rate Republicans coldly say the same. By comparison, a smaller share of those who rate Republicans neutrally or warmly say their own party should get most of what it wants.

The Republican Party General Policy And Political Values

The Republican Party is often referred to as the GOP. This abbreviation stands for Grand Old Party. Its logo is an elephant. The Republican Party is known to support right-leaning ideologies of conservatism, social conservatism, and economic libertarianism, among other -isms. Thus, Republicans broadly advocate for traditional values, a low degree of government interference, and large support of the private sector.

One main standpoint of the Republican Party platform is a strong focus on the family and individual freedom. Generally, the Republican Party therefore often tends to promote states’ and local rights. That means that they often wish for federal regulations to play a lesser role in policymaking. Furthermore, the GOP has a pro-business-oriented platform. Thus, the party advocates for businesses to exist in a free market instead of being impacted by tight government regulations.

The Democratic Party General Policy And Political Values

The Democratic Party generally represents left-leaning, liberal and progressive ideological values, thus advocating for a strong government to regulate business and support for the citizens of the United States. Thus, one of the key values emphasized by Democrats is social responsibility. Overall, Democrats believe that a prominent and powerful government can ensure welfare and equality for all. Much like the Republican Party, political opinions within the Democratic Party stretch across a wide spectrum, as both parties are, to a large degree, decentralized. However, from a general point of view, Democrats tend to support heavy taxation of high-income households. In comparison to Denmark, where taxes are generally high, the Democratic taxation policy may not seem excessive, but on a U.S. taxation scale these tax percentages are in the heavy end.

What Is The Difference Between Republicans And Democrats

Republicans and Democrats are the two main and historically the largest political parties in the US and, after every election, hold the majority seats in the House of Representatives and the Senate as well as the highest number of Governors. Though both the parties mean well for the US citizens, they have distinct differences that manifest in their comments, decisions, and history. These differences are mainly ideological, political, social, and economic paths to making the US successful and the world a better place for all. Differences between the two parties that are covered in this article rely on the majority position though individual politicians may have varied preferences.

Civil Rights United States Citizens In Puerto Rico

The 2016 Republican Party Platform declares: “We support the right of the United States citizens of Puerto Rico to be admitted to the Union as a fully sovereign state. We further recognize the historic significance of the 2012 local referendum in which a 54 percent majority voted to end Puerto Rico’s current status as a U.S. territory, and 61 percent chose statehood over options for sovereign nationhood. We support the federally sponsored political status referendum authorized and funded by an Act of Congress in 2014 to ascertain the aspirations of the people of Puerto Rico. Once the 2012 local vote for statehood is ratified, Congress should approve an enabling act with terms for Puerto Rico’s future admission as the 51st state of the Union”.

Which Republican President Inspired The Teddy Bear

Theodore Roosevelt, a Republican U.S. president from 1901 to 1909, inspired the teddy bear when he refused to shoot a tied-up bear on a hunting trip. The story reached toy maker Morris Michtom, who decided to make stuffed bears as a dedication to Roosevelt. The name comes from Roosevelt’s nickname, Teddy.

See all videos for this article

Republican Party, byname Grand Old Party , in the United States, one of the two major political parties, the other being the Democratic Party. During the 19th century the Republican Party stood against the extension of slavery to the country’s new territories and, ultimately, for slavery’s complete abolition. During the 20th and 21st centuries the party came to be associated with laissez-fairecapitalism, low taxes, and conservative social policies. The party acquired the acronym GOP, widely understood as “Grand Old Party,” in the 1870s. The party’s official logo, the elephant, is derived from a cartoon by Thomas Nast and also dates from the 1870s.

Writing Activity For What Is A Political Platform:

You are becoming disillusioned with the two major political parties. You and your friends have decided to form a third party. You are in charge of developing the party’s platform. After reviewing the respective platforms of the Republicans and Democrats , write a platform that you think will serve your party well. It may be useful to pick three hot topics/issues and focus on them in your platform. For instance, you could choose topics such as student debt, healthcare, and gun rights.

The 2020 Republican Party Platform: Letat Cest Moi

As published on the party’s official web site, the “Resolution Regarding the Republican Party Platform” states:

“RESOLVED, That the Republican National Convention will adjourn without adopting a new platform until the 2024 Republican National Convention.”

We all know that party platforms are traditionally about mom and apple pie—but at least they tell us the party is in favor of apple pie rather than cherry pie. I was on the drafting committee for the 2012 Democratic platform; the process is one of grappling with diverse interests and priorities. The diversity of those issues and interests reflect the challenges of governing.

The Republican resolution cites COVID-19 as a reason for cutting back on platform development. Yes, “strict restrictions on gatherings and meetings” have changed the nature of the 2020 political conventions. Such restrictions, however, did not stop the development of the 2020 Democratic platform to address the issues of the day and let Americans know what the party stood for.

There will be no grappling with the issues raised by our current national crisis by the Republican Party, however. There will be no forward-looking agenda to define what the party stands for.

Views Of Parties Positions On Issues Ideologies

Republicans and Democrats see little common ground between the two parties when it comes to issues, ideas and ideology. Majorities of partisans say the policy positions of the Republican and Democratic parties are very different, and neither Republicans nor Democrats say the other party has many good ideas.

In general terms, both Republicans and Democrats agree with their own party’s policies. In-party agreement extends to specific issues, such as policies to deal with the economy, health care and immigration.

