Category Archives: Democrat

'We will be there for as long as the community wants us to be there'

Long line forms at FAMU testing site as Leon County COVID numbers rise

Over 100 people waited in line for COVID-19 testing at Bragg Memorial Stadium on Florida A&M University's campus Monday, August 2, 2021.

Tori Lynn Schneider, Tallahassee Democrat

Through alpha, delta and now omicron, theres a place people know they can count on to get accurate, reliable and speedy COVID-19 test results.

At this point in the pandemic, its now just referred to as the testing site, as if theres only one in Tallahassee.

The Florida A&M University COVID-19 testing site opened in April 2020 with the anticipation that it would operate for a couple of weeks. At first, the site only had the capacity to test 200 people a day.

Its solid reputation quickly grew, and while other testing sites dealt with long lines and lagging test results, FAMU persevered. At one point, people from Georgia and Alabama were driving hours to get tested in Tallahassee.

Nowits one of the longest-running testing sites in the Southeast, and more than a half-million tests have been administered.

More on FAMU testing site:

Since 2012, the Tallahassee Democrat has awarded its Person of the Year to someonewho has had a great impact on the community.But the Personof the Year for 2021 isn't just one.

The award goes to Tanya Tatum, the director of student health services at FAMU, who oversees testing and vaccinations. But it also goes toCynthia M. Harris, associate dean for public health at FAMU.

Then there's Tracy Pleiss, the lead nurse. Andthe set-up crew, and the people who workregistration, and the many contract nurses who have rotated in and out of the site. As many as 50 people may be working at a given time.

The Personof the Year honor goes to all those who dedicate their time to make sure the FAMU COVID-19 testing site at2507 Wahnish Way runs smoothly, rain or shine, Monday through Saturday, 8 a.m.-4 p.m.

2020 Person of the Year: Health care heroes on the front lines of Tallahassee's COVID-19 battle

2019 Person of the Year: FAMU football coach Willie Simmons changes lives on, off the field

The 2018 Person of the Year: The helpers in the aftermath of Hurricane Michael

Early in the pandemic, Harris was approached by President Larry Robinson about opening a testing site on campus.

At that time, there was a disparity in the number of those who were being tested in underserved communities.

Opening a site near FAMU, especially near Tallahassees historically Black Greater Bond neighborhood, would provide access to people who could not get to testing sites in other parts of the city.

The site started on the east side of Bragg Memorial Stadium, then moved to the west side to make room for football season and construction. But testing continued Monday through Saturday, always free with no physician referralrequired.

More: FAMU COVID-19 testing site reopens on Wahnish Way

COVID warrior: Dr. Temple Robinson driven to fix health care disparities in Tallahassee

Nowits not just testing;FAMU offers COVID-19 vaccinations and boosters, too. The site hasbecome a public health hub for the entire community, not just the area surrounding FAMU especially during the latest omicron wave making its way through Leon County.

The site has been a magnet for people of all socioeconomic and geographic demographics, bringing many to the FAMU campus who hadnever set foot there.

Leon County reported 1,048 cases in the latest week.This is a482.2% increase from the week prior, which had180 cases.Local hospitalizationsare climbing, but slowly.

COVID in Leon County: Cases surge 482.2% as testing sites fill up

More: Tallahassee hospitals urge people to stop seeking COVID tests at ERs amid case surge

On the Monday after Christmas weekend, 1,000 tests had been administered by 10:30 a.m., Tatum said.

Last year, the Democrat recognized health care workers for their service and named them Person of the Year for 2020.

Testing site personnelare on the front lines, too.We will be there for as long as the community wants us to be there, Harris said.

On Tuesday,Pleiss, the lead nurse at the testing site, was multitasking her way through the morning as the line reached about 200 people deep.That morning, the site opened at 7:20 a.m. because there was already a line.

The COVID symptoms that she said she's seeing are similarto the common cold: stuffy nose, runny nose or sore throat. For people who arevaccinated, Pleiss says she's seeing much milder symptoms and faster recovery times.

On the other hand: "Even though your symptoms are mild when you go visit Grammy or celebrate New Year's,that doesn't mean it's going to affect that person the same way it affects you," she said.

2020 Person of the Year: Refugee turned CRMC doctor says 'we can't give up now' in COVID fight

2020 Person of the Year: 'COVID guru' at TMH keeps heartbreaking promise to patients' families

Alex Baumgartner, 29, was in line Wednesday morning to gettested because someone at his work tested positive. For a while during the pandemic, he was getting tested once a month. He estimated he's been tested about seven times just this year.

