Maine Writer

Its about people and issues I care about.

My Photo
Name:
Location: Topsham, MAINE, United States

My blogs are dedicated to the issues I care about. Thank you to all who take the time to read something I've written.

Monday, October 10, 2022

Republicans created a mess for American exceptionalism: Republicans are cult Trumpzis

Echo opinion letter reported in the Independence Bulletin Journal, newspaper, published in Iowa:

I strongly urge area voters to vote a straight Democratic ticket in the coming November elections, from our local candidates right to the top national office.

Let’s face it: is Iowa in a mess or what? The Republican party has controlled Iowa's state legislature since the 2016, election and what has been the result? Our voting rights have been steadily curtailed (early voting days cut, absentee voting requirements stiffened); and social programs and unemployment benefits reduced. State funds to our schools have stalled at 2.5% while inflation is far above that and monies to our state colleges have been reduced, resulting in higher tuition for students. Though nothing was codified during the last legislative session, we had Republican rants to jail teachers, and librarians and the Republican president of the Senate used an obscene gesture in our State Capitol with the comment to Democrats: “Here’s my message!”
Medical professionals and business owners are reacting to the latest failure on the part of Republican Governor Kim Reynolds to fight back against the coronavirus pandemic.

Unfortunately, Republican Governor Kim Reynolds, in the meantime, is boasting of a billion-dollar state treasury balance, while we’re kicking conservation officers out of our state parks (we can’t afford to fix employee housing?) and the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) labeled 11 of our state beaches “swimming not recommended.” She also proposes to take funds from public schools for a tuition program to private schools, which critics warn will result in the closing of schools in the smaller counties. And our Senator Grassley and Congresswoman Hinson are trying to keep their stories straight on whether they voted for the $35 insulin charge or not.

Please mark that ballot straight Democratic!

From Ann O’Loughlin in Independence, Iowa


Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, January 24, 2017

Sean Spicer is now a branded "fake news" presser

Secretary of State's know the voter facts. They know that voter fraud is negligent. It's Russian Hacking, stupid!

Although the White House spin and Donald Trump are obviously orchestrating fake news, reported directly to the professonal White House press corps, in the text of "alternative facts" IOW "lies", Sean Spicer the POTUSTrump presser, has lost his historic credibility. 

In fact, tax payers have hired Spicer to flat out lie because nothing of what he says, regarding anything of urgency, will be believed. Nothing.
Vote, Word, Letters, Scrabble
Voting is the citizens' right- voter fraud is negligent

The Washington Post reports:Sean Spicer just keeps killing his credibility

Sean Spicer should have listened to Ari Fleischer.

After Spicer's flagrant misstatement of Inauguration Day crowd figures over the weekend, Fleischer — a former White House press secretary trying to help the current one — offered some free advice Monday on Fox News.


“As soon as a press secretary gets into statistics and facts, the press is going to fact-check the press secretary,” Fleischer said. “So don't use a fact, don't use a stat, unless you're 100 percent certain you've got it nailed down.”

Simple, right? Don't make trouble for yourself and your president by saying provably false stuff to reporters.

And yet! Spicer stood before reporters on Tuesday and delivered this whopper, in defense of President Trump's bogus claim that massive voter fraud cost him the popular vote in November: “I think there's been studies. There was one that came out of Pew [in] 2008 that showed 14 percent of people who have voted were not citizens.”

It is hard to overstate what a brazen lie this was. I say “lie” — a loaded word that suggests Spicer knew he was telling a falsehood — because it is inconceivable that he believed it to be true. Trump has mischaracterized Pew's research on more than one occasion, and fact-checkers have crushed him for it. There is no way that Spicer, whose job requires him to obsess over media coverage, did not know that this absurd claim has been debunked.

And just think about how ridiculously large that number, 14 percent, really is. Did Spicer really expect anyone — even people who believe, despite a lack of evidence, that voter fraud is a big problem — to buy the idea that 1 in 7 voters is not a U.S. citizen? And that a respectable outfit like the Pew Research Center would have published that kind of garbage?

For the record, Spicer appears to have conflated two different studies, neither of which showed what he said. 

In one, researchers at Old Dominion University surveyed noncitizens in 2008 and 2010 and asked whether they are registered to vote; 14 percent said yes. (Honestly, 2008 and 2010 surveys must be read to be believed as any and all credible statisticians will tell you; but, of course, Spicer used unverifiable data for his own skewed misinformation campaign.)

There are reasons to be skeptical of that figure (explained in detail here), but let's go with it for a minute. 

A conclusion that 14 percent of noncitizens are registered to vote is very different from a conclusion that 14 percent of all voters are noncitizens. Noncitizens represent just 7 percent of the U.S. population. If 14 percent of them are registered to vote, we are talking about 1 percent of voters.

The second study, published by Pew in 2012, concluded that “approximately 24 million registration records, or nearly 13 percent of the national total, are estimated to be inaccurate or no longer valid.” Again, there is a big difference between inaccurate voter rolls and fraudulent ballots. (But the real fact here is that the PEW research never even reported this data!)

Voter registration records can be inaccurate for all kinds of reasons. After Spicer's news conference on Tuesday, I decided to check my registration status in Massachusetts, where I lived before moving to Virginia in the fall of 2015. Guess what? The Massachusetts secretary of state's office still says I'm active in the Bay State. I guess Bill Galvin doesn't know that I moved, which is kind of hurtful; I assumed that he missed seeing my byline in the Boston Globe. (Many people have more than one address but none of them have the mystical gift of bi-location.)

Anyway, like 2.8 million people in the Pew study, I'm apparently registered in more than one state. But that doesn't mean I actually vote in more than one state, and there is no evidence that tons of other people do, either.

Spicer knows this stuff. It's his job to know this stuff. Yet, with his credibility already damaged, he told the White House press corps another fat one on Tuesday.

