Daily Archives: March 31, 2021

How the GOP Can Reverse the Progressive Advance – The Dispatch

Posted: March 31, 2021 at 6:52 am

The first two months of the Biden administration have taught Republicans a painful lesson: Yes, elections have consequences, but elections that are not conceded have even worse consequences. Former President Trumps insistence that he won in a landslide cost the Republicans control of the Senate, derailed a necessary post-mortem discussion about how the party can do better (after losing the popular vote in seven of the past eight presidential elections), and has crippled the partys ability to combat an increasingly radical progressive agenda. Rather than owning the libs, the GOP is getting owned.

In short order, the Biden administration pushed through a massive $1.9 trillion stimulus packagea Keynesian spending orgy more than twice the size of Obamas stimulusthat used the COVID emergency to advance an ambitious progressive wish list. The package expanded Obamacare, laid the groundwork for universal income and day care, and included a brazen federal power grab that prevents states from lowering taxes by mandating that states who do cut taxes cannot receive aid.

That was just the first act in an administration that wants to be as ambitious as FDRs. As Biden described in his first press conference, Democrats are now gearing up to push a massive infrastructure package, followed by a sweeping domestic proposal focused on universal pre-K and free college. Together, they would cost about $3 trillion. Rather than paying for this by reducing government waste and cutting lower-priority spending, Biden wants to raise taxes for individuals and businesses. Democrats are aiming not just to transform our physical infrastructure (i.e., roads and bridges) but our nations social and political infrastructure. Their aim is liberal supremacy across the boardin culture, politics and economics.

The only thing more alarming than the size and scope of these proposals is the degree to which Republicans are sleeping through them. While a few Republicans such as Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey deftly documented the excess of the Biden stimulus, the clearest response was a secret vote in the Republican conference to bring back earmarks. So much for contrast.

The way forward for conservatives is to go back to first principles. Reacquainting ourselves with our foundational doctrines beginning with limited government and our founders revolutionary conception of rights and equality would go a long way toward thwarting a progressive movement that is untethered from reality and politically overconfident.

The Republican Partys limited-government muscles atrophied during the Trump era but can be rehabilitated fairly quickly. Focusing on limited government requires a commitment to fiscal conservatism, but fiscal conservatism, properly practiced, is much more than a myopic green eyeshade focus on mere numbers. Fiscal conservatism isnt just a branch of conservatism but its root system. Our founders were preoccupied not just with the balance of power between branches of government but between the people and their government. More government meant less freedom, and you cant expand government without funds.

Republicans used those limited-government muscles very well in two fairly recent fights. The first was the struggle to enact an earmark ban that forward-thinking senators like Ohio Sen. Rob Portman want to keep in place. When I was a staffer for the late U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, we lost the Bridge to Nowhere vote by a margin on 82-15. But that iconic example of waste continues to be a part of the national conversation 15 years later, because we connected it to larger themes. It wasnt about money. It was about freedom and even justice. That amendment and many others that Coburn offered were designed to create permanent reasonable doubt about governments ability to set priorities and solve problems. Our message to voters still rings true: If you love freedom, justice, equality, and prosperity, then choose less government, not more.

The second example was the partys response to the Obama stimulus. By November 2010, voters were not only displeased about Obamacare taking away their doctors and insurance plans but were exposed to the Republican Partys principled, disciplined, and entertaining critique of the Recovery Act. Coburn teamed up with U.S. Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) on a series of oversight reports on Recovery Act that were widely covered by the media. Silly and low-multiplier effect stimulus projects (cocaine for monkeys, sidewalks to nowhere, and so on) sowed reasonable doubt about governments competence among centrist audiences.

This strategy worked because Republicans were willing to do the hard work of documenting waste and presenting it in an honest and clear narrative that connected with voters.

Its time for Republicans to get back to work. Republicans would do themselves a favor by spending as much time in the oversight gym as TV green rooms. We need new icons, but the spirit of the message should be the same: Can you trust a government that wants to build Bridges to Nowhere to take over health care and day care? If Republicans take the time to look and communicate, examples of failed progressive government and counterfeit compassion arent hard to find.

On climate, for instance, Republicans have easy openings. The Green New Deal is an unworkably heavy-handed, top-down, more government proposal that wont work. For starters, the science tells us carbon dioxide doesnt respect borders. Ending all emissions in the U.S. would do almost nothing to lower global temperatures as long as China is building new coal plants. The answer is more innovation, less government and trusting markets over mandates.

The second challenge for Republicans is to counter Democrats racial justice arguments with soundand constitutionalarguments about human dignity and equality. On immigration, for example, Republicans feel like theyve struck political gold with Bidens border crisis, but it will pay off with non-base voters only if Republicans transcend Trumps nationalistic framing of the problem. Trump was right that you cant have a country without borders. But it is equally true that you cant have America without its beliefs. We arent a mere country. We are an idea. The only way to defeat the lefts obsession with critical race theory and identity politics is by reasserting the radical American idea that our rights come not from the state but natural law or natures God.