However, there are some issue areas – climate change for Republicans and policies to deal with ISIS for Democrats – where somewhat smaller majorities of partisans say they agree with their own party’s approach. Even then, few partisans express agreement with the other party on these issues.

Overall, about seven-in-ten Republicans and Democrats say they generally agree with their party’s positions almost always or more than half the time. Even larger majorities – 84% of Republicans and 82% of Democrats – disagree with the other party’s positions at least most of the time.

Most Republicans and Democrats also agree with their own party’s policies on a range of specific issues, including the economy, immigration, health care and policies to deal with the Islamic militant group in Iraq and Syria.

However, the shares agreeing with their own party vary by issue, and the patterns of agreement are different within the two parties.

The Platform: A Road Map For A Political Party

One of the most common complaints about politics these days is that the two major parties seem almost indistinguishable. Of course, everyone knows this isn’t really so – it’s clear they’re not ‘exactly’ the same, since they’re fighting all the time – but the policy differences between the two parties can sometimes be hard to figure out.

But it’s not actually that hard to understand what Republicans and Democrats believe about the nation and its future. There are easy-to-find documents that explain their views in great detail. Each party produces a platform. The platform is something like a roadmap; it’s the path the parties would like to follow if they can find their way to a place where they can make those decisions. The platform usually contains a list of the party’s beliefs, policy choices, and ambitions. These are often a lot more specific than candidates tend to be when they’re running for office.

An error occurred trying to load this video.

Try refreshing the page, or contact customer support.

Contrasting Perceptions Of Parties Ideologies

Republicans and Democrats tend to view the opposing party as highly ideological, while viewing their own party as less ideological.

On an 11-point scale where 10 is very liberal and 0 is very conservative, a 34% plurality of Democrats use the most conservative option to describe the ideology of the Republican Party. Fully 58% of Democrats select one of the three most conservative points to describe the Republican Party’s ideology.1

While most Republicans describe their party as conservative , just 11% of Republicans select the most conservative option. About a third of Republicans rate their party one of the three most conservative points , while about as many give their party a conservative rating that is closer to the midpoint . Just 16% select the midpoint of the scale and only about one-in-ten place themselves on the liberal side of the scale.

A similar pattern is seen in views of the Democratic Party’s ideology. Fully 45% of Republicans select the most liberal option to describe the Democratic Party, and nearly seven-in-ten Republicans use one of the three most liberal points on the scale to describe the party.

Politics & PolicyPolitical PartiesPolitical PolarizationPolitical AnimosityElection 2016

The Platform The Gop Is Too Scared To Publish

What the Republican Party actually stands for, in 13 points

About the author: David Frum is a staff writer at The Atlantic and the author of . In 2001 and 2002, he was a speechwriter for President George W. Bush.

Republicans have decided not to publish a party platform for 2020.

This omission has led some to conclude that the GOP lacks ideas, that it stands for nothing, that it has shriveled to little more than a Trump cult.

This conclusion is wrong. The Republican Party of 2020 has lots of ideas. I’m about to list 13 ideas that command almost universal assent within the Trump administration, within the Republican caucuses of the U.S. House and Senate, among governors and state legislators, on Fox News, and among rank-and-file Republicans.

Once you read the list, I think you’ll agree that these are authentic ideas with meaningful policy consequences, and that they are broadly shared. The question is not why Republicans lack a coherent platform; it’s why they’re so reluctant to publish the one on which they’re running.

Annie Lowrey: The party of no content

1) The most important mechanism of economic policy—not the only tool, but the most important—is adjusting the burden of taxation on society’s richest citizens. Lower this level, as Republicans did in 2017, and prosperity will follow. The economy has had a temporary setback, but thanks to the tax cut of 2017, recovery is ready to follow strongly. No further policy change is required, except possibly lower taxes still.

Democrats Plan To Keep Their Primary Strategy

Morgan Carroll, chairwoman of the Colorado Democratic Party and a former state Senate president, said a proposal to forgo primaries would never receive serious consideration among state Democrats.

She called the idea “ridiculous and undemocratic.”

“If we had a candidate that recommended it, I think they’d be driven out of town,” Morgan Carroll said.

She sees the push as part of a larger pattern “by Trump and his loyalists to basically move in an authoritarian direction, take away choices from voters, make it harder to vote, make it hard for the people to decide, and make it easier for them to install whoever they want in whatever position they want.”

Want exclusive political news and insights first? Subscribe to The Unaffiliated, the political newsletter from The Colorado Sun. That’s where this story first appeared. Join now or upgrade your membership.

If the Republican proposal passes, she said it’s hard to know whether more unaffiliated voters would participate in 2022 Democratic primaries because they would be the only primary left they could vote in.

She thinks the move would backfire for Republicans as they’ve struggled to win elections in Colorado in recent years. “If I were a rank-and-file Republican person, I’d be furious.”

Colorado Sun staff writer Jesse Paul contributed to this report.

Republican Platform Panders To Israel Zealots

annexationChristian ZionismgopJerusalemoccupationrepublican national committeeRepublican platformrncUnited Nations

The Republican platform for 2016/2020 has a starring role for Israel.

The Republican National Committee platform of 2016, resurrected for 2020, will once again genuflect before Israel – ignoring the realities of human rights, international law, and logic.

Last month, If Americans Knew presented an analysis of the Democratic National Committee’s 2020 platform on Israel/Palestine. In the spirit of impartiality, we now offer a similar review of the Republican counterpart.