He said he gets his rapid results in 30 minutes, so he keeps coming back."(The line)moves pretty quickly," he said. "Sometimes I just walk up and not even have to wait."

The latest omicron variant is so infectious, Tatum said, that testing is crucial:"Were here for the community so that people can take care of themselves and take care of their families."

Tatum oversees the FAMU testing and vaccination site, but she also fills in for traffic duty, registration, set up and clean up.

Everybody works really well as a team so we all pitch in and do what we need to do, and everybody helps pick up trash," she said, laughing.

2020 Person of the Year: Bond nurse serves Tallahassee's most vulnerable during pandemic

More: FAMU opening own COVID-19 test site for students, staff; vaccines set to arrive

FAMU has partnered with a couple of labs throughout the pandemic, Tatum said. Most recently, the testing site has partnered with Nomi Health to hire medical personnel for swabbing and testing because of the company's quick turnaround time and their willingness to use the FAMU lab,whichprocesses results for FAMUstudents, faculty and staff.

FAMU's labis the result of a partnership between the university and Thermo Fisher Scientifics $25 million donation of diagnostic equipment, test kits and related supplies to a select group of HBCUs.

PCR tests, which detect even small amounts of the COVID-19 virus, go to either FAMU'slabor Nomi Health. Results are available within 12 to 48hours.

Rapid tests, which look for antigens orproteins of the virus to detect COVID-19,are also available, and results come within an hour. The site also now tests for Influenza A and B for people who are symptomatic.

The streamlined process is a result of months of trial and error. Different variants mean different configurations to keep people safe. They don't want to keep people standing in line and waiting.

The mission: Come in, swab, go on your way.

Its a calling, Tatumsaid. Everybody that works there really is invested in trying to do the best for the community."

Contact Ana Goi-LessanatAGoniLessan@tallahassee.comand follow her on Twitter@goni_lessan.

Want morenews coverage? If you're already a subscriber, thank you! If not, please subscribe using the link at the top of the pageand help keep the news you care about coming.

Read more here:

Tallahassee Democrat 2021 Person of the Year: FAMU COVID testing site workers - Tallahassee Democrat

Attorney General Josh Shapiro has a preferred running mate in his bid to be Pennsylvanias governor.

Shapiro on Tuesday plans to endorse state Rep. Austin Davis, a Western Pennsylvania Democrat who will simultaneously launch his campaign for lieutenant governor.

The endorsement would break with a recent tradition of Democratic gubernatorial candidates staying out of the lieutenant primary. And it stirred pushback from supporters of another hopeful in the race, Philadelphia state Rep. Brian Sims, who announced his candidacy nearly a year ago.

Davis, a first-term representative from the Mon Valley, an industrial center near Pittsburgh, will announce his run alongside Shapiro in McKeesport on Tuesday morning, both confirmed. The pair will make a second joint appearance in Philadelphia on Wednesday at the Octavius Catto statue outside City Hall.

In an interview Monday, Davis, the first Black representative elected for his district, said his working-class background will benefit the ticket and the office.

As the son of a Port Authority bus driver and a hairdresser in Allegheny a first-generation college graduate, with the student loans to prove it when I talk about working-class families thats because Im talking about my family, he said.

Pennsylvania is one of just a handful of states where candidates for lieutenant governor run separately from candidates for governor in the primary. The winners share their partys ticket in the general election.

Shapiro told The Inquirer he chose Davis because I wanted someone who brings a different life experience, who is diverse, who comes from a different part of the state than I do. He said with Davis as his second-in-command, there will always be a voice in the room that adds to the conversation and helps us achieve more for the good people of Pennsylvania.

Since Shapiro has effectively cleared the Democratic field for governor, the endorsement is likely to have a lot of sway. The Shapiro and Davis campaigns will work in tandem; without his own primary challenger, Shapiro can dedicate more time and resources to helping Davis.

Democrats vying for governor have traditionally stayed out of the race for lieutenant governor, resulting in some odd couplings. Former Lt. Gov. Mike Stack ran afoul of Gov. Tom Wolf, who didnt endorse him when he ran for reelection.

Former Gov. Ed Rendell said Monday that he thinks gubernatorial candidates should get to select their lieutenants, similar to presidential tickets. He said not having that option has hurt some in the past.

