Daily Archives: April 30, 2017

ATLANTA -- Georgia, where President Trump visited Friday, has voted Republican in the last six presidential elections. But there is a new movement to turn the red state blue, led by women speaking up for the first time.

Jen Cox, a 46-year-old realtor and mother of four, suddenly found her political voice -- the liberal one she muted for years living in Cobb County, a suburb of Atlanta.

Play Video

The special election in Georgia's sixth congressional district is now headed to a runoff in June. The race has captured national attention, and b...

"I was afraid that it would affect even perhaps my kids' relationships with their friends," Cox said. "We were all making a lot of assumptions that terrible things would happen if we came out as liberals."

Now, the blues have "absolutely" outed themselves, Cox said.

She had never been politically active, but when women nationwide rallied in January to protest Mr. Trump's election, Cox and her daughter joined 60,000 demonstrators in downtown Atlanta.

Seven weeks ago, on Facebook, she launched Pave It Blue, a grassroots organization for frustrated progressive women like her.

The Women's March on Jan. 21, 2017.

CBS News

"Now, just over a month later, we're at almost 2,000. And again, all local women," Cox said.

Pave It Blue's first goal is helping elect Jon Ossoff, a local Democrat running in a congressional runoff election in June.

Karin Agard, a Bermuda native who became a U.S. citizen last month, said the effort is because of Mr. Trump.

"All of it is President Trump," Agard said. "I don't think they represent me or my family. And I need someone in office to create some balance and represent me."

Jen Cox, who lives in a conservative suburb of Atlanta, has found her liberal voice.

CBS News

Cox says Mr. Trump's first 100 days have been anti-immigrant, anti-women and un-American.

"It's our responsibility to stand up to that, to speak out against it. If not us, who?" Cox said.

Pave It Blue's goal is to turn red districts to blue ones and to get women running for local office. And now that they found their voice, these liberal women say they are going to keep speaking up and speaking out.

2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Read more:

Can Georgia's dedicated liberal women turn red state blue ...

The morning after the first of what seems likely to be an annual comic event, Samantha Bee has no regrets. Dropping by CNNs State of the Union for a chat with Jake Tapper, a happyBee pretty much rolled her eyes atany notion of being asmug liberal.

How does it feel to be the face of the problem? asked Tapper, who had appeared in a very funny taped bit on Bees Not the White House Correspondents Dinner special last night. (Watch todaysvideo above).

Tapper referenced an article by New York Timesconservative columnist Ross Douthat that said Hillary Clinton had a Samantha Bee Problem, as in,Clinton was too closely aligned with Bees ascendant social liberalism.

So flattering! Bee laughedat one point during the good-natured interview. Asked if there was a smug liberal problem, Bee didnt seem to mind one way or the other.

I do the show for me, she said of her Trump-lashing comedy show Full Frontal, and for people like me. And I dont really care how the rest of the world sees it, quite frankly. The TBS star (TBS and CNN are sister stations) continued, We birth it and then the world receives it however they want to receive it.

As for Douthats column from last fall, Bee chuckledand said, One persons opinion. One wonderful chap.

Excerpt from:

Morning After: Samantha Bee Shrugs Off Jake Tapper's Smug Liberal Question - Deadline

The Liberal government is moving to break a month-old deadlock over parliamentary reform, dropping some proposals that had raised opposition concerns, but nonetheless seeming readyto make changes to the way the House of Commons works, with or without oppositionsupport.

The government's intention is outlined in a letter from Government House leaderBardishChaggerto her Conservative and New Democrat counterparts that was delivered on Sunday.

In the letter, Chagger says the government will introduce amotion in the House that includes a set of reforms that were promised in the last Liberal campaign platform, including changes to question period,the consideration of omnibus legislation,and the process through which MPs approve government spending.

Other proposals, some of them controversial, will be dropped and a committee study, which was being filibustered by the opposition, will be abandoned.

The new motion is to be introduced before the House adjourns for the summer in June.

The Liberals, with a majority of seats in the House, would be able to approve the changes without the support of MPs in other parties, a possibility that has been at the heart of a messy dispute between the government and opposition.

"In the last election, Canadians were tired of how Stephen Harper's Conservatives had abused Parliament, so we really offered them real change and that's where some of our campaign commitments came from," Chagger said in an interview on Sunday.

"We have a mandate to really advance those changes and we really do want to deliver on the commitments that we've made to Canadians."

Repeating an argument the government has made on this issue, she said the Liberals "will not give the Conservatives a veto over any of our campaign commitments."

Chagger says she is interested in a "meaningful debate" and argues that the changes included in the motion will make the government more accountable to Parliament. But she suggests the government is committed to delivering on its promises of reform, regardless of opposition support.

Conservative House leader Candice Bergen said the motion will not be warmly received.

"I think what's happened is the Liberals have been hearing ... from Canadians that Canadians are not impressed with the arrogance of this government, the arrogance of this prime minister, that he thinks he can ram these changes through. And so they are scrambling and trying to do something," Bergen said in an interview on Sunday.