Interestingly, the Republican National Committee decided to recycle its 2016 platform for 2020-2024. This document was heavily influenced by Christian conservatives – including Christian Nationalists and Christian Zionists – who have very explicit ideas about the issue of Israel. On the other hand, Christian conservatives with more nuanced viewpoints on the the Bible or the issue of Israel-Palestine , many of whom actively support Palestinian rights, seem to have been ignored.

The platform was likely also influenced by donors like Sheldon Adelson, considered “the most important mega-donor in the Republican Party,” and whose pro-Israel demands have largely determined Trump’s Mideast policies.

The first question, then, is whether the RNC platform reflects the will of Republicans, or just that of certain Republicans.

Do the “representatives” represent the people?

Jerusalem

Political Positions Of The Republican Party

Republicanism in the United States

The platform of the Republican Party of the United States is generally based on American conservatism, contrasting with the modern liberalism of the Democratic Party. The positions of the Republican Party have evolved over time. Currently, the party’s fiscal conservatism includes support for lower taxes, free marketcapitalism, deregulation of corporations, and restrictions on labor unions. The party’s social conservatism includes support for gun rights and other traditional values, often with a Christian foundation, including restrictions on abortion. In foreign policy, Republicans usually favor increased military spending and unilateral action. Other Republican positions include restrictions on immigration, opposition to drug legalization, and support for school choice.

0 notes

everettwilkinson · 8 years ago

Text

TRUMP infrastructure priority in trouble — DEBT CEILING SWEETENER: A veterans bill — INSIDE THE DSCC retreat in Martha’s Vineyard — JON KARL elected WHCA prez for 2019 — B’DAY: Paul Kane

Good Saturday morning.

TWO THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW …

Story Continued Below

TRUMP’S FIRST INFRASTRUCTURE PRIORITY IN TROUBLE: House Republicans have been scrambling to find enough votes for President Donald Trump’s first infrastructure initiative: privatizing the country’s air traffic control system. Despite Speaker Paul Ryan’s supportive public comments this week and whipping by House Transportation Chairman Bill Shuster, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao and the FAA’s legislative affairs team, the bill won’t come up next week. The whip count was close to a few dozen votes short as of the time lawmakers left town Friday afternoon.

Several lawmakers we spoke to yesterday afternoon said it simply wasn’t a vote they wanted to take, because it gains them nothing back home. In many cases local leaders are against the legislation. Roads are in disrepair, bridges are crumbling and no one really cares about modernizing air traffic control, as one lawmaker put it to us. THIS WOULD BE A BIG EMBARRASSMENT for Trump and GOP leaders, however. The inability to push a priority through one chamber shows how difficult D.C. is.

ABOUT THE DEBT CEILING … Even though the Wall Street Journal buried it on their homepage, Rich Rubin, Nick Timiraos and Kristina Peterson’s debt ceiling story from yesterday afternoon is very important. They report: “Republicans are considering tying a must-pass increase in the federal debt limit to funding for a program that lets military veterans get medical care outside of Veterans Affairs facilities, people familiar with the idea said.” A vet bill is a decent sweetener, but consider this: John Boehner coupled a debt ceiling increase with massive spending cuts when he was the speaker! In an all-GOP Washington, all they might get is the renewal of a veterans program that was already going to be renewed! Read Rubin, Timiraos and Peterson’s story http://on.wsj.com/2utSHbz

**SUBSCRIBE to Playbook: http://politi.co/2lQswbh

LAWMAKERS … THEY ARE JUST LIKE US EDITION: Several members of the Michigan delegation were grounded on a Delta plane for hours at DCA headed to Detroit yesterday. One traveler on the plane, which felt like it had no air conditioning, estimated that it was at least 85 to 90 degrees inside the cabin. The plane, which was originally scheduled to take off at 12:45 p.m., finally took off around 7:30 p.m. SPOTTED: Archbishop of Detroit Allen Vigneron and Reps. John Conyers, Jim Sensenbrenner, Dave Trott, Tim Walberg, Mike Bishop, Debbie Dingell, Dan Kildee, Brenda Lawrence, Marcy Kaptur, Jackie Walorski, Andy Barr, Sandy Levin, Bill Huizenga and John Moolenaar, among others.

PRIORITIES IN TROUBLE? WHITE HOUSE IN CHAOS? JARED AND IVANKA IN SUN VALLEY! — THE DAILY MAIL: “Mark Zuckerberg arrives in Sun Valley for showdown with Ivanka and Jared amid rumors the self-made billionaire is planning 2020 run against Trump” — 34 pix http://dailym.ai/2t1WsRc

WHAT PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP IS UP TO TODAY — at 11:02 p.m.: “I will be at the @USGA #USWomensOpen in Bedminister, NJ tomorrow. Big crowds expected & the women are playing great-should be very exciting!”

— THE PRESIDENT attending the U.S. Women’s Open will draw exponentially more attention to the tournament, which is being hosted at a Trump property.