If Republicans go into 2022 focusing on first principles, theyll have a much easier time countering the progressive advance in every area ranging from climate to taxes. What Republicans cant afford are more unforced errors like holding secret votes to bring back earmarks (thankfully that ban is still technically in place in the Senate). Historical trends suggest the GOP has an excellent chance of retaking the House in 2022. Since 1982, the presidents party has lost an average of 30 House seats during a new presidents first midterm election. The lone exception was 2002, when Republicans gained eight seats in the wake of 9/11. In 2022, Republicans need only to flip five seats to take the House. As The Dispatch noted, Republicans could get there through new maps and redistricting alone.

The big unknown is whether Donald Trump will further undermine Republicans hopes in 2022 by pushing vengeance primaries against Republicans he views as insufficiently pure (i.e. disloyal to him). The media would love nothing more than to cover rage primaries rather than policy arguments that make Democrats look foolish and out of touch. Fortunately, 76 percent of Republicans (and 94 percent of college-educated Republicans) oppose retaliation primaries. Lets hope Trump decides to be loyal to his own base.

The defining question in the post-Trump era is not whether we are tired of winning, but whether we are tired of losing, and what we can do to start winning again. Returning to first principlesand remembering how those principles were successfully applied in recent fightsis a good place to start.

John Hart is the co-founder of the Conservative Coalition for Climate Solutions and served as Tom Coburns longtime communications director and co-author.

Read this article:

How the GOP Can Reverse the Progressive Advance - The Dispatch

Posted in Fiscal Freedom | Comments Off

Independent Scotland should invest in Bitcoin – Jim Duffy – The Scotsman

Posted: at 6:52 am

NewsOpinionColumnistsThe cash in your pocket is not worth what you may think it is, according to the Austrian School of economics thinkers.

Wednesday, 31st March 2021, 7:00 am

For these esteemed economic gurus Fiat currency or Pounds, Dollars and Yen are being devalued over decades by inflation and poor monetary and fiscal policy. Global macroeconomics works for a select few, but for the ordinary man and woman in the street, it has been a disaster as the pound in their pockets is worth less today than it was in 1971. This being the year that America came off the Gold Standard and in effect devaluated currency across the globe over time.

But, there is far more pressing argument for Scotland as we head into the Independence war with England. The man who has fired the first shots on this debate is the Ex First minister Alex Salmond and now big cheese at the newly formed Alba Party. Like him or loathe him, Salmond knows how to steer the narrative away from him, but at the same time have it focused firmly on him. And this time, he is raising the spectre on a currency for Scotland. A ghost that has spooked the SNP in all its attempts to win freedom from the United Kingdom. Lets explore.

First, we had the oil premium. Yes, with all that oil we should be a rich nation. Wrong! Scotland, like Venezuela, is probably one of the only countries in the world to discover vast deposits of black gold off its shores and end up skint. And we cant blame Margaret Thatcher or any subsequent Westminster governments. We have had plenty time to get our act together and demand a bigger slice of the oil premium. Then to go on and create a sovereign wealth fund. But, nope, even under Salmond, this never took seed.

Then there was the wish-washy lets keep the pound malarkey at the last independence referendum. I recall watching endless TV debates, where this was muted as workable. Alas, the majority of Scots did not think so. It will no doubt raise its head again. But, while oil and the pound have not been convincing arguments for a solid Scottish currency, perhaps there is a way forward out of this stalemate and middle ground. It is called Bitcoin.

If we work from the the premise that Scotland is skint and its borrowing costs will rocket should the good citizens of Scotland tick the Yes" box in sufficient numbers, then there may be a way to get a quick, but sustained win. And perhaps Mr Salmond is onto something here.. But he just doesnt know it yet, because the economic advisor feeding him his lines has not thought it through completely. But, that said, this advisor is onto something.

Borrowing rates globally are almost at negative. Scotland could borrow billions at these rates, locking in big slugs of cash that we can then use. But, rather than feed the cash down the usuals political sinkholes, Scotland could then buy a ton of Bitcoin. Hear me out.

Singapore is pretty clever right? They have a sovereign wealth fund worth hundreds of billions of pounds. And now they are investing in Bitcoin as they have done their arithmetic and due diligence. Sovereign wealth funds dont rush into things lightly. So, maybe Scotland could borrow at minuscule rates and invest in this appreciating asset too. Thus, being an early adopter in the nation state acquisition of Bitcoin, while taking its lead from Singapore.

Ill let that sink it.

What it is, is a contrarian, but potentially smart way of not doing the same old same old issuing bonds and creating long term debt. I would argue that there is a sound monetary policy rationale within this approach. Perhaps even entrepreneurial.

And perish the thought that Scotland would want to be just that -post independence - eh?

Jim Duffy, Create Special

Read this article:

Independent Scotland should invest in Bitcoin - Jim Duffy - The Scotsman

Posted in Fiscal Freedom | Comments Off

A Deeper Look at the Landmark Ruling on Cash Bail by the Cal Supremes | – witnessla.com

Posted: at 6:52 am

Late last week,a ruling came down from the California Supreme Courtthatwill permanently change the way that thestate deals with cash bail.

The heart of the case, originally brought by a man named Kenneth Humphrey, and joined by then Attorney General Xavier Bacerra, among others, is the contention that no person should lose the right to liberty simply because that person really and truly cannot afford to post bail.