With phony figures, Spicer is killing his standing among journalists — and it's only the first week of the Trump era.

How many votes did Russian hacking influence?

Labels: ,

Thursday, April 07, 2016

Wisconsin Republican criticizes his party over Voter ID


"It left a pit in my stomach, to think that a party that I had worked for for years and years and years was literally talking and plotting to deny someone, a fellow citizen, their constitutional right,” Todd Allbaugh.
Raxyxtqjbcszva53ywks
Wisconsin's Voter ID law was passed for the purpose of supressing voter turnout for the benefit of Republican candidates.

Todd Allbaugh is one man who finally spoke truth to GOP power- on facebook and reported on "Taking Poings" blog (below):

You wanna know why I left the Republican Party as it exists today? Here it is; this was the last straw: I was in the closed Senate Republican Caucus, when the final round of multiple Voter ID bills were being discussed. A handful of the GOP Senators were giddy about the ramifications and literally singled out the prospects of suppressing minority and college voters. Think about that for a minute. Elected officials planning and happy to help deny a fellow American's constitutional right to vote in order to increase their own chances to hang onto power. A vigorous debate on the ideas wasn't good enough. Inspiring the electorate and relying on their agenda being better to get people to vote for them wasn't good enough. No, they had to take the coward's way out and come up with a plan to suppress the vote under the guise of 'voter fraud.' The truth? There was almost none. Oh wait, GOP Speaker Voss' estranged wife voted twice in both Idaho and WI, and a GOP staffer was caught voting twice. But it was good rhetoric. Yesterday, one of my employees, born in California went to get his WI ID. He was told he couldn't use his CA ID to get a WI ID without his birth certificate which is back in CA. The result? He's not able to vote today. Here's a young man in his early 20's, who is taking part and interested in voting for the first time in his life. He was excited to go to the polls. What kind of a state, a legislature, a political party is it that denies this young man his right? 

The GOP was born out of greater opportunity and equality. Wisconsin, yes the Wisconsin Republican Party, under the leadership of Republican Governor Robert M. 'Fighting Bob' La Follette lead the country in creating greater voting access to its citizens. The WI GOP was seen as a shining example of equality. THAT was the party I joined in the 80's and fought for. That party no longer exists. I don't belong to any party now. I don't think the Dems have all the answers either. But, my God, to watch a party I once fought for deny a young man his voting rights...it boils my blood, leaves a pit in my stomach. It's time for a ‪#GOP_Implosion.

A former top staffer for a Republican legislator in Wisconsin suggested this week that GOP legislators were motivated to pass the state’s tough photo voter ID law because they believed it would help them at the ballot box, an account he expanded on in a Wednesday interview with TPM (Talking Points Memo).

Todd Allbaugh, who served as chief of staff for state Sen. Dale Schultz (R), until the legislator retired in 2015, first made the claims in a Tuesday Facebook post that caught the attention of national voting rights experts.

In the post, Allbaugh recalled a 2011 caucus meeting of GOP state senators about the voter ID legislation. Allbaugh said during that meeting, some Republicans were “giddy” over the legislation's "ramifications" and the effect it would have on minority and young voters.

Once he left politics, Allbaugh opened a Madison, Wisconsin, coffee shop, where TPM (TalkingPointsMemo) reached him over the phone and he elaborated on those claims.

“It just really incensed me that they started talking about this particular bill, and one of the senators got up and said, 

‘We really need to think about the ramifications on certain neighborhoods in Milwaukee and on our college campuses and what this could do for us,’” Allbaugh said. “The phrase ‘voter suppression’ was never used, but it was certainly clear what was meant.”

While Schultz, Allbaugh’s former boss, has notably spoken out against more recent restrictions on voting, he voted for the 2011 bill. According to Allbaugh, at this point in the point of meeting, Schultz brought up his own concerns with the voter ID legislation.

“He was immediately shot down by another senator who said, ‘What I am interested in is getting results here and using the power while we have it, because if the Democrats were in control they would do they same thing to us, so I want to use it while we have it,'” Allbaugh said.

Allbaugh said Schultz left the meeting in frustration after that, while he stayed behind to continue taking notes.

“It left a pit in my stomach to think that a party that I had worked for for years and years and years was literally talking and plotting to deny someone, a fellow citizen, their constitutional right,” Allbaugh said.

Allbaugh told TPM he was stirred to write the initial Facebook post after one of his young employees, who had moved from California to Wisconsin, was unable to vote Tuesday. Albaugh said that because the employee's California ID did not meet the state’s requirements to vote, he was told he needed to show his California birth certificate, which the employee was not going to be able to produce in time.

“When you see the real world ramification, it just sickens you,” Allbaugh said. “I have to tell people what’s going on.”

Schultz was asked about Allbaugh’s Facebook post on Wednesday by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. The former lawmaker said he would not discuss what happened in a closed door meeting, but praised Allbaugh for his "honesty and integrity,” which Schultz said were “beyond reproach.”

By coincidence, after Allbaugh’s Facebook post went up, U.S. Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-WI) told a local TV station that the Wisconsin photo ID law would help Republicans win in November’s election. Grothman served in the state Senate from 2005-2015.

Allbaugh said he didn’t want to name names from his account of the 2011 caucus meeting, but he confirmed that Grothman was in the room.

“He has outed himself," Allbaugh said. "He was one of those that was saying these things."

Grothman's office on Wednesday night did not immediately return a request for comment from TPM.

Labels: , ,

Friday, April 25, 2014

Republicans have no new ideas - many candidates run on fear, misinformation and myths

Pundits are already predicting the 2014 election will be challenging for Democrats and good for Republican candidates. Why? Instead of making hollow predictions, media reports have a responsibility to inform the the public about the ideas and policies defining candidates. Let me list the ideas and policies I see for each party, in a comparison report. After compiling these two quick lists below, I can't find any reason whatsoever for supporting Republican candidates.  