THE TWO FACES OF FOX NEWS — SHEP SMITH: “The deception, Chris, is mind-boggling … why are we getting told all these lies?” CHRIS WALLACE: “I don’t know what to say.” http://wapo.st/2uuloW2 … FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR LISA BOOTHE: Hillary Clinton would “literally sell her daughter … literally sell her only child to be president.” http://bit.ly/2tVVV4x

IMPORTANT FOR NEXT WEEK — “GOP leaders plead with senators to hold their fire on Obamacare repeal,” by Jen Haberkorn and Burgess Everett: “Republicans say McConnell will force a vote to start debate even if he knows it would be unsuccessful, which would force Republicans to decide which might be worse: Democratic attack ads for repealing Obamacare or anger from the conservative base and President Donald Trump if they abandon the cause. McConnell canceled a scheduled vote on the bill last month when it became clear the votes weren’t there. But this time, Republicans say, McConnell wants to get people on the record and bring some finality to the Obamacare debate that has hung up Senate action for nearly two months.” http://politi.co/2vo9IAy

— “Republicans use state payoffs to win votes for repeal bill,” by Paul Demko: http://politi.co/2v3bUhg

— “White House launches aggressive push to flip GOP governors opposed to Senate health bill,” by WaPo’s Sean Sullivan, Juliet Eilperin and Dan Balz: http://wapo.st/2upJu32

TRUMP, WHO? — “Governors steer clear of Trump,” by Gabe Debenedetti and Megan Cassella in Providence, Rhode Island: “Vice President Mike Pence spent much of his afternoon address to the nation’s governors on Friday making sure they know how much Donald Trump loves them. But a majority of the state leaders gathered here this week spent much of their three-day summer meeting pretending the president doesn’t exist. When a group of seven Democratic governors stood in front of a cramped hotel meeting room Friday morning to decry the GOP’s health care plan, for all 30 minutes they avoided saying the polarizing words ‘Donald Trump. …

“At the tail end of the National Governors Association’s three-day summer meeting, the lengths to which the country’s state executives went to sidestep the issue of the disruptive president underscored just how much the current Oval Office occupant has rewired the political environment, confounded its participants and upended their usual way of doing business. For many of them, the safest play is to avoid the matter altogether.” http://politi.co/2te5tLf

— “Insurers Oppose Cruz Amendment to Republican Health-Care Bill,” by WSJ’s Anna Wilde Mathews: “In a letter sent Friday night to the Senate Republican and Democratic leadership, the two major associations representing health insurers, which don’t typically send such missives jointly, said the amendment ‘is simply unworkable in any form and would undermine protections for those with pre-existing medical conditions, increase premiums and lead to widespread terminations of coverage for people currently enrolled in the individual market.’” http://on.wsj.com/2tUvdL4 … The letter http://bit.ly/2tWayov

****** A message from the National Retail Federation: {Video} Under the proposed Border Adjustment Tax, small business owners say the costs of their products will increase substantially. What are they supposed to tell their customers? Watch Dave’s story. ******

UNRAVELING THE DON JR. MEETING — MICHAEL ISIKOFF in Yahoo, “Russian-American lobbyist: I just strolled into Trump Jr. meeting”: Rinat “Akhmetshin said he was not expecting to attend any meeting at Trump Tower that day. In fact, he was dressed in jeans and a T-shirt when [Natalia] Veselnitskaya told him that she had a meeting scheduled and asked him to come along. Although Trump Jr. has insisted that Vesenikstaya mainly wanted to talk about Russian adoptions, Akhmetshin said she brought a folder with information about an American hedge fund operating in Russia that she believed was funneling money to the [DNC].

“‘She spent years researching this stuff,’ he said. She left the folder with her hosts at Trump Tower, Akhmetshin said, adding that he had never seen its contents and doesn’t know the details of what was in it. ‘I didn’t prepare the document,’ he said. Akhmetshin cut the interview short, saying he had to have dinner with his daughter. Knowing of his work with Veselnitskaya, Yahoo News had originally reached him by phone in Moscow on Monday, not long after stories about the lawyer’s meeting at Trump Tower first broke. When asked why he didn’t tell a reporter then that he had also attended the meeting with Trump Jr., he replied: ‘You didn’t ask me.’” https://yhoo.it/2vnKeDp

— “U.S. officials probing Russian lobbyist who met Trump team,” by Ali Watkins: “Among the questions investigators are trying to answer, one U.S. official told POLITICO, is whether Veselnitskaya was sent to meet with Trump Jr. on direct orders from the Kremlin. … Akhmetshin — whose lobbying tenure has included several high-profile efforts to promote the Kremlin’s agenda in Washington — has run afoul of Congress in recent weeks. In a March letter to the Justice Department, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley accused Akhmetshin of failing to register properly under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.” http://politi.co/2t1HbzO

— “Also At Trump Jr.-Russia Meeting: An Ex-U.S. Government Worker With Liberal Views,” by HuffPost’s Jessica Schulberg and Paul Blumenthal: Interpreter Anatoli “Samochornov’s presence at the meeting is key because he appears to be the only witness to the event who does not have close ties to either the Trump campaign or the Russian government. He wouldn’t tell HuffPost whether he had been contacted by investigators probing the Trump campaign’s relationship with Russia. …

“Samochornov has worked as an interpreter on dozens of government assignments, including for the U.S. State Department, Defense Department, Securities and Exchange Commission and Drug Enforcement Administration, and for a G-8 foreign ministers dinner at the United Nations, according to his resume. He helped facilitate exchange programs for the Meridian International Center … He has worked with periodically with the State Department as a contract interpreter for exchange programs. His wife also works for the State Department.” http://bit.ly/2v2SJUR

— @juliaioffe: “Wait, he was the interpreter at a panel I moderated in Jan at the Brooklyn Library. He was very pro-Trump and pro-Putin.” Pic http://bit.ly/2ukG2XW

— “Trump Tower Russia meeting: At least eight people in the room” — CNN.com: http://cnn.it/2tUMwM2