Swaying who becomes lieutenant governor also helps Democrats avoid a situation with too many candidates from one part of the state, or without any racial diversity, Rendell said.

Given the increasingly important role African Americans have played, it would be good to have an African American candidate in one of those three positions of governor, lieutenant governor, senator, he said.

Davis would be the states first Black lieutenant governor. Sims would be the first person to hold the position who is openly gay.

While the duties of lieutenant governor are limited, its a role that comes with a spotlight and often sets candidates up to run for higher offices. Lt. Gov. John Fetterman went from a small-town mayor to lieutenant governor to his current position as a front-runner in the Democratic Senate primary.

Davis, 32, worked in county government before running for state representative. Elected in 2018, he also chairs the Allegheny County House Democratic Delegation and is a member of the Pennsylvania Legislative Black Caucus.

Pennsylvanias Democratic establishment, already lined up behind Shapiro, is largely lining up behind Davis. The campaign said hes backed by Wolf, Rendell, state House and Senate leadership, and the majority of the House Democratic caucus, along with Mayor Ed Gainey in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia Council President Darrell Clarke.

Shapiro and Davis have collaborated in recent years, including on an antiviolence initiative in McKeesport and on a police misconduct database set up by the AGs office in the wake of George Floyds killing.

Shapiro had a short list of lieutenant governor candidates, which included Sims and Rep. Patty Kim, of Harrisburg, who decided not to run.

Sims said in a statement after the endorsement that Democrats are lucky to have a historically diverse field of candidates to choose from.

Sims, first elected in 2012, has raised at least $285,000 in his bid and enters the race with a profile and some name recognition, though hes also been the subject of some controversy, including in 2019 when he yelled at teenage protesters at Planned Parenthood.

Some of Sims backers were critical of Shapiros decision to inject himself into the race.

Amanda Waldman, a Democratic statehouse candidate in Lycoming County, called it a hijacking.

If the powers that be, the upper echelon of the political world, is making a decision on who a candidate should be in spite of what the constitution says specifically about the lieutenant governors race, whats the point of turning out? she asked.

Waldman said she has nothing against Davis but is wary of a candidate who announces his run in the same moment hes endorsed by Shapiro.

It feels very forced..., she said. Why hasnt he been out doing the work? And why is Shapiros campaign doing it for him?

There are ongoing efforts in the Pennsylvania legislature to change the constitution so that nominees for lieutenant governor do not run in separate primaries. None are likely to take effect in time to influence the May 2022 primary.

Davis said while the early ticketing up may be unique for Democrats in recent elections, he thinks it makes sense in a year where the gubernatorial front-runner is thus far unopposed. He said voters appreciated decisive leaders.

We know we want Josh Shapiro to lead us as our governor and he wants a strong governing partner in myself, and, while its unique, its what voters are looking for, Davis said.

Staff writer Chris Brennan contributed to this article.

Excerpt from:

Josh Shapiro wants Austin Davis, a 32-year-old Western Pa. lawmaker, to be his lieutenant governor - The Philadelphia Inquirer

John E. Wallace, Jr. sided with Democrats on a new map last month, but its not clear whether the New Jersey Supreme Court was aware of sizeable campaign contributions involving his politically active wife before they picked him to serve as the independent tiebreaker.

Barbara Wallace, who served on the staffs of Gov. Jon Corzine and U.S. Senator Frank Lautenberg, received substantial campaign contributions from stakeholders in the congressional redistricting process during her campaigns for mayor of Washington Township in Gloucester County about a decade ago.

A spokesperson for the court declined to say if justices knew about donations made by and to Mrs. Wallace before they voted to select her husband, a former state Supreme Court Justice, as the 13th member of the panel that redrew New Jerseys twelve House districts. John Wallace had been nominated by the Democrats and former Superior Court Judge Marina Corodemus was the candidate Republicans wanted.

Last year, Barbara Wallace contributed $250 to Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-Ewing) and $500 to U.S. Senator Bob Menendez in June, records show. She also made a small contributions to a federal PAC called Stop Republicans. In 2020, she made donations to Joe Biden and Democratic congressional candidate Amy Kennedy.

But more alarming to Republicans are the donors to her own mayoral campaigns.

She raised over $84,000 in 2011, when she was the Democratic candidate for mayor in a special election for a one-year unexpired term. That race was largely funded by supporters of the South Jersey Democratic machine, including $24,600 from the legislative campaign fund of 4th district Democrats State Sen. Fred Madden (D-Washington) is the Gloucester County Democratic Chairman $7,200 from the New Jersey Regional Council of Carpenters, $4,500 from Watson Coleman, and $8,2000 from Sheila Oliver, who was the Assembly Speaker at the time.