The circumstances underlying the Humphrey case began on May 23, 2017, when 66-year-old Kenneth Humphrey, who had fallen off the wagon and was back to struggling with drugs and drink, and was arrested. Humphreywas charged withfirst degree residential robbery and burglary against an elderly victim, inflicting injury on an elder adult, and for misdemeanor theft from an elder adult.

According to 79-year-old Elmer Johnson, Humphrey followed the older man into his apartment in a residential hotel in the Fillmore District of San Francisco. Then Humprey reportedly demanded cash, threatening to put a pillowcase over Elmers head if Elmer didnt produce some money. When Elmer said he had no money, Humphrey allegedly took Elmers cell phone and threw it hard to the floor.

The phone throwing persuaded Johnson to hand over $2. After that, Humphrey allegedly managed to find an additional $5, and a bottle of cologne, both of which he took with him when he exited Johnsons apartment.

Before leaving, Humphrey moved Elmer Elmer Johnsons walker into the next room, presumably in order to inhibit Elmers ability to report his victimizer.

But Johnson did manage to contact the cops, and Humphrey was arrested.

The $600,00 bail

Humphreys arraignment took place on May 31, 2017, at which time, though his public defender, he sought release on his own recognizance (OR), asking that no money bail would be set. His attorney pointed to Humphreys advanced age, his community ties as a lifelong resident of San Francisco, and the fact that he had been law abiding for fourteen years.

Yes,Humphrey had four prior felony convictions, some of which were strikes. Yet, the most recent of those convictions was in 1992, a quarter century in the past. And, as mentioned above,Humphrey had no arrests at all for 14 years.

The prosecutor, in response, requested bail in the amount of $600,000 as well as a criminal protective order directing Humphrey to stay away from Elmer.

The judge dismissed the OR request, and approved the $600,000 bail. Humphrey and his attorney asked for another bail hearing.

Humphrey, who had long struggled with drugs, said hed been accepted into that a residential substance abuse and mental health treatment program, beginning the day after the date set for another the bail hearing. So, if bail was refused, he would be unable to attend.

At the new bail hearing, the prosecutor argued that Humphreys substance abuse issues and inability to address them constituted a great public safety risk, and that Humphrey was a flight risk because he faced a lengthy prison sentence based on his prior strike convictions, so he would likely vanish before trial.

The judge reduced the bail to $350,000 bail, which was no easier for Humphrey to pay than the more than half million earlier bail amount.

The discrepancy between the seriousness of the crime and the now still more than a quarter million bail amount caught the attention of the San Franciscos public defenders office, which was at the time, still overseen by the late Jeff Adachi, who before his death in early 2019, had become near legendary as a gifted justice reformer who was fearless in his defense of the rights of everyday people.

And so it was the PDs office along with the nonprofit Civil Right Corps, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus for Humphrey in the First Appellate District of California, Division Two.

Requiring money bail as a condition of release at an amount the accused cannot pay, Humphreys lawyers argued, is the functional equivalent of a pretrial detention order which can be justified only if the state establishes a compelling interest in detaining the accused and demonstrates that detention is necessary to further that purpose.

If not, the judge violates the 14th Amendments guarantees of equal protection and due process.

Initially, then California Attorney General Becerra opposed Humphreys petition. But then Becerra took a hard look at the case and changed his mind. Furthermore, Bacerra stated that his office would no longer defend any application of the bail law that does not take into consideration a persons ability to pay, or alternative methods of ensuring a persons appearance at trial. Period. Full stop.

The appeals court sided with Humphrey, andruled that, since the trial court had not considered whether Humphrey could realistically come up with the required bail, there must be a new hearing, which had to include the defendants financial situation.

The trial court conducted the ordered new hearing and, after considering the fiscal variables, ruled that Humphrey could be released, with a few non-financial restrictions, because of his earlier convictions, even through they were so many years in his past. The restrictions included electronic monitoring, an order to stay away from Elmer J., plus an order to participate in a residential substance abuse program for seniors, which Mr. Humprey was agreeable with anyway.

On to the CA Supremes

Meanwhile Humpreyscase moved on to the CaliforniaSupreme Court, which heard the case in January, and on March 25,affirmed the judgement of thelower court of appeal.

The informatively-written ruling by Justice Mariano-Florentino Cullar with which Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye and Justices Corrigan, Liu, Kruger, Groban and Jenkins concurred noted that those who are incarcerated pending trial who have not yet been convicted of a charged crime unquestionably suffer a direct grievous loss of freedom in addition to other potential injuries.

In principle, theCal Supremes wrote, pretrial detention should be reserved for those who otherwise cannot be relied upon to make court appearances or who pose a risk to public or victim safety.

But, in practice, thecourt observed,thats not what usually happens at all.

So, theCal Supremes wrote,if the trial courtdoes not consider what an arrestee can pay, money bail becomesthe functional equivalent of a pretrial detention order.

In other words, its the same as the court declining to set bail at all.

Thus, thecommon practice of conditioning freedom solely on whether an arrestee can afford bail, the court concluded, is unconstitutional.

And just like that the world of bail changed in the state of California.