COMING ATTRACTIONS — “Pence will join GOP leaders for fundraiser benefiting his PAC,” by Alex Isenstadt: “Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, House Speaker Paul Ryan and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy are slated to headline a July 25 fundraiser for Pence’s Great America Committee. The event is to take place in Washington, according to an invitation, and attendees are being asked to pony up $5,000 apiece. … While vice presidents usually focus on raising money for presidential reelection bids or for their party generally, they typically do not launch their own fundraising vehicles. He is expected to use the PAC to reward candidates up for election in 2018.” http://politi.co/2uudbRB

— “In memo, Trump administration weighs expanding the expedited deportation powers of DHS,” by WaPo’s Abigail Hauslohner and David Nakamura: “The Trump administration is weighing a new policy to dramatically expand the Department of Homeland Security’s powers to expedite the deportations of some illegal immigrants. Since 2004, the agency has been authorized to bypass immigration courts only for immigrants who had been living in the country illegally for less than two weeks and were apprehended within 100 miles of the border. Under the proposal, the agency would be empowered to seek the expedited removal of illegal immigrants apprehended anywhere in the United States who cannot prove they have lived in the country continuously for more than 90 days, according to a 13-page internal agency memo obtained by The Washington Post.” http://wapo.st/2ul2zE7

THE JUICE …

OUT AND ABOUT IN MARTHA’S VINEYARD – POOL REPORT from a Playbooker who attended the opening dinner last night of the DSCC’s annual Martha’s Vineyard retreat weekend — the dinner, which featured a traditional lobster boil, was held at the Harbor View Hotel in Edgartown: “DSCC Chair Sen. Chris Van Hollen opened things up with a joke about how Democrats have higher standards than Republicans and Russian agents are prohibited from attending. Remarks included 2018 incumbent Sens. Tammy Baldwin, Sherrod Brown, Chris Murphy, and Debbie Stabenow. All of them railed against Republican attempts to take health care away from millions of Americans and highlighted personal stories of their constituents.

“Massachusetts host Sen. Ed Markey closed with an impromptu imitation of the Kennedy accent that won plaudits from the crowd — as well as impassioned remarks against climate change that pointed out Martha’s Vineyard would have been wiped out if Hurricane Katrina landed a few degrees differently. … The setting looked like a party from a Hollywood movie with a fire pit, colored lights in the pool, and a giant pair of balls floating in the pool saying Love. … A highlight of the night was the after-party at the home of Democratic donor Connie Milstein.” 2018 incumbent Sens. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) spoke this morning at the DSCC breakfast at the same hotel.

SPOTTED: Sens. Mark Warner (D-Va.) (who also spoke), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), and Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), and Tom Carper (D-Del.), former Sen. John Breaux (D-La.), Heather Podesta, Tony Podesta, and various other big Democratic donors.

QUOTE OF THE DAY: “It’s almost an embarrassment being an American citizen traveling around the world and listening to the stupid s— we have to deal with in this country,” JPMC’s Jamie Dimon said responding to a question on an earnings call Friday. “Since the Great Recession, which is now 8 years old, we’ve been growing at 1.5 to 2 percent in spite of stupidity and political gridlock, because the American business sector is powerful and strong,” he said. “What I’m saying is it would be much stronger growth had we made intelligent decisions and were there not gridlock.” http://cnb.cx/2vkwadN

PHOTO DU JOUR: French President Emmanuel Macron shakes hands with President Donald Trump with their wives, Brigitte Macron and Melania Trump, by their sides after the Bastille Day military parade on the Champs Elysees avenue in Paris on July 14. | Christophe Archambault/Pool/AP Photo

WHAT JAKE SULLIVAN IS UP TO THESE DAYS – “Lessons in disaster: A top Clinton adviser searches for meaning in a shocking loss,” by WaPo’s Greg Jaffe: “If all had gone as planned, and as most in Washington had expected, Jake Sullivan would be hard at work just steps from the Oval Office. … Instead, Donald Trump won the presidency … On a recent evening, he was pushing open a battered orange door, climbing stairs covered with fraying carpet and striding into a dimly lit apartment where two dozen Yale Law School students were waiting to hear from him. Most of them were desperate for some version of the life he had led in Washington.

“Sullivan, though, has never felt less certain about where both he and his country are headed. He divides his time between an empty think-tank office in Washington and Yale, where he lectures one day a week on law and foreign policy. Almost everything about his professional life is transitory, uncertain, unsettled. ‘I feel a keen sense of responsibility for the outcome,’ he told friends in the immediate aftermath of Clinton’s defeat. Months later, the feeling had not faded.” http://wapo.st/2vobEcb

THE LATEST ON THE TRAVEL BAN — “Justice Department appeals latest travel ban setback to Supreme Court,” by Ted Hesson: “The Justice Department on Friday appealed to the Supreme Court a federal judge’s decision to allow grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles and other relatives of people in the U.S. to circumvent the Trump administration’s travel ban policy. The order, issued Thursday evening local time in Honolulu by Judge Derrick Watson in Hawaii, deals a temporary blow to one of the president’s signature initiatives. It also prohibits the administration from blocking refugees with a commitment from a resettlement agency in the U.S., a move that could revive the flow of refugee admissions this year.