Her contributors also included other building trades unions including Ironworkers Local 399, which is headed by Richard Sweeney and Democratic elected officials.

When Mrs. Wallace sought a full-term in 2012, her donors included $8,200 each from Senate President Steve Sweeney, the Gloucester County Democratic Organization, and the Carpenters union, and $3,500 from Madden. She raised nearly $72,000 for that race, mostly from allies of the party organization.

In 2016, Gloucester County Democrats declined to support Mrs. Wallace for re-election, and she lost the Democratic primary to Joann Gattinelli by a 59%-41% margin. In that race, she received a $2,500 donation from Corzine and $4,600 from political action committees affiliated with the Communications Workers of America. Without party support, she only raised about $10,000 for her campaign.

While Wallace, as a judge, might have been forced to recuse himself from a matter that was tied to his wife, its not clear whether a redistricting tiebreaker was obligated to self-disclose the political contributions that are part of a public record.

Should Wallace have taken on the tiebreaker post knowing of the campaign contributions made by Democrats to his wife?

Its not actual conflicts, its appearances of conflicts, said Micah Rasmussen, the director of the Rebovich Institute of New Jersey Politics at Rider University, in an appearance on the New Jersey Globe Power Hour on Talk Radio 77 WABC. Maybe he should have taken a walk on this one.

John Wallace ended his 27-year judicial career in 2011 when Republican Gov. Chris Christie refused to renominate him to a tenured term. He is now affiliated with a politically influential South Jersey law firm with close ties to Democratic powerbroker George Norcross, Brown & Connery. Bill Tambussi, a partner at the firm, has been the counsel to the Camden County Democratic organization for 32 years and is the personal attorney for George E. Norcross III, a major Democratic powerbroker.

The Supreme Court did not seek any input from the redistricting commissioners before choosing Wallace over Corodemus, and did not interview either of the candidates, the New Jersey Globe has learned.

Republicans did not raise the issue of campaign contributions during the map-drawing process indeed, its not clear they knew about them prior to Wallaces vote but that might not have mattered.

Wallace had all the power, said one Republican leader, who spoke on the condition of anonymity Its not like we could have questioned his integrity, even privately, without taking a risk that he would hold it against us.

After Wallace picked the Democratic map on December 22, the GOP redistricting chairman, Doug Steinhardt, told the New Jersey Globe that he wasnt surprised.

Wallace was never a 13th member, Steinhardt said. He was a 7th Democrat.

John Wallace did not immediately respond to a 1:08 PM email.

Correction: an earlier version of this story incorrectly reported a small contribution to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Read this article:

Democrats were huge contributors to campaign of redistricting tiebreaker's wife - New Jersey Globe | New Jersey Politics

The United States, the United Kingdom, Norway and the European Union on Tuesday called for Sudanese leaders to recommit to the countrys democratic transition or risk international action against the ruling military.

The joint statement came following the resignation on Monday of Sudanese Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok, who said he was stepping down after failure to reach consensus with the military on a pathway to transition to a civilian government.

The military had earlier detained Hamdok and other civilian leaders during an armed takeover of the government in October, citing stalled progress to transition to a democratic, civilian-led government.

The military dissolved the civilian-military transitional government that had been put in place in 2019 after a popular revolution ousted longtimeleader Omar al-Bashir in 2019.

The U.S., the U.K., Norway the so-called Troika and the EU called the militarys seizure of power in October unconstitutional and called for all Sudanese leaders to recommit to the countrys democratic transition and deliver on the Sudanese peoples demands for freedom, peace, and justice.

In the absence of progress, we would look to accelerate efforts to hold those actors impeding the democratic process accountable, the statement continued.

The U.S. and its allies further condemned the military as responsible for human rights violations against the Sudanese people,as street protests opposing the militarys takeover of the transitional government have reportedly been met with deadly force and disturbing violence.

The statement cited the killing of scores of Sudanese civilians, sexual violence, and hundreds of civilians injured by the military or armed groups and called for the military to cease attacks on hospitals, end the detention of activities and journalists, andstop communication blackouts.

The right of the Sudanese people to assemble peacefully and express their demands needs to be protected. We expect the security services and other armed groups to refrain from using further violence against peaceful protestors and civilians across the country, especially in Darfur, the