(Yes, there are still bail related issues that need to be addressed, and well talk about that in a minute.)

In Los Angeles County, both the countys public defender, Ricardo Garcia, and the LA DA George Gascn issued statements praising the California Supreme Courts ruling.

We are confident that the judges in Los Angeles County will implement this important decision, protecting the rights of presumed innocent Angelenos, wrote Garcia in an emailed statement. The front-line lawyers in my office will implement this decision in every case, for every client, in every court, where our clients, many from communities of color, are locked up solely because they cannot post bond.

Los Angeles County District Attorney Gascn emailed his own statementregarding the ruling, which he said ended an unjust practice that favors the wealthy and punishes those with limited means.

We cannot have equal protection under the law, Gascn wrote, when fundamental aspects of our criminal justice system hinge so decisively on financial status.

As for Kenneth Humphrey, sincecompleting the court-mandated residential treatment in December 2018, he has been reportedly staying clean after decades of drug and alcohol addiction.

Mr. Humphrey not a threat to public safety, hes an asset, San Francisco Public Defender Mano Raju told reporters after last weeks ruling.

Since his 2018 release, Raju said, Humphrey had taken on the role of friend and mentor to many in the community who found themselves in his circumstances.

Mr. Humphreys success while out of custody shows what can happen when we invest in people, not cages,said Raju.

So whats next?

Despite the importance of the ruling, the struggle over bail in California is not completely over. In January of this year, a trio of California lawmakers introduced bills that would set bail at $0 for all misdemeanors and categories of low-level felonies.

The bills are the latest in a multi-year battle to get rid of the states unjust cash bail system.

In 2018, legislators passed and then-Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 10, a hideously watered down bill that would have replaced cash bail with controversial algorithm-based pretrial risk assessments.

The law was scheduled to go into effect in 2019. But then the bail bond industry managed to get Proposition 25 on the 2020 ballot, in order to get rid of SB 10. (A no vote on 25 was a no vote on the passed and signed SB 10)

Last November, Californias voters rejected Proposition 25, and in doing so, got rid of SB 10, much to the relief of most of the states justice reformers, who believed that the badly amended version of the bill created more problems than it solved.

The new ruling, in contrast, is viewed by justice advocates as a remarkable step in the direction of banishing cash bail altogether, rather than, as Civil Rights Corps founder Alec Karakatsanis put it, putting a new facade on the same pretrial human caging, surveillance tech, and wealth extraction from the most vulnerable people in our society.

So there you have it.

Photo by WitnessLA

Biden is pitching a big infrastructure plan, but Republicans already panned it as going too far – USA TODAY

Posted: at 6:51 am

WASHINGTON President Joe Biden on Wednesday will take to the lectern inPittsburgha city known for steel, factories and thetowering bridges crisscrossing its downtown to pitch thesecond signature proposal in his young presidency, a massiveinfrastructure and jobs plan that would cost $2 trillion.

But before Biden even offered specifics of his aims to fix the nation's roads, bridges and railways, Republicans he'll need to work with in Congress panned it, claiming it goes too far beyond traditional infrastructure spending andcomparingits climate aspectsto the Green New Deal.

Republicans arguethe package should be limited to transportation, broadband internet and other basics, not green energy like Biden has touted since he was a candidate. Biden doesn't want to just fix roads, Republicans warn, he wants to upend American life.

They've also balked at raising taxes long a sticking point for Republicans to get behind big-ticket Democratic programs. To find bipartisan support, the president will have to convince skepticalRepublicans to support an increase of the corporate tax rateto pay for infrastructure and a wide-range of other spending.

These dynamics foreshadowa possible repeat of Biden's first majorlegislative victory earlier this month,when he won approval of a$1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package, the American Rescue Plan, without a single Republican supporter in Congress.

"What taxes are the Republicans who want infrastructure spending for?"saidMatt Grossman, who heads the Institute for Public Policy and Social Research at Michigan State University. "I think the answer is not many. And if so, they won't be ones that Democrats are likely to support. So that, right off the top, limits the potential for bipartisanship pretty fundamentally."

More: Biden putting final touches on potential $3 trillion economic, infrastructure package as Buttigieg heads to the Hill

Biden is set to unveil his long-discussed infrastructure plan in his Pittsburgh speech. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said his proposal in addition to addressing roads, bridges, railways and broadband willincludespending onmanufacturing, research and development and"the caregiving economy."She said the president also has a "plan to pay for it," which he will unveil.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki speaks during a press briefing at the White House on Tuesday.Evan Vucci, AP

The White House has billedthe proposalas a way to create "good-paying union jobs" and a "first step" toward economic recovery amid the coronavirus pandemic. A second proposal in Biden's "Build Back Better" agenda addressing health care, education andchild care is expected in April.

To build their case forthe large infusion of domestic spending,theWhite House saidthe U.S. ranks 13th globally in infrastructure quality, down from fifth in 2002, and significantly lags rival superpower China in infrastructure spending. More than one-third of America's bridges need repairs and one in every five highways are in poor condition.

"We know that 80%or more of people in this country, Democrats and Republicans, supportinvesting in infrastructure,"Psaki said.