“In its appeal to the High Court, the Justice Department argues that Watson’s interpretation ‘empties the Court’s decision of meaning,’ because it includes ‘not just “close” family members, but virtually all family members.’ ‘Treating all of these relationships as close familial relationship[s]’ reads the term “close” out of the Court’s decision.’” http://politi.co/2ug5EoL

WASHINGTON, INC. – “Is the most powerful lobbyist in Washington losing its grip?” by WaPo’s Steven Mufson: “This should be the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s moment. A businessman occupies the White House. … Yet in recent months, the U.S. Chamber — historically one of the cornerstones of Washington politicking and policymaking — has been deeply shaken. Members are divided over the border-adjustment tax, health care and climate change. Some want the Chamber to more vigorously stand up to President Trump to protect free trade. …

“General Electric … has considered pulling out of the Chamber because it views the group as part of an antiquated Washington influence establishment, too exclusively aligned with the Republican Party, and no longer an effective advocate for GE’s interests or views, according to people familiar with the company’s thinking.” http://wapo.st/2vnQIC5

MEDIAWATCH — “WHCA elects ABC’s Karl as ‘19-20 president,” by Cristiano Lima: “The White House Correspondents’ Association announced Friday that ABC News’ Jonathan Karl had been elected as their president for 2019-20. Karl, who received 104 of 265 votes on the way to sealing his victory, was also appointed to a 3-year term as an at-large member of the WHCA’s board of directors, according to a White House press pool report from the group. … Karl edged-out Todd Gillman of the Dallas Morning News, who earned 87 votes, for the role of president, but Gillman also notched a position on the board as a newspaper representative. The New York Times’ Doug Mills, meanwhile, was elected to fill the photography seat on the board.” http://politi.co/2tr2zOh

– “Trump Jr.’s Russia meeting a Democratic plot? Pro-Trump media wants you to think so,” by CNN’s Oliver Darcy: “Was the Russian lawyer who met with Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort in June of last year the first evidence of possible Trump campaign collusion with Russia — or was she part of a sinister Democratic plot to entrap the Trump campaign? Over the past three days, members of the pro-Trump media have settled on their answer, characterizing the lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, as a leftist with ties to the Obama administration. The idea quickly drifted upward to some of the most influential figures in right-wing media, and then ultimately to President Trump himself.” http://cnnmon.ie/2uulfBS

— NEW YORK MAGAZINE’s cover story on climate change this week, “The Uninhabitable Earth,” by David Wallace-Wells, is now the most-read article in the magazine’s history, with 2.5 million readers so far: http://nym.ag/2tdMwYO… The magazine has published a new, annotated version, with 7k+ words of footnotes: http://nym.ag/2v0jA3T … The magazine’s 2nd most-read feature article was a May 2016 Andrew Sullivan piece, “Democracies end when they are too democratic. And right now, America is a breeding ground for tyranny”: http://nym.ag/1X42nzY

****** A message from the National Retail Federation: The overwhelming majority of retailers are small businesses, with more than 98% of all retail companies employing fewer than 50 people. While small in size, their voices are loud and clear when fighting to be heard on decisions and policies that impact their businesses and the customers they serve every day. Hear more industry stories on NRF’s Retail Gets Real podcast. ******

SNEAK PEEK — DAVID REMNICK in next week’s New Yorker, “Trump Family Values: Amid revelations of Donald, Jr.,’s misguided meeting with two Russians, the President shows once again where his only loyalties lie”: “The Republicans, the self-proclaimed party of family values, remain squarely behind a family and a Presidency whose most salient features are amorality, greed, demagoguery, deception, vulgarity, race-baiting, misogyny, and, potentially—only time and further investigation will tell—a murky relationship with a hostile foreign government.” http://bit.ly/2v3rHMX

CLICKER – “The nation’s cartoonists on the week in politics,” edited by Matt Wuerker – 12 keepers http://politi.co/2tdu7eV

GREAT WEEKEND READS, curated by Daniel Lippman, filing from Great Barrington, Massachusetts:

— “Why You Need Emoji: Emojis are the body language of the digital age,” by Vyvyan Evans in Nautilus Magazine – per ALDaily’s summary: “Digital text alone is impoverished and, on occasion, emotionally arid. It lacks the nonverbal cues — body language — of spoken communication. That’s why we need emoji.” http://bit.ly/2uu26Qg

— “Mr. Ten Percent: The Man Who Built — And Bilked — American Soccer,” by Ken Bensinger in BuzzFeed in June 2014: “As the World Cup opens, a tale about winning dirty: How a swindling suburban soccer dad [Chuck Blazer, who died this past week] pocketed millions as he helped make the sport in the U.S a booming success.” http://bzfd.it/2t1vqta (h/t Longform.org)

— “Kremlin, Inc.: Why are Vladimir Putin’s opponents dying?” by Michael Specter in the Jan. 29, 2007, issue of The New Yorker: “The murder of Anna Politkovskaya was at once unbelievable and utterly expected.” http://bit.ly/2tTLnV4

— “The C-word,” by Paul Collier in the Times Literary Supplement – per The Browser’s summary: “The only cure for corruption is an incorruptible leader, such as Lee Kuan Yew, willing to jail friends and enemies alike. Without such leadership, cultural norms defeat laws and institutions. Northern Italy is one of the most honest regions in Europe, southern Italy one of the most corrupt.” http://bit.ly/2tqygrf

— “Did Airbnb Kill the Mountain Town?” by Tom Vanderbilt in Outside Magazine: “Living the dream has never been easy in the West’s most beloved adventure hamlets, where homes are a fortune and good jobs are few. But the rise of online short-term rentals may be the tipping point that causes idyllic outposts like Crested Butte, Colorado, to lose their middle class altogether—and with it, their soul.” http://bit.ly/2v2zoD7 (h/t Longreads.com)