What's most distressing is how Americans are not hearing from the media, in a meaningful way, about how Republican and Democrat candidates are supporting the chance for the middle class to achieve and maintain the American Dream.  

Republican Ideas

1. Cut taxes for the rich

2. Support tax incentives ie corporate welfare for big corporations.

3. Cut social safety net programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid for the poor, veteran’s benefits, Pell grants for poor college students and food stamps.

4. Cut medical coverage for women who need access to health care and contraception.

5. Oppose equal pay for equal work for women and men.

6. Increase defense spending to spend on contracts for corporations that receive tax incentives.

7. Control access to voting by restricting polling hours on voting day and requiring picture ID cards, even though third world countries are able to minimize voter fraud with finger print or thumb prints.

8. Obstruction of job creation investments in the economy to build vital infrastructure like bridges, roads, railroads, high speed rail, public transportation and airports, policies that will benefit and improve the quality of life for the middle class.

9. Oppose universal access to health care.

10. Oppose Obamacare while government workers and elected officials enjoy government funded health insurance.

11. Support for unlimited Second Amendment rights regardless of the number of innocent people who are victims of gun violence.

12. Oppose quick path to citizenship for immigrants and asylum seekers.

Democrat Ideas

1. Share the wealth by supporting a graduated tax system based on income.

2. Assess corporations with a fair tax; eliminate loopholes.

3. Support for the promise made to people who invest in Social Security and Medicare.

4. Create support for people who need public assistance like Medicaid for the disabled, severely and persistently mentally ill and the mentally challenged.

5. Support for universal health care.

6. Support for women’s health and safety net for children’s health programs like CHIP and food stamps.

7. Support for equal pay for equal work “Lilly Ledbetter”

8. Support a strong defense system.

9. Support for veterans who give up their youth to defend America.

10. Expand voting rights for all American citizens.

11. Support investment in America’s infrastructure, bridges, high speed rail, roads, public transportation and the jobs associated with these projects.

12. Support for Obamacare.

13. Support for reasonable gun regulations to prevent the growing public health problem of gun violence.

14. Support for education for all children from pre-school through high school, college or technological institutes.

15. Support for a rapid path to citizenship for all immigrants and asylum seekers.

It makes no sense for Republicans to be declaring the 2014 elections as theirs to loose.  Instead of acting like the rooster at sunrise, the Republicans should be creating ideas rather than reacting to worn out old policies where there is virtually no proof of desirable outcomes.  There's virtually no evidence that any of the Republican ideas on my home made list has created one job or improved the human condition.  

Instead of intimidating voters with picture ID cards and obstructing voters rights, I'd like for all Secretary of State regulations to include asking voters to write, on the ballot, the reason why they're voting for a particular candidate. I suspect a required explanation by voters could create an informed electorate, as well as educate those of us who are mystified to understand why anybody would vote for idea void Republicans.

Labels: , ,

Thursday, January 09, 2014

Liberty at Risk in North Carolina - Time to Read Their State Constitution

Has anybody bothered to read the North Carolina State Constitution recently? I suggest this document be read verbatim at the state legislature.

North Carolina is now asking for government officials' emails to be exempt from disclosure. This is among a litany of assaults on freedoms in North Carolina.

Now, North Carolina is asking a federal judge to keep secret Republican state lawmakers’ communications as they pushed through the nation’s most restrictive voting law last summer.

“They are doing everything they can to try to keep us from finding out what they did and how they did it and who was involved,” Rev. William Barber II, the president of the state’s NAACP chapter, which is challenging the law, told reporters Thursday. “It’s time for what was done in the dark to come into the light.”

This obstruction of North Carolinian freedoms is clearly in contrast to the language in the state's Constitution.  It seems to me, the people in North Carolina, especially the lawmakers including the state's right wing Republican Pat McCrory, should take time to read their own laws.  So, here's some homework for North Carolinians:

PREAMBLE
We, the people of the State of North Carolina, grateful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of Nations, for the preservation of the American Union and the existence of our civil, political and religious liberties, and acknowledging our dependence upon Him for the continuance of those blessings to us and our posterity, do, for the more certain security thereof and for the better government of this State, ordain and establish this Constitution.

ARTICLE I

DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
That the great, general, and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established, and that the relations of this State to the Union and government of the United States and those of the people of this State to the rest of the American people may be defined and affirmed, we do declare that:

Section 1. The equality and rights of persons.
We hold it to be self-evident that all persons are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, the enjoyment of the fruits of their own labor, and the pursuit of happiness.

Sec. 2. Sovereignty of the people.
All political power is vested in and derived from the people; all government of right originates from the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole.

Sec. 3. Internal government of the State.
The people of this State have the inherent, sole, and exclusive right of regulating the internal government and police thereof, and of altering or abolishing their Constitution and form of government whenever it may be necessary to their safety and happiness; but every such right shall be exercised in pursuance of law and consistently with the Constitution of the United States.

Sec. 4. Secession prohibited.
This State shall ever remain a member of the American Union; the people thereof are part of the American nation; there is no right on the part of this State to secede; and all attempts, from whatever source or upon whatever pretext, to dissolve this Union or to sever this Nation, shall be resisted with the whole power of the State.

Sec. 5. Allegiance to the United States.
Every citizen of this State owes paramount allegiance to the Constitution and government of the United States, and no law or ordinance of the State in contravention or subversion thereof can have any binding force.

Sec. 6. Separation of powers.
The legislative, executive, and supreme judicial powers of the State government shall be forever separate and distinct from each other.

Sec. 7. Suspending laws.
All power of suspending laws or the execution of laws by any authority, without the consent of the representatives of the people, is injurious to their rights and shall not be exercised.

Sec. 8. Representation and taxation.
The people of this State shall not be taxed or made subject to the payment of any impost or duty without the consent of themselves or their representatives in the General Assembly, freely given.