YetRepublican lawmakershave spent recent days fine-tuningtheir attacks.

Were hearing the next few months might bring a so-called 'infrastructure' proposal that may actually be a Trojan horse for massive tax hikes and other job-killing left-wing policies," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said from the Senate floor last week.

More: Republicans tell Buttigieg that Biden's infrastructure bill should focus on roads, rail, ports - not climate or social justice

His office seized on recent comments from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.,likeningthe proposal to the Green New Deal, a sweeping environmental effort pushed by Democrats to fight climate change. "Sold as an infrastructure plan," warned Scott Sloofman, a top McConnellaide, it "actually intends to reshape the U.S. economy and other parts of American life."

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va.J. Scott Applewhite, AP

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R.-W.Va., the leading Republican on the Senate's Environment and Public Works Committee, said she's "very disappointed" the plan could includesocialprograms in addition to infrastructure.

"They're terming it 'social infrastructure.' Never heard that before," Capito said, predicting a hard legislative fight. "I think we need to talk to the American people and say, 'Is this what you envision with infrastructure? Arethese job creators? Are were-engineering our own social fabric here with a 50-vote majority?'"

House Republicans warnedBiden's transportation secretary, Pete Buttigieg, last week that any plan that strays from core transportation priorities to one that tackles climate change and social justice won't get GOP support.

"I don't think the bill can grow into a multi-trillion-dollar catch-all," said Missouri Rep. Sam Graves, the top Republican on the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee. "A transportation bill needs to be a transportation bill, not a Green New Deal. It needs to be about roads and bridges."

Former President Donald Trump repeatedly promised an infrastructure package but never delivered one.

Democrats could choose to pass the infrastructure legislation in the Senate through budget reconciliation just like they did Biden's COVID-19 relief bill known as theAmerican Rescue Plan which would require justa simple majority in the evenly split chamberand therefore no Republican votes.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg attends an event titled Transforming Rail in Virginia at the Amtrak-VRE station Tuesday in Alexandria, Virginia.Win McNamee, Getty Images

More:A gas tax? A mileage tax? Biden wary of user fees to pay for roads, bridges and highways

In an interview Monday on CNN, Buttigieg said he think there's "a tremendous opportunity nowto havebipartisan support for a big, bold vision of infrastructure," arguingAmericans "don't need a lot of selling" on the issue.He also defended the inclusion of green investments in the infrastructure package.

"You can't separate the climate part from this vision," he said, "because every road we fix, every bridge we build, we can either do it in a way that's better for the climate or worse for the climate.Why wouldn't we want to be creating these jobs in a way that's better for the climate?"

Buttigieg said he thinks the administration can get Republican votes on infrastructure in Congress, adding "we're going to work with them to try shape it in a way that earns as much support as possible."

"At the the same time," he said,"the American people can't wait."

To pay for the sweeping package,Biden wants to make large corporations pay more taxes. According to an administration official, hewill propose increasing the corporate tax rate to 28% resetting to the its level before passage of President Donald Trump's tax cuts in 2017 and overhauling how the U.S. taxes multinational corporations by increasing the minimum tax on U.S. corporations to 21%.

The White House this weekeliminated user fees, such as an increase to the gas tax or road tax, to pay for the infrastructure plan.

"People might have different ideas about how to pay for it," Psaki said. "We're open to hearing them. So hopefully people will bring forward ideas."

Clouds hang over the skyline of downtown Pittsburgh, the Rachel Carson Bridge, and the Allegheny River on Friday, March 18, 2016.Gene J. Puskar, AP

A poll this month from The Hill-HarrisX found 54%of American voters believe an infrastructure package should be a priority right now for the federal government, compared to 46%who said other issues should. Sixty percent of Democrats, 54%of independentsand 46% of Republicans agreedinfrastructure should be prioritized.

"To have a bill like this that can generate jobs, help improve transportation, and infrastructure in general is a win-win all around," saidDavid Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center. "Paying for it, obviously, is going to be the sticking point for Republicans."

Green energy investments are also popular among thepublic, according to Grossman. And while polls generally find opposition to raising the federal tax on gas to pay for infrastructure, the public gives higher marks to raising taxes forcorporations and higher-income individuals

"In that sense, this developing bill does have the potential to at least start out with bipartisan support in the public," Grossmansaid.

Such a scenariowould be also reflect thedynamics of Biden's COVID-19 relief bill,which multiple polls found was backed by more than 70% of Americans.

But as Biden learned, that doesn't mean Republicans in Congress will jump on board.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., called an infrastructure package the the best chance for Republicans and Democrats to do something together, saying Everybody needs roads and bridges and ports.

But he added: We just want to make sure its related to infrastructure.

Reach Joey Garrison on Twitter @joeygarrison.