— “Does the World’s Top Weed Killer Cause Cancer? Trump’s EPA Will Decide,” by Peter Waldman, Lydia Mulvany, Tiffany Stecker, and Joel Rosenblatt in Bloomberg Businessweek: “Roundup has revolutionized farming. Now, human health and Bayer’s $66 billion deal for Monsanto depend on an honest appraisal of its safety.” https://buswk.co/Monsanto

— “The Fallout,” by Lacy M. Johnson in Guernica Magazine: “In St. Louis, America’s nuclear history creeps into the present, leaching into streams and bodies.” http://bit.ly/2v3m1mb

— “Rape Choreography Makes Films Safer, But Still Takes a Toll on Cast and Crew,” by April Wolfe in LA Weekly: “While narratives of sexual assault are nothing new — everything from early Old West films to the various Renaissance-era depictions of ‘The Rape of the Sabine Women’ and Japan’s 19th-century ukiyo-e prints (an art form that influenced anime today) depicts gendered violence — these storylines have become particularly common in film and TV lately.” http://bit.ly/2tdrfyF

— “The Netflix Prize: How a $1 Million Contest Changed Binge-Watching Forever,” by Dan Jackson in Thrillist: “Following the announcement … 30,000 Netflix enthusiasts who downloaded the trove of information and set out to unlock the secrets of the recommendation algorithm. … In a way, [Netflix CEO Reed] Hastings was a tech-age Willy Wonka letting any curious hacker into his digital Chocolate Factory. Instead of a chocolate river, he offered a gushing stream of data.” http://bit.ly/2tdEGyp

— “A Team of Their Own,” by Jessica Luther in Bleacher Report: “Meet the players on this all-girls travel squad who have bigger dreams than youth baseball—they want to become MLB stars.” http://ble.ac/2tq2Y3G (h/t Longform.org)

— “An 18-Year-Old Girl Died From a Synthetic Opioid She Bought Online. Here’s How Portland Police Cracked the Case,” by Nigel Jaquiss in Willamette Week: “A fatal overdose in East Portland leads detectives into the Dark Web, where lab-created opioids are bought with Bitcoin.” http://bit.ly/2upr2Yo

— “1917: The Year of the Century,” by Jeremy Black in Imperial and Global Forum – per The Browser’s summary: “The greatest single event of the 20th century was arguably the overthrow of the Manchu dynasty in 1910-11, opening the way to China’s modernisation. But 1917 was the pivotal year, bringing the Russian Revolution, America’s entry into World War I, and the Balfour Declaration reshaping the Middle East. Hard to say now which was more consequential: The communist experiment, the assertion of America as world power, or the entailing of the West in the founding of modern Israel.” http://bit.ly/2tVBzZb

OVERHEARD AT REAGAN — Rep. Joe Courtney (D-Conn.), with a backpack, on the bus yesterday heading to Gate 35X at DCA to catch an American flight to Hartford (which got delayed an hour), talking to fellow airplane passengers about how the lobster catch in New England has declined because of climate change. He also said he was going to Fenway Park today to catch the Red Sox-Yankees game. Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.) was next to him on the bus wearing a green tie and talking on his cell phone.

SPOTTED: Justice Merrick Garland last night at the James Taylor concert at Nats Park … Kellyanne Conway on the 6 a.m. Delta DCA to DTW flight — former Rep. Mike Rogers was also on the flight … former Delaware Gov. Jack Markell biking yesterday in Mitchell, South Dakota — earlier this week he went through Badlands National Park. He’s on a 3,680 mile cross-country bike ride from Oregon to Delaware (map and pix: http://bit.ly/2upwfj0), his first big effort since leaving office. He’s blogging about his trip on his Facebook page http://bit.ly/2uunWmY

WEEKEND WEDDING — COLORADO POWER COUPLE: Brittany Pettersen, Colorado State Rep. and Democratic candidate for Colorado’s 7th congressional district, recently married ProgressNow Colorado executive director Ian Silverii at the Colorado Governor’s Mansion. Pool report from Gigi Sukin of Colorado Biz: “Pettersen and Silverii were wed by former speaker of the Colorado House of Representatives Dickey Lee Hullinghorst. Their wedding party included State Reps. Chris Kennedy and Faith Winter, and State Rep. Janet Buckner read EE Cummings’ ‘I carry your heart with me.’ … They met in Denver while Pettersen was clipboard-canvassing for nonprofit organizations on the corner of 13th and Sherman, one block south of the Capitol where they would then work together for four years.” Pic http://bit.ly/2tUnkpd

SPOTTED: Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-Colo.), former Denver Mayor Wellington Webb, former Lt. Gov. Barbara O’Brien, current Lt. Gov. Donna Lynne, Colorado House Speaker Crisanta Duran, both of Pettersen’s Democratic primary opponents State Sens. Dominick Moreno and Andy Kerr, and Gordon Bronson.