Sec. 9. Frequent elections.
For redress of grievances and for amending and strengthening the laws, elections shall be often held.

Sec. 10. Free elections.  All elections shall be free.

Sec. 11. Property qualifications.
As political rights and privileges are not dependent upon or modified by property, no property qualification shall affect the right to vote or hold office.

Sec. 12. Right of assembly and petition.

The people have a right to assemble together to consult for their common good, to instruct their representatives, and to apply to the General Assembly for redress of grievances; but secret political societies are dangerous to the liberties of a free people and shall not be tolerated.

Sec. 13. Religious liberty.
All persons have a natural and inalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences, and no human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience.

Sec. 14. Freedom of speech and press.
Freedom of speech and of the press are two of the great bulwarks of liberty and therefore shall never be restrained, but every person shall be held responsible for their abuse.

Sec. 15. Education.
The people have a right to the privilege of education, and it is the duty of the State to guard and maintain that right.

Sec. 16. Ex post facto laws.
Retrospective laws, punishing acts committed before the existence of such laws and by them only declared criminal, are oppressive, unjust, and incompatible with liberty, and therefore no ex post facto law shall be enacted. No law taxing retrospectively sales, purchases, or other acts previously done shall be enacted.

Sec. 17. Slavery and involuntary servitude.
Slavery is forever prohibited. Involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the parties have been adjudged guilty, is forever prohibited.

Sec. 18. Court shall be open.
All courts shall be open; every person for an injury done him in his lands, goods, person, or reputation shall have remedy by due course of law; and right and justice shall be administered without favor, denial, or delay.

Someone should begin reading this document, from beginning to end, to the people of North Carolina.  Governor McCrory?

Labels: , , ,

Sunday, August 18, 2013

Progressive versus Regressive Politics - Expressive Names Describe Political Divisions

Americans, indeed, most of the world's citizens, are familiar with the polarizing divide between our United States political parties. Democrats are perceived as being "liberal" (whatever that means) and as being different from Republicans, who are perceived as being conservative (whatever that means).  Same old same old.

A newly oriented political observer would need a dictionary and thesaurus to figure out what each party label means.

That's why I'm suggesting we modify the names of political affiliations to either Progressive or Regressive, rather than Democrat or Republican.  One way moves us forward, while the other is a retrofit to policies that have been tried before.

But, nevertheless, a person can be progressive about taxation, for example, while regressive about funding women's access to contraception, for example. These and other unrelated political topics (why women's health is political is beyond me, but, for many, this is the case) could then be sorted out by individuals, rather than party affiliations. 

In fact, the Pro-Reg labels might even have the value added of being educational for people who might be conflicted about where they fall on the political "left" (liberal) to "right" (conservative) spectrum. At the end of this exercise, we can each evaluate where we want to fall on this spectrum.

Let's make two columns:

Progressive 
favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are,especially in political matters: a progressive mayor

Regressive
 obtained from or characterized by backward reasoning

Progressive                                         Regressive                    
Taxation

Supports revenue sharing                       Supports tax cuts for rich
Supports graduated tax system               Hall-Rabushka flat tax   

Women's Health

Supports women's access to health         Contraception should not
care including right to contraception       be government funded

Access to Health Care

Supports universal coverage for              Supports free market
preventative and illness care                   who  pays gets the care

Immigration

Supports path to citizenship                     Severely restricts path to 
for all immigrants                                     citizenship for illegal
                                                                 immigrants

Second Amendment Rights- a Constitutional amendment ratified in 1789

Supports some regulations for the right    Supports everyone
to own military assault multiple                including immigrants
ammunition clip weapons                         owning any guns, of any
                                                                  kind for any purpose

Voting Rights

Every American citizens must                   American citizens
have the right to vote,                                must prove they
one person : one vote                                 have the right to vote
and the opportunity to                                based upon 
execute this                                                inconsistent state
inalienable right in                                      promulgated criteria
an efficient and timely
manner

This is an abbreviated list of the Progressive-Regressive spectrum issues, but you can easily get the gist.

In summary, it will be difficult for people of intellect to submit to being Regressive when the Progressive point of view is clearly the position of enlightenment.  

If America is to progress in the enlightenment set forth by our esteemed Founding Fathers, we must block the Regressive movement.  A two party system needs Progressives on both sides of the political spectrum, especially when the Regressives are clearly obstructing our advancement as a civilized nation.

So, let's now describe Democrats and Republicans as both being progressives if we can focus on:


  •  a future where equal opportunity is available to everyone, regardless of citizenship status; 
  • where voting rights are respected for all American citizens ages 18 and older; 
  • where the tax policy is benevolent to the poor and fair to the middle class; 
  • where quality and affordable health care is available to all;
  • and the Second Amendment is amended to protect innocent people from preventable gun violence.
Let's remove party labels and, instead, subscribe to all of the above.
That's progress! 

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Monday, August 12, 2013

A Proposed Twenty First Century Bill of Rights

After 220 years, Americans might consider updating the US Bill of Rights.  Although many amendments have been added to the Constitution since 1789, the Bill of Rights, the original 10, are nearly sacred to those who adhere to the literal intent of law. They're sort of like a revised Ten Commandments of the Old Testament.  So, since the original 10 were adopted in 1789, let's modernize this valuable document, to assure newly identified inalienable human rights are protected, 
....beginning with voting rights.

In fact, our nation's Founding Fathers and authors of the Bill of Rights even foresaw the need for revisions.  Upon reading the 10 amendments to the US Constitution, it occurs to me the 10th tenet opens the door to revisions and updates, as needed:  

Tenth Amendment


Here are the original 10, adopted in 1789. Following the original are some recommended updates, consistent with my interpretation of the intention of the last phrase of the tenth:

First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
 Second Amendment
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Third Amendment  (maybe this one could be eliminated in a proposed update?)