They are doing exactly the same thing though and it's not going to work. It's certainly not going to be a positive reception from us and the NDP, and I don't think overall Canadians will be receptive."

Bergen maintains that the rules of Parliament should only be changed with all-party consensus.

NDP House leader Murray Rankin was similarly unimpressed.

"For the past few weeks, the Liberals have tried to claim that all they've wanted was a discussion," Rankin said in a statement. "Well, they have just announced that they will be unilaterally forcing through changes to the way our Parliament works, largely just to suit themselves. Discussion was always just a pretence it just took them a while to admit it. It's clear now that the emperor has no clothes."

The parties have been at odds for more than a month, since the Liberals released a discussion paper on reform and proposed that the House committee on procedure take up a study of possible changes.

Conservatives and New Democrats expressed concerns about some of the ideas raised by the Liberals, including a new procedure to schedule debate in the House and limits onthe ability of MPs to delay committee business.

The opposition alsoalleged that the government was preparing to force the changes on MPs anddemanded that the government agree in advance to only implement reforms if all-party agreement could be found.

The Liberals refused and Conservatives and New Democrats responded by filibustering the proceedings at the committee, preventing a study from starting.

That protest spread to the House of Commons, where Conservatives used procedural maneuvres to delay business. Two weeks ago, an unrelated debate in the House became a filibuster that tied up the chamber and could continue when the House resumes sitting on Monday.

In deciding to move a motion that puts their platform commitments to a vote, the Liberals will drop their pursuit of a larger committee study.

The new government motion has not yet been tabled, but the Liberal platform proposed:

The Liberals also said they would not abuse prorogation and have since proposed a new procedure for proroguing Parliament.

On Sunday, Bergen said the Conservatives are concerned that changing question period could result in the prime minister appearing only once per week. The Liberals have said that that is not their intention.

The Conservatives are also concerned that changes to the estimates process for reviewing spending could make it harder for the opposition to scrutinize the government.

Liberal MPs are generally expected to support the government on votes in the House that relate to platform commitments.

The government isabandoning itssuggestion of a new mechanism for scheduling House business (known as "programming.")But Chagger warns that, instead, the government will be relying more often on a procedure known as time allocation, which allows the government to cap the time for debate.

"We believe in the role Parliament plays to have constructive debate of legislation and I will always strive to find out from the opposition how much time is needed for debate," Chagger says. "But if there is no agreement, we will have to use time allocation more often."

The Liberal motion will also not include a proposal to eliminate the abbreviated sittings of the House that take place on Fridays and reapportionthat time to other days, a suggestion that opposition parties have criticized.

The Liberals believe it would be better for MPs to be able to be in their ridings on Friday. Opposition MPs have complained that doing away with the Friday sitting would deprive the opposition of a day to question the government (though sparsely attended, a session of question period is conducted on Friday mornings).

The Liberals say they will discuss the proposal within their caucus and ask that the Conservatives and New Democrats do likewise.

The rest is here:

Liberals drop some proposals, but seem ready to move ahead with reform to Parliament - CBC.ca

Updated May 01, 2017 11:57:58

Long-serving Liberal MP Duncan McFetridge is quitting the party to sit on the crossbenches of the South Australian Parliament after narrowly losing a preselection fight for his Adelaide electorate of Morphett.

Dr McFetridge told the ABC he would take a "few days off" before making a formal statement to Parliament next week.

He would not say if he planned to contest the next election as an independent.

"I have not made any plans. I am having a lot of discussion with supporters as to which direction I take," he said.

Dr McFetridge has been a member of State Parliament for about 15 years and held a range of shadow portfolios during the Liberals' years in opposition.

He had gone into last month's preselection fight with the public backing of party leader Steven Marshall but lost by a single vote, after a three-way contest.

South Australian voters will go to the polls next March, with the current Mayor of Holdfast Bay, Stephen Patterson, to contest Morphett for the Liberals.

In Labor ranks, party veteran Frances Bedford quit the ALP recently after Health Minister Jack Snelling was endorsed as the candidate for Florey for next year's election.

She said she would remain the local member until at least election time.

Mr Snelling is the member for the neighbouring Playford electorate, but is shifting because of the boundary changes from a recent redistribution.

Topics: liberals, political-parties, states-and-territories, government-and-politics, glenelg-5045, adelaide-5000, sa

First posted May 01, 2017 11:44:32

Read the original:

Duncan McFetridge quits Liberal Party after Morphett preselection loss - ABC Online

The Peoples Climate March on Saturday in the nations capital had a powerful billionaire behind it: Democratic Party donor George Soros.

Mr. Soros, who heads the Open Society Foundations, contributed over $36 million between 2000 and 2014 to 18 of the 55 organizations on the marchs steering committee, according to an analysis released Friday by the conservative Media Research Center.

Six of the groups received during that time more than $1 million each: the Center for Community Change, the NAACP, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Peoples Action, Public Citizen and the Union of Concerned Scientists.