Northam signs agreements for major rail expansion

Gov. Ralph Northam has finalized agreements with executives at Amtrak, CSX and Virginia Railway Express (VRE) that pave the way for a $3.7 billion dollar rail expansion in Virginia during the next decade. (March 30)

Published8:52 pm UTC Mar. 30, 2021Updated9:27 am UTC Mar. 31, 2021

Excerpt from:

Biden is pitching a big infrastructure plan, but Republicans already panned it as going too far - USA TODAY

Posted in Republican | Comments Off

The Republican Poseurs Who Claim to Be True Texans – The New Republic

Posted: at 6:51 am

Yettheres little evidence these transplants are the sole, or even the driving,cause of Texass approaching swing-state status. As the Houston Press wrote last year, It is utter nonsenseto assume that every person coming here is some wide-eyed socialist hippie whodreams of high taxes and replacing Whataburgers with soy patties. Another write-up noted that it wassignificantly reductive to ascribe Texass leftward lurch to these new arrivals.

Indeed,theres a kind of cognitive dissonance at play in the Texas rights claim thatthe sole reason for the states political shift is wayward Californians. Afterall, shouldnt these uprooted Californians be fleeing the supposedly failedsocialist policies in California? Why would they be bringing these left-leaningpolicies with them? Are California politicians secretly plotting to spread theseeds of socialism wherever the roots of liberty run deep?

Thiswillingness to pin Texass political changes on an influx of liberals acts as akind of cover, or an excuse, for a state Republican Party unwilling to face newgenerations and demographics of Texans disgusted by the partys Trumpian turn.Younger Texans, nonwhite Texans, second-generation Americans whose immigrantparents selected Dallas and Houston and El Paso as the place to raise theirfamilyall of these contingents are increasingly sloughing off the outdated imagesof Texas that prep schoolers like Roy and Rodimer cling to. Its these true-nativeTexans who are refashioning those tiredtropes,all while steering the state leftward, toward a more multiethnic polity aimedsquarely against the authoritarian rot at the heart of the Texas RepublicanParty.

Buttheres one more irony at the heart of these far-right transplants attemptingto claim the mantle of Texanness. When the state first began convulsing towardindependence in the 1830s, the states residents broke into two camps. On theone end was a multiracial cohort composed of older Anglos and most of thestates Tejanos, content to remain within the anti-slavery republic of Mexico.On the other end was a contingent of young, transplanted Anglos, comprising theso-called War Party.

Originally posted here:

The Republican Poseurs Who Claim to Be True Texans - The New Republic

Posted in Republican | Comments Off

Opinion | Republicans Have an Agenda All Right, and They Dont Need Congress for It – The New York Times

Posted: at 6:51 am

Similarly, in the 2014 case Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the Supreme Court held that businesses seeking a religious exemption from a law may have it holding, for the first time, that such exemptions may be allowed even when they diminish the rights of others. That case permitted employers with religious objections to birth control to deny contraceptive coverage to their employees, even though a federal regulation required employer-provided health plans to cover contraception.

Before Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the Supreme Court, however, a majority of the justices were very reluctant to grant religious exemptions to state regulations seeking to limit the spread of Covid-19. Yet after she became a justice, the courts new majority started granting such exemptions to churches that wanted to defy public health orders.

Its plausible that the Republican Party did not campaign on its old legislative agenda in 2020 because it was busy rebranding itself. Under Mr. Trump, Republicans attracted more working-class voters, while Democrats made gains in relatively affluent suburbs. So Mr. Ryans plans to ransack programs like Medicaid arent likely to inspire the partys emerging base.

And yet the courts conservative majority is still pushing an agenda that benefits corporations and the wealthy at the expense of workers and consumers.

Its easy to see why government-by-judiciary appeals to Republican politicians. Theres no constituency for forced arbitration outside of corporate boardrooms. But when the court hands down decisions like Circuit City or Epic Systems, those decisions often go unnoticed. Employers score a major policy victory over their workers, and voters dont blame the Republican politicians who placed conservative justices on the court.

Judges can also hide many of their most consequential decisions behind legal language and doctrines. One of the most important legal developments in the last few years, for example, is that a majority of the court called for strict new limits on federal agencies power to regulate the workplace, shield consumers and protect the environment.

In Little Sisters v. Pennsylvania (2020), the court signaled that its likely to strike down the Department of Health and Human Servicess rules requiring insurers to cover many forms of medical care including birth control, immunizations and preventive care for children. And in West Virginia v. E.P.A. (2016), the court shut down much of the E.P.A.s efforts to fight climate change.

Read this article:

Opinion | Republicans Have an Agenda All Right, and They Dont Need Congress for It - The New York Times

Posted in Republican | Comments Off

Former Republican Sen. Lucido accused of unethically grinding political axe with Gov. Whitmer in new prosecutor role – MLive.com

Posted: at 6:51 am

Former Republican state Sen. Peter Lucido is accused of using the power of his newly elected role as the Macomb County prosecutor to grind a political axe with Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

Hes accused Whitmer of crimes related to her handling of nursing home patients and asked relatives of patients whove died of COVID-19 in nursing homes to file wrongful death lawsuits.

Now a trio of legal ethics experts are accusing Lucido of violating his Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct and conflict-of-interest ethics standards.

Mr. Lucido may have been within his rights to use the tools of his office to advance his cause, but his actions as a prosecutor raise serious questions under the rules governing the legal profession and the prosecutors office, said a complaint filed with the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission Monday, March 29. In light of his public pronouncements regarding the guilt of a potential defendant prior to an investigation, Mr. Lucidos continued involvement in this matter implicates a conflict of interest between his personal political interests and the duties of a prosecutor ... "

The complaint is filed by Larry Dubin, former chairman of the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission and a law professor at University of Detroit Mercy; Claire Finkelstein, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania and Richard Painter, a law professor at the University of Minnesota.