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Fourth Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
 Fifth Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
 Sixth Amendment
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Seventh Amendment

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
 Eighth Amendment
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Ninth Amendment

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Tenth Amendment

Second Amendment proposed modernization - A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. All right authorized by the right to bear arms shall be consistent with protecting public safety and shall not infringe on the right of law enforcement to protect the public from preventable harm caused by aggressive gun violence.

Eleventh Proposed Amendment- Every American citizens has the right to vote, when each can provide the least restrictive or onerous proof of such right. Americans shall have access to voting in an expedient environment or such place deemed publicly and safely accessible to support the freedom to vote.

Twelfth Proposed Amendment - Every American citizen is guaranteed the right to access health care including reproductive health care.

Thirteenth Proposed Amendment: - American citizens are provided freedom from discrimination for age, race, religion, gender, perceived or actual disabilities and social status, for the purposes of employment and to receive benefits consistent with quality of life and as beneficiaries of actuarial products.

Fourteenth Proposed Amendment:  All children living in the United States are guaranteed the right to access education consistent with the values put forth by the US Constitution and incorporating these principle amendments forthwith.

Fiftieth Proposed Amendment:  Americans must be assured the right to public safety through support of interventions to protect against preventable illnesses and violence from military assault weapons owned by civilians who are not employed by a militia.

Labels: , , ,

Saturday, August 10, 2013

Wearing Republicans Down By Turning Up the Political Heat

Physicists understand how energy creates heat. Americans need some focused heat put on Republicans who continue obstructing President Obama.  

Included in this blog is a list of "sure to inspire" ideas to light a fire under Americans and produce some energy to push back on the obstructionist Congressional Republicans.


Let's blast through the political obstruction in Congress.

But, President Obama is the leader who must ignite the inspiration.

His leadership is essential to fire up Democrats who must turn up the heat to teach Republicans about their responsibility to help others.  

In leading, President Obama must stop being politically nice.  

Along with giving inspired speeches, President Obama needs to lead by applying strategic energy to wear down the Grumpy Old Party's positions against nearly everything. He must put a fire under the momentum needed to launch progressive policies.  

Rocket scientists understand the physics of putting a rocket into the atmosphere.  It takes a great deal of energy to launch a rocket. Likewise, it's going to take a lot more energy than I see coming from President Obama to fire up Democrats for the purpose of launching obstructionist Republicans out of office, so Americans can, finally, get our government working for the people again.

Americans can get fired up about the following policy list, regardless of political party, if President Obama will ignite us:

1.  No to shutting down government: A Constitutional ban should be proposed to prohibit shutting down the Federal government for any reason.  Republicans want to shut down government so they can grandstand on the backs of middle class Americans, who need federal government services, as well as those employed to help us, including the US military.  Any political party should be held in contempt of their fiduciary responsibilities by even suggesting a government shut down for any reason. 

2.  Pay for work:  Congressional pay and benefits should be calculated by the actual hours worked.  Americans should put Congress on a time clock, along with the office staffs they employ. Moreover, the benefits Congress accrues should be adjusted according to their hours worked, including their health insurance premiums.

3.  Voting rights:  Americans citizens should be encouraged to vote in all elections.  Polling stations should never have lines longer than five minutes long so voters can conveniently cast their ballots without taking unnecessary amounts of  time away from their work to do so.

4.  Social Security and Medicare- A Constitutional Amendment should be adopted to require all beneficiaries who have paid their 40 quarters into the Social Security and Medicare benefits to be assured, without any doubt whatsoever, that their will see a return on their investment in pension income and health care coverage.

5.   Women's reproductive health care -  All women should be provided access to health care, regardless of their citizenship status: women who are American citizens, immigrants, illegal immigrants or seeking asylum.  This care should include reproductive health including the right to family planning services. Period.

6.  Taxation -  All Americans should be taxed at a graduated rate we can each afford and no exemptions for the rich. 

7.  Guns- Americans should demonstrate a reasonable reason why we need to own assault weapons.  In other words, rifles and weapons capable of automatic fire should be restricted to the military and public safety personnel. 

8.  Education - All children should be guaranteed the right to access quality education, consistent with their life's goals toward becoming productive citizens, who will contribute to improving our nation's economy and their own personal well being.

9.  Natural disasters-  All our nation's communities should know we're one family when responding to national disasters like devastating hurricanes, out of control wild fires, paralyzing blizzards, traumatic volcanoes,  massive earthquakes or cluster F4 and F5 tornado outbreaks.

This is an abbreviated list.  A potential number 10 could go on to call for the eradication of social, racial and gender discrimination.  

Human condition issues including health and economic security should be among our inalienable rights as Americans.  

Democrats need to turn up the heat on obstructionist Republicans who won't support progressive policies to improve our human condition.  We must wear down Republicans who talk about austerity while collecting salaries and benefits for their four day work weeks and five week summer vacations.  

Former Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell (D) said on MSNBC Morning Joe that he wore down his opponents in the capital Harrisburg when he wanted to push his progressive initiatives. Likewise, Democrats must wear down Republicans by turning up the political heat against right wing extremism.  We must stop nihilistic thinking like "shutting down government" and other regressive right wing initiatives.  And President Obama must generate leadership focused on this purpose.

Americans must stand against obstructionist Republicans in Congress. We must wear down their right wing extremism before uncontrollable obstructionists burn away our American human and civil rights.  Better yet, let's fire up the electorate to vote them all out of office.

Labels: , , , , ,

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

Attorney General Holder Speech Explains Being a Black Man Stalked

Although Americans must accept the Zimmerman jury's innocent verdict, the decision nevertheless sends cold shivers through blacks who easily identify with the victim Trayvon Martin. The verdict is a chilling reminder about the decades before civil rights, when all white juries sat in judgement of blacks.