The Peoples Climate March, which came a week after another climate-themed anti-Trump event, the March for Science, ran along Pennsylvania Ave. and ended by surrounding the White House in order to drown out all of the climate-denying nonsense that has been coming out of this administration.

While some of its partners are climate change organizations like NextGen Climate, founded by top Democratic donor Tom Steyer, the march also was heavily backed by labor unions and social justice groups such as Color of Change, which also is backed by Mr. Soros.

Only three of the six organizations on the steering committee NRDC, Public Citizen and UCS actually have anything climate-related in their individual missions, the Media Research Center reported.

The presence of many nonclimate-related organizations leading the march indicated that this climate march (just like the March for Science and the Womens March) is not about a single issue, but about attacking the new administration, MRCs Aly Nielsen said.

She pointed to the marchs usual checklist of liberal policy priorities, such as labor union rights, a minimum wage increase and a halt to attacks on immigrants.

Peoples Climate March organizers made no secret of their antipathy for President Trump, calling for climate, jobs and justice as an alternative to Trumps disastrous agenda.

Trumps game plan has been to relentlessly attack our communities and shock us into despair, march organizers said in a post. It hasnt worked because our people-powered movement is stronger than he is together, the resistance stopped his attempts to overturn the Affordable Care Act and stymied his despicable Muslim ban.

Mr. Soros, a longtime top donor to Democrats and left-wing causes, contributed nearly $10 million to Priorities USA Action, the primary super PAC supporting Mr. Trumps opponent, Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, in the 2016 election cycle, according to Open Secrets.

The march was held on the 100th day of the Trump administration.

View post:

Climate March donated to by liberal billionaire George Soros - Washington Times

Let it never be said Stephen McNeil was afraid to stand up to unions.

Protesters circling Province House, chanting "Steee-vannn" and waving signs, were one of the hallmarks of the Liberal leader's first term as premier. More often than not, labour-related legislation was the source of that protest.

McNeil repeatedly stuck to a position that his government had a certain amount of money it could spend on contracts and it would not deviate from that "fiscal envelope," a position that would keep the Liberals from reaching a collective agreement with any of the province's three major unions.

How the public views thatapproach and the Liberals'motives could well determine the outcome of the upcoming election.

But for his most recent scuffle with teachers, McNeil and the Liberals saw bumps in the polls whenever there was a union-related fracas.

Jason Foster, a professor who studies labour relations at Athabasca University in Alberta, said the combative approach from the Liberals during the last 3 years is a trend for many governments as they try to negotiate contracts.

"It's a pretty common tactic for government especially governments who are feeling some fiscal pressure to target their public sector unions," he said.

The approach here is measured compared to some provinces and states, said Foster, where wages are being rolled back and workers are being laid off. In McNeil's own words, the approach in Nova Scotia was about"slowing down growth" of public sector contracts.

NSGEU president Jason MacLean says unions are trying to maintain what they've already earned through previous bargaining. His members will campaign against the Liberals. (CBC)

The Liberals enter the election campaign having imposed a contract on teachers and having yet to sign deals with the other two major public sector groups: health-care workers and civil servants. The Nova Scotia Government andGeneral Employees Union represents the latter and a good chunk of the former.

NSGEU president Jason MacLean described labour relations in the province as "strained."

MacLean said he sees the Liberals'track record of labour-related bills as anti-union and,in some cases, unconstitutional. It's why the NSGEU is putting on a push with its 30,800 members to try to help defeat the Grits, he said.

"They feel that they know everything and that they can dictate everything to Nova Scotians. However, the ones that they're dictating to are the ones that are serving Nova Scotians."

MacLean said he sees Liberal legislation thatmerged the district health authorities, designated workers as essential services and reserved the right to impose a wage packageas designed so the government could avoidactual negotiations.

Liberal Leader Stephen McNeil says he didn't relish confrontation with unions during his first term as premier, but it was what was necessary to bring order to provincial finances. (CBC)

McNeil, not surprisingly, doesn't see it that way.

His focus in negotiations as premier was on "what was the amount that we could afford that was fair and, at the same time, leaving capacity for government to invest in infrastructure and programs," he said.

McNeil sits across the table from union leaders tasked with doing what's best for their members. But it's his job, he said, to think of the whole province. In many cases that's put him at odds with thousands of workers, something he said he does worry about.

"It's not always a good place to be where you're in confrontation. It's not where I like to be, but it's part of what I have to do.It's part of the job to say, 'This is all I can afford.'"

When the Liberals tabled their latestbudget, McNeilmade the case that many of the investments in the document were possible only because his government took the position it did when negotiating contracts.

Foster said the challenge for governments is that wages make up the largest line item in a budget.

But a confrontational approach can be as much of a challenge because it can lead to people feeling alienated, not working to their full potential, or leaving the public sector altogether, he said.

"And that's a long-term consequence that [governments] don't think about because they're thinking about short-term votes and they're thinking of short-term public opinion."

Read more:

'Strained' labour relations a hallmark of Liberals' first term - CBC.ca