They claim if Lucido doesnt recuse himself from any criminal investigation related to the nursing home issue he may be in violation of the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct that guide legal professionals in the state.

It was one thing for Mr. Lucido to make such allegations as a politician; (its) quite another thing for him to do so as a prosecutor, the complaint said. We urge the Commission to investigate Mr. Lucidos behavior for violations of his duties in his capacity as a prosecutor for Macomb County.

Despite calls for a criminal investigation into Whitmers handling of nursing homes during the pandemic, Lucido previously told MLive theres not exactly probable cause to open an investigation, but rather a cumulation of general information hed like law enforcement to look into.

Across the state and in Lansing, Michigan Republicans are pushing for an investigation into Whitmers handling of nursing home policy after a reporting scandal in New York, despite data indicating the same problems do not exist in Michigan.

Michigan is below the national average in nursing-home deaths from COVID-19 and theres no evidence that Michigan has been hiding data or is an outlier in its handling of the situation.

On two different metrics, Michigan is slightly below the national average in regards to nursing home deaths: The death toll per 1,000 nursing home residents and the percentage of total COVID-19 deaths attributed to long-term care facilities. On the latter, about 31% of the states COVID-19 deaths are attributed to long-term care facilities compared to a national average of 34%.

Whitmers widely criticized policy telling nursing homes they had to accept COVID-positive patients was never actually implemented, according to Melissa Samuel, president and CEO of the Health Care Association of Michigan, which represents long-term care providers.

In April 2020, Whitmer put in place a policy ordering nursing homes to accept COVID-19-positive patients back into their facilities but paused the implementation due to a flurry of complaints and amended the order and eliminated the re-acceptance mandate in May, Samuel said.

As of data available this week, residents of long-term care facilities accounted nearly a third, or 5,563 of Michigans 16,034 COVID-19 deaths.

Michael Goetz, who oversees grievance investigations, on Monday said he could neither deny nor confirm a complaint was filed against Lucido, although a copy of the complaint has been publicized in the media.

According to Goetz, a review of any attorney complaint is conducted internally and referred to the Attorney Discipline Board if there is adequate evidence and the alleged misconduct is severe enough. That is rare.

According to Goetz, about 120 of 2,500 attorney complaints in a year are referred, at which time they become available for public inspection. Prior to that, any complaint, the resulting investigation or disciplinary action -- such as an admonition, warning or consensual probation -- remains secret from the public.

MLive has requested comment but not received response from the filers of the complaint and left a message with the Macomb County Prosecutors Office offering Lucido a chance to respond to the grievance.

Lucido defeated former judge Mary Chrzanowski in November to replace the seat left open by former Macomb County Prosecutor Eric Smith after he resigned amid allegations that he was fraudulently spending public forfeiture funds.

Letter to the editor: With Collins rebuke, Aroostook Republican Party shows it’s lost its way – pressherald.com

Posted: at 6:51 am

As a former county chairman of the Republican Party, I am horrified by the recent actions taken by the Aroostook County Republican Party to formally censure Sen. Susan Collins for her vote to impeach former President Donald Trump. The blanket statements in the resolution do not reflect the values of our party as a whole, and they certainly dont reflect my views.

Sen. Collins has said that you can be a good Republican without agreeing with every single position taken by the party, and she is absolutely correct. I may not always agree with her, but thats not because shes not Republican enough its because we are each individuals with our own thoughts and values. Mainers havent elected Sen. Collins for a record five terms because we want a follower; we support her because shes a leader.

Just a few short months ago, Mainers re-elected Sen. Collins in a landslide. By staying true to herself and our state, Sen. Collins earned the support of Donald Trump and Joe Biden voters alike. If the Republican Party ever wants to regain the ground its lost, it will need to embrace more candidates like Susan Collins, who appeal to those who dont identify with the fringe of the base.

In my view, this recent censure is just another example of how the Aroostook County Republican Party has lost its way. This groups views do not reflect the Republicans I grew up with.

Shalom, Peace, Salaam be upon Sen. Collins as she keeps up her endeavors for Aroostook County Republicans and all Mainers.

Richard RhodaHoulton

Invalid username/password.

Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.

See the original post here:

Letter to the editor: With Collins rebuke, Aroostook Republican Party shows it's lost its way - pressherald.com

Posted in Republican | Comments Off

Republican bill aimed at tightening voter restrictions in Texas passes Senate committee – FOX 4 Dallas

Posted: at 6:51 am

Republican bill aimed at tightening voter restrictions in Texas passes Senate committee

Voices are rising against a bill headed to the Senate floor that would change a lot about how we vote in Texas.

The states Republican leadership says Senate Bill 7 is designed to prevent fraud and ensure greater election integrity. Democrats disagree.

Whats in it has many different groups saying it will hurt voter turnout, especially in places like Houston and Dallas. LULAC has already promised to go to court if Senate Bill 7 becomes law.