Every Black person in America is feeling the pain of Treyvon Martin's preventable death last year.  This young Florida youth was stalked and killed by George Zimmerman, who was then found innocent, in a jury trial, of manslaughter.  Regardless of whether or not the killing of Trayvon Martin was racially motivated, the fact is, the death raised the horrible specter of the days when blacks were terrorized by vigilantes in the pre civil rights days.

Attorney General Eric Holder spoke to the NAACP about his own experience growing up, when his father spoke to him about being a young black man:

"Now I'm sure my father felt certain at that time that my parents' generation would be the last that had to worry about such things for their children," said Attorney General Holder in a speech today to the NAACP.

In his NAACP speech, Attorney General explains: (Stand Your Ground)....
"These laws try to fix something that was never broken. There has always been a legal defense for using deadly force if -- and the "if" is important -- if no safe retreat is available."

General Eric Holder's speech was a personal reflection about the Zimmerman manslaughter trial:

A full text of Holder's speech is available at this link and follows:

Now, I am proud to be in such good company this afternoon, among so many obvious friends, courageous civil rights leaders like Julian Bond -- (cheers, applause) -- and passionate men and women who have dedicated themselves to bringing our nation together, addressing common challenges and focusing attention on the problems and inequities that too many of our citizens continue to face.
Even as this convention proceeds, we are all mindful of the tragic and unnecessary shooting death of Trayvon Martin last year in Sanford, Florida, just a short distance from here, and we're also aware of the state trial that reached its conclusion on Saturday evening. Today I'd like to join President Obama in urging all Americans to recognize that, as he said, we are a nation of laws, and the jury has spoken.
I know the NAACP and its members are deeply are deeply -- and rightly -- concerned about this case, as passionate civil rights leaders, as engaged citizens and most of all as parents.
This afternoon I want to assure you of two things: I am concerned about this case and -- (cheers, applause) -- and as we confirmed last spring, the Justice Department has an open investigation into it.
Now -- (applause) -- while that inquiry is ongoing, I can promise that the Department of Justice will consider all available information before determining what action to take.
But independent of the legal determination that will be made, I believe this tragedy provides yet another opportunity for our nation to speak honestly -- honestly -- and openly about the complicated and emotional (sic), charged issues that this case has raised.
Years ago, some of these same issues drove my father to sit down with me to have a conversation -- which is no doubt familiar to many of you -- about how, as a young black man, I should interact with the police, what to say and how to conduct myself if I was ever stopped or confronted in a way that I thought was unwarranted.
Now I'm sure my father felt certain at that time that my parents' generation would be the last that had to worry about such things for their children.
Since those days, our country has indeed changed for the better. The fact that I stand before you as the 82nd attorney general of the United States, serving in the administration of our first African American president, proves that. Yet, for all the progress that we've seen, recent events demonstrate that we still have much more work to do and much further to go.
The news of Trayvon Martin's death last year, and the discussions that have taken place since then, reminded me of my father's words so many years ago and they brought me back to a number of experiences I had as a young man, when I was pulled over twice and my car searched on the New Jersey Turnpike when I'm sure I wasn't speeding, or when I was stopped by a police officer while simply running to a catch a movie, at night in Georgetown, in Washington, D.C. I was, at the time of that last incident, a federal prosecutor. (Laughter, applause.)
So Trayvon's death last spring caused me to sit down to have a conversation with my own 15-year-old son, like my dad did with me. This was a father-son tradition I hoped would not need to be handed down. But as a father who loves his son and who is more knowing in the ways of the world, I had to do this to protect my boy. I am his father, and it is my responsibility, not to burden him with the baggage of eras long gone, but to make him aware of the world that he must still confront. This -- (applause). This is a sad reality in a nation that is changing for the better in so many ways.
As important as it was, I am determined to do everything in my power to ensure that the kind of talk I had with my son isn't the only conversation that we engage in as a result of these tragic events.
In the days leading up to this weekend's verdict, some predicted and prepared for riots and waves of civil unrest across the country. Some feared that the anger of those who disagreed with the jury might overshadow and obscure the issues at the heart of this case. But the people of Sanford, and, for the most part, thousands of others across America, rejected this destructive past. They proved -- (applause) -- they proved wrong those who doubted their commitment to the rule of law.
And across America, diverse groups of citizens, from all races, backgrounds and walks of life, are instead overwhelmingly making their voices heard, as American citizens have the right to do, through peaceful protests, rallies and vigils designed to inspire responsible debate, not to incite violence and division; and those who conduct themselves in a contrary manner do not honor the memory of Trayvon Martin.
I hope -- (applause) -- I hope that we will continue to approach this necessarily difficult dialogue with the same dignity that those who have lost the most, Trayvon's parents, with the same dignity that they have demonstrated throughout the last year and especially over the past few days. We should be proud of those two people. (Applause.) They suffered a pain that no parent should have to endure, and one that I, as a father, cannot begin to conceive. As we embrace their example and as we hold them in our prayers, we must not forgo this opportunity to better understand one another, and we must not fail to seize this chance to improve this nation that we cherish.
Today, starting here and starting now, it's time to commit ourselves to a respectful, responsible dialogue about issues of justice and equality so we can meet division and confusion with understanding, with compassion and ultimately with truth, however hard that is.
It's time to strengthen our collective resolve to combat gun violence, but also time to combat violence involving or directed toward our children, so we can prevent future tragedies. (Applause.) And we must confront the underlying attitudes, the mistaken beliefs and the unfortunate stereotypes that serve too often as the basis for police action and private judgments.
Separate and apart from the case that has drawn the nation's attention, it's time to question laws that senselessly expand the concept of self-defense and sow dangerous conflict in our neighborhoods. (Cheers, applause.) These laws try to fix something that was never broken. There has always been a legal defense for using deadly force if -- and the "if" is important -- if no safe retreat is available.
But we must examine laws that take this further by eliminating the common-sense and age-old requirement that people who feel threatened have a duty to retreat, outside their home, if they can do so safely. By allowing and perhaps encouraging violent situations to escalate in public, such laws undermine public safety.
The list of resulting tragedies is long and, unfortunately, has victimized too many who are innocent. It is our collective obligation; we must stand OUR ground to ensure -- (cheers, applause, music) -- we must stand our ground to ensure that our laws reduce violence, and take a hard look at laws that contribute to more violence than they prevent.
We must also seek a dialogue on attitudes about violence and disparities that are too commonly swept under the rug, by honoring the finest traditions established by generations of NAACP leaders and other nonviolent advocates throughout history; and by paying tribute to the young man who lost his life here last year, and so many others whose futures have been cut short in other incidents of gun violence, that pass too often unnoticed, in our streets. (Applause.) And we must do so by engaging with one another in a way that is at once peaceful, inclusive, respectful and strong.
As we move forward together, I want to assure you that the Department of Justice will continue to act in a manner that is consistent with the facts and the law. We will not be afraid. We are committed -- (applause) -- we are committed to doing everything possible to ensure that in every case, in every circumstance and in every community, justice must be done. (Applause.)
For more than a century, this organization, founded in 1909, the NAACP has led efforts to do just that, standing on the front lines of our fight to ensure security, opportunity, and equal treatment under law.
Especially in times of need and moments of danger, you have dared to seek opportunities for progress and growth, challenging this nation to aim higher, to become better, and to move ever closer to its founding ideals.
Under the banner of the NAACP, courageous men and women like W.E.B. DuBois, Walter White, Charles Hamilton Houston, Ida B. Wells, Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, Jr. and countless others whose names may be less familiar but whose contributions are no less important have raised their voices to advance our common pursuit of a more perfect union.
Their stories prove that today's civil rights leaders can best honor the progress of the last century by planning for the challenges of the next. Their examples remind us that, as recent events illustrate, our work is far from over. And it's time to acknowledge, once again, that we have much more to do.
After all, we come together today in another moment of need, during a year defined by historic milestones, including just last month the 50th anniversary of the infamous "stand in the schoolhouse door," when two brave young students enlisted the advice of NAACP lawyers, the support of the Justice Department and the protection of the National Guard to step past Governor George Wallace and to integrate the University of Alabama -- (applause) -- 50 years ago last month.
One of those students, Vivian Malone, would much later become my sister-in-law. (Cheers, applause.) Although she passed away several years ago -- much too soon -- her courage made a strong impression on me when I was a young man. Her stories and others like it drove me to dream of a career in public service and led me to spend my first summer in law school working at the NAACP's legal defense fund. (Cheers, applause.)
And Vivian's memory inspires me to think often of the historic speech that President John F. Kennedy delivered on that fateful night when she integrated the University of Alabama 50 years ago last month, when he addressed the American people; expressed his support for Vivian and her classmate, James Hood; and described the cause of civil rights as a moral issue and, to use his words, that -- "as old as the Scriptures and as clear as the Constitution."
In that extraordinary moment, President Kennedy urged his fellow citizens to refuse to accept that anyone could be denied opportunity, denied education or denied the future of their choosing just because of the color of their skin. And he called on Congress to pass sweeping civil rights legislation, outlining a series of proposals that would later be included in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Once signed into law by his successor, President Lyndon Johnson, these proposals affirmed and codified into law the greatest of American ideals: that all are created equal. They established -- (applause) -- they established protections for the rights to which every citizen and every eligible voter is entitled. And they came to represent nothing less than the foundation of modern civil rights law.
Now, unfortunately, last month an important piece of this foundation was chipped away when the Supreme Court invalidated a key part of the Voting Rights Act.
Over the years, and significantly, and in the past 18 months, this provision, called pre-clearance, allowed the department to take swift action against numerous jurisdictions that adopted rules or procedures with either a discriminatory purpose or effect.
It served as a potent tool for addressing inequities in our elections system. And it proved the effectiveness of a legal mechanism that puts on hold any new voting changes until they have been subjected to a fair and thorough review.
Let me be clear: This was a deeply disappointing and flawed decision.