BIRTHDAYS: Chris LaCivita is 51 … WaPo’s Paul Kane … Gareth Rhodes, running for Congress against Rep. John Faso (R-N.Y.) and a former deputy press secretary to NY Gov. Cuomo, is 29 … Arianna Huffington is 67 … Jim Merrill of New Hampshire … Jeremy Bird, 270 Strategies CEO and 2012 Obama for America field director (hat tip: Lynda Tran) … Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America and Planned Parenthood Action Fund … Penn Staples … Liana Balinsky-Baker, Reuters tech, media and telecom M&A reporter and deals team leader in SF (h/t Emily Stephenson) … Karin Johanson, the pride of New Jersey and Wisconsin (h/t Jon Haber) … Zach Wahls … Dan Hewitt, VP at Entertainment Software Association, is 41 (h/t Alex Slater) … Svetlana Legetic, co-founder of Brightest Young Things … Dr. David Lippman, a travel aficionado who also loves crosswords and playing tennis, soccer, ping pong and croquet, is 72 (h/t son Daniel) … Amanda Fernandez, senior manager with development organization Palladium, visiting from Bogotá and celebrating this weekend with her parents, husband and kids at Rehoboth Beach (h/t Ben Chang) …

… Heather Higginbottom, COO of CARE and former Obama deputy secretary of state … Elliot Gerson, EVP at the Aspen Institute, is 65 … Wallis Annenberg, president and chairman of the board of the Annenberg Foundation, is 78 (h/ts Jewish Insider) … Andrew Usyk … Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) is 65 … Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) is 59 … Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) is 56 … Rep. Daniel Lipinski (D-Ill.) is 51 … Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah) is 57 … Chris Duffner … Michael Francisco … Taylor Lindman … Seth Grossman … Bloomberg’s Jodi Schneider, now in Hong Kong … Jackie Spinner … Hilary Leighty … Jason Wheeler … Helen Hare … Gwendolyn Ward … Allison Steil … Bekah Geffert … Campbell Roth … HFA alum Marisa McAuliffe … Deb Rosen (h/t Teresa Vilmain) … Erica Fein … Babak Talebi is 38 … Brunswick Group partner Mark Palmer … Linda Ronstadt is 71 … actor Brian Austin Green is 44 … actress Diane Kruger is 41 (h/ts AP)

THE SHOWS, by @MattMackowiak, filing from Austin:

—NBC’s “Meet the Press”: Jay Sekulow … Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) … Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.). Panel: Tom Brokaw, Al Cardenas, Doris Kearns Goodwin and Danielle Pletka

–ABC’s “This Week”: Jay Sekulow … Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) … Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) … HHS Secretary Tom Price. Panel: Matthew Dowd, Michael Caputo, Megan Murphy and Abby Phillip

–CBS’s “Face the Nation”: Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) … Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) … Jay Sekulow … author and TIME Magazine editor-at-large Jeffrey Kluger (“Apollo 8”). Panel: Jeffrey Goldberg, Ed O’Keefe, Susan Page and Ramesh Ponnuru

–CNN’s “State of the Union”: Jay Sekulow … Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) … Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). Panel: Bakari Sellers, CNN political commentator Alice Stewart, CNN legal commentator and former Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (R-VA) and Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.)

–“Fox News Sunday”: Jay Sekulow … Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.). Panel: Brit Hume, Julie Pace, Michael Needham and Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel

–CNN’s “Reliable Sources”: Jeff Mason, Tara Palmeri and Ken Kurson … Carl Bernstein and Len Downie … David Zurawik

–CNN’s “Inside Politics”: Margaret Talev, Karoun Demirjian, Jeff Zeleny and Manu Raju (substitute host: CNN’s Nia-Malika Henderson)

–Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures”: Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) … former U.S. Attorney Bud Cummins … Corey Lewandowski. Panel: Ed Rollins and James Freeman

–Fox News’ “MediaBuzz”: Gillian Turner … Katie Pavlich … Joe Trippi … Anthony Scaramucci … Ari Fleischer … Carley Shimkus

–CNN’s “Fareed Zakaria GPS”: Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif

–Univision’s “Al Punto”: Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) … report from Univision News correspondent Luis Megid on how ICE conducts immigration raids … Venezuelan human rights activist and Leopoldo Lopez’s wife Lilian Tintori … Mexican Senator (PAN) and presidential candidate Juan Carlos Romero Hicks … singer-songwriter Natalia Lafourcade

–C-SPAN: “The Communicators”: CTIA – The Wireless Association president & CEO Meredith Attwell Baker, questioned by Politico’s Margaret Harding McGill … “Newsmakers”: Rep. Elliot Engel (D-N.Y.), questioned by Politico’s Elana Schor and CQ Roll Call’s Rachel Oswald … “Q&A”: Author and Saudi Arabian women’s rights activist Manal Al-Sharif

–Washington Times’ “Mack on Politics” weekly politics podcast with Matt Mackowiak (download on iTunes, Google Play, or Stitcher or listen at http://bit.ly/2omgw1D): former U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.).

SUBSCRIBE to the Playbook family: POLITICO Playbook http://politi.co/1M75UbX … New York Playbook http://politi.co/1ON8bqW… Florida Playbook http://politi.co/1OypFe9 … New Jersey Playbook http://politi.co/1HLKltF … Massachusetts Playbook http://politi.co/1Nhtq5v… Illinois Playbook http://politi.co/1N7u5sb … California Playbook http://politi.co/2bLvcPl … Brussels Playbook http://politi.co/1FZeLcw … All our political and policy tipsheets http://politi.co/1M75UbX

Source link

from CapitalistHQ.com https://capitalisthq.com/trump-infrastructure-priority-in-trouble-debt-ceiling-sweetener-a-veterans-bill-inside-the-dscc-retreat-in-marthas-vineyard-jon-karl-elected-whca-prez-for-2019-bday-pau/

#TrumpNews #CapitalistHQ.com

0 notes