The National Black Voters Matter Tour rolled into Dallas Monday hoping to inspire Black people to vote

"We, the people, got power. We got power to put people in office," said Wanda Mosley with the Black Voters Matter Fund. "We got power to take people out of office. Because when we come to you with requests, we are the employers. Elected officials work for us."

But Texas is among a dozen states working to pass bills that Democrats say will make it much tougher to vote.

"This is a voter suppression bill," said State Sen. Royce West (D-Dallas). "And we should not have that in Texas. Not in 2021."

West's colleagues have passed out of committee a bill Republicans say will ensure election security.

It's got Gov. Greg Abbotts approval who earlier this month said so-called "election integrity" was a top legislative priority.

Senate Bill 7 would:

"We have some real concerns about Senate Bill 7," explained Jeff Miller, a Disability Rights Texas Policy Specialist. "Forcing people to have to show proof of their disability, who's going to pay for that? Does that become a poll tax? Or is that a violation of the ADA because you now have a surcharge on them voting by mail?"

The measure would also allow poll watchers to videotape people getting assistance if they believe that assistance is unlawful, and stop local officials from encouraging voters to apply to vote by mail.

"Each of those things would modestly push down on voting, and thats the idea to place hurdles between the voter and the ballot box that some people wont get over," said SMU political science professor Cal Jillson. "Its not that everything being proposed is illegitimate. You do want ballot security. But you want to be sure that you're not engaged in voter suppression as opposed to ballot security."

"A reasonable person would look at that and say that its part of the national Republican strategy in order to suppress voters in urban areas," West said.

West says with 18 Republicans and 13 Democrats in the Senate against his opposition he expects the measure to easily pass.

Republicans also hold the advantage in the House by a healthy margin. Senate Bill 7 could make it to the governors desk this session.

More here:

Republican bill aimed at tightening voter restrictions in Texas passes Senate committee - FOX 4 Dallas

Posted in Republican | Comments Off

Conservative PAC targets Brooks, 5 other Republicans in new ad campaign – alreporter.com

Posted: at 6:51 am

The Republication Accountability Project, a political action committee formed by the conservative group Defending Democracy Together, has launched a $1 million ad campaign directed at six House Republicans, including U.S. Rep. Mo Brooks, for their objection to the results of the 2021 presidential election.

Since the night of Jan. 6, most Republicans in Congress have been trying to make us forget what happened or rewrite the story, said Sarah Longwell, executive director of RAP. We wont allow them to get away with helping incite an insurrection. They cant be trusted with power, and we wont forget it.

Targeting Congressmen Kevin McCarthy, Louie Gohmert, Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Madison Cawthorn and Brooks, the PAC highlights their support of the Big Lie that the 2020 election was not free and fair, in the lead up to the ratification of the Electoral College votes and the sacking of the Capitol on Jan. 6.

The same group also launched billboards calling on congressmen, including Brooks, to resign for their role in the Capitol attack.

The Alabama ad, scheduled to broadcast next week on local Alabama newscasts and, features Brooks saying, There was massive voter fraud and election theft, during a Fox News interview on Jan. 3.

The ad also highlights Brooks today, American patriots start kicking ass comment at the Capitol rally, said directly before a mob stormed into the Capitol through the doors of the Capitol. The video will also appear in digital ads and will also be broadcasted nationally on MSNBC, CNN and Fox.

If Mo Brooks wont support democracy, we wont support him, the ad states.

A national ad, directed toward Republican voters, will air multiple times next week on CNNs New Day. The ad closes with a call for voters, businesses, religious and civic organizations to pledge not to support Republican members of congress who objected to the ratification of the electoral college results on Jan. 6.

In addition, RAP released a legislative search engine to be used by voters to search if their legislators voted against the ratification.

Read the original post:

Conservative PAC targets Brooks, 5 other Republicans in new ad campaign - alreporter.com

Posted in Republican | Comments Off

Daily Archives: March 31, 2021

How the GOP Can Reverse the Progressive Advance – The Dispatch

Independent Scotland should invest in Bitcoin – Jim Duffy – The Scotsman

A Deeper Look at the Landmark Ruling on Cash Bail by the Cal Supremes | – witnessla.com

Biden is pitching a big infrastructure plan, but Republicans already panned it as going too far – USA TODAY

The Republican Poseurs Who Claim to Be True Texans – The New Republic

Opinion | Republicans Have an Agenda All Right, and They Dont Need Congress for It – The New York Times

Former Republican Sen. Lucido accused of unethically grinding political axe with Gov. Whitmer in new prosecutor role – MLive.com

Letter to the editor: With Collins rebuke, Aroostook Republican Party shows it’s lost its way – pressherald.com

Republican bill aimed at tightening voter restrictions in Texas passes Senate committee – FOX 4 Dallas

Conservative PAC targets Brooks, 5 other Republicans in new ad campaign – alreporter.com

The Prometheus League

Breaking News and Updates

Prometheism

Forbidden Fruit

The Evolutionary Perspective

Transtopia Menu

Library Updates

Library Books

Future Euvolution

Lucid Dreams from Childhood

Genetic Revolution

Speciation + Self-Directed Evolution