it dealt a serious setback to the cause of voting rights. And like all of you, I strongly disagree with the court's action. Aster all -- after all, as we've seen over the last 18 months, numerous successful decisions in the department's Voting Rights Act cases have proven that, far from being an antiquated relic of a bygone era, such a process frequently resulted in approvals for fair and impartial voting changes, while allowing the department to work with jurisdictions to address problems wherever they occur.
For instance, just last year a federal court noted the "vital function" that preclearance played in protecting black voters who would have been disproportionately impacted by a photo ID law in South Carolina. Because of the department's engagement with the state during the administrative review and later litigation, South Carolina officials changed how their new voting statute will be implemented in future elections and to eliminate what would otherwise have been a dramatic discriminatory effect.
Another court cited the Voting Rights Act in blocking a Texas congressional redistricting map that would have discriminated against Latino voters, noting that the parties -- and this is a quote -- "provided more evidence of discriminatory intent than we have space, or need, to address here," unquote. That's a federal court.
These cases and many others illustrate that these problems are real.
They are significant. They corrode the foundations of our democracy. And they are of today, not yesterday. In fact, despite last month's ruling, every member of the Supreme Court has agreed that, as the chief justice wrote, and I will quote again, "Voting discrimination still exists; no one doubts that," unquote. That's the chief justice. Therefore, the struggle for voting rights cannot be relegated to the pages of history. And this is why protecting the fundamental right to vote for all Americans will continue to be a top priority for the Department of Justice so long as I have the privilege of serving as the attorney general of the United States. (Cheers, applause.)
It's also why, although I remain disappointed with this outcome, I believe we must regard it not as a defeat but as a rare and historic opportunity: for Congress to consider new legislation restoring and even strengthening modern voting protections in a manner that's consistent with the record established by one of the most effective civil rights laws in American history.
After all, in the nearly half-century since its passage, the Voting Rights Act enjoyed broad, bipartisan support on Capitol Hill as well as in the executive branch. Its most recent authorization passed Congress with near-unanimous support in 2006 and was signed into law by President Bush, just as prior reauthorizations had been signed by Presidents Reagan, Ford and Nixon -- Republicans. (Cheers, applause.)


This is because providing fair and equal access to the ballot box has never been a partisan issue. It is an American issue. (Cheers, applause.)

It's about the core values that define us as a nation and who we say we are as a people.

But whatever solutions our congressional leaders consider, I urge them to bear in mind as they move forward that the right to vote is both a guarantee and a sacred duty, conferred by citizenship and protected by the United States Constitution. Quite simply, Congress must take steps to ensure that every eligible American has equal access to the polls. (Applause.)

In the meantime the Justice Department will continue to monitor jurisdictions around the country for any changes, any changes that may hamper voting rights. We will not hesitate to take aggressive action, using every tool that remains available to us against any jurisdiction that attempts to take advantage of the Supreme Court's ruling by hindering eligible citizens' free and fair exercise of the franchise.

We also will -- we will also not wait for congressional action to refine and to refocus our current enforcement efforts. In fact, I am announcing today that I have directed the department's Civil Rights Division to shift resources to the enforcement of Voting Rights Act provisions that were not affected by the Supreme Court's ruling -- (cheers, applause, music) -- to move those resources of the part of the division and to the parts of the act that were not affected by the Supreme Court's ruling, including Section 2, which prohibits voting discrimination based on race, color, or language, in addition to other federal voting rights laws.

It is clear that our work is anything but complete. Our cause is not yet fulfilled. And for all the progress that we've made over the last 104 years, our nation's journey along the road to equality and opportunity is far from over.

This journey goes on every day in the efforts of those who seek to extend the legacy that our predecessors have established by combating violence and realizing America's founding and enduring promise of equal justice under law. It goes on in the steadfast commitment of my colleagues throughout the Justice Department and the entire Obama administration to prevent all types of civil rights violations. Most of all, it goes on in the passionate advocacy of concerned, dedicated and ultimately hopeful men and women in and far beyond this room, the members and leaders of America's oldest and largest civil rights organization. (Applause.)

Make no mistake: The NAACP's work is not just historically relevant. It is and will always be a vital and contemporary part of what makes this country truly exceptional.

So -- (applause) -- let us pledge that we will honor heroes like Dr. King, Medgar Evers, my Vivian Malone and so many others who have struggled, sacrificed and died -- died -- for the freedoms we now enjoy by zealously guarding the progress they achieved and matching their contributions with our own.

Above all, let us act with optimism and without delay to seize the really breathtaking opportunities now before us to see that justice is done and strengthen our nation's long tradition of increasing opportunity and inclusion and to continue the work that constitutes our shared purpose and must always remain our common cause: the enduring pursuit of a more equitable, more just and more perfect union.

Thank you all very much. (Cheers, applause.)




Labels: , ,

Monday, June 17, 2013

Supreme Court Finally Agrees - Proof of Citizenship not Required for Voter Registration

Arizona citizens voted to require proof of citizenship for voter registration, in spite of decades of voting without such evidence being required. Now the Supreme Count has, rightly, stricken down this requirement.

Let's be realistic, Arizona voters have gone to the polls without proof of citizenship, ever since 1912, when it become a state.  Meanwhile, Arizona has always had a growing number of residents and citizens who originally came from Mexico or Latin America.  What's different now is partisan politics.   

A recent law approved by Arizona's voters was intended to curtail newly immigrated Democratic voters (many were Hispanic), by intimidating them into not registering.  

Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court on Monday tossed out a provision in Arizona's voter registration law that required proof of citizenship. In a 7-2 majority ruling, the Supreme Court said the state's voter-approved Proposition 200 interfered with federal law designed to make voter registration easier.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, a year ago, blocked the Arizona law from being enforced, while the high court decided internally whether to accept pending appeals for review. The ballot measure was passed in 2004 and has been lingering in the federal courts ever since.

In the election 2000, the Supreme Court created controversy and skepticism with the ludicrous Gore vs Bush ruling, by ignoring the popular vote and ruling to stop the ballot counting in Florida. Vice-President Gore won the popular vote in 2000, but lost the election, because Florida ballots were unable to be counted and the electoral vote was tipped for a Bush win.  

Yet, voters rights were supported in today's court ruling, demonstrating an intention to protect the fundamental DNA of democracy - the voter's right to vote.  

In fact, the Motor Voter Law, (National Voter Registration Act of 1993) that enables prospective voters to register when they obtain or renew a driver's license, will stand, at least for the foreseeable future.  Cumbersome obstructions, meant to intimidate prospective minority voters, can be monitored by voting rights activists while the Democrats can begin to register new voters.

Monday's Supreme Court ruling, striking parts of Arizona's onerous voter law, is a triumph for democracy- which is fundamentally about the right to vote.  

Strategically, Democrats might experience a breath of new political oxygen when the growing number of immigrant citizens are registered as party supporters. After all, Republicans are clearly not demonstrating support for new citizens voting rights. Therefore,  why would any new citizen want to register with a political party that doesn't support the voting rights?

Immigrants are clearly the new face of America. Nevertheless, Republicans don't want the nation's changing demographics to become voting Democrats.  Incredulously, the Republicans aren't helping to change the minds of the people who are politically victimized by proposed repressive voting laws.

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) gets a broken clock ie, right twice a day, award, when he said, on the June 16th Sunday talk shows:  Republicans are in a demographic death spiral, unless the party supports immigration reform.  In my mind, immigration reform must  allow for a path to citizenship for legal immigrants, and thereby, allow voter registration, without intimidating processes to demonstrate citizenship.

Labels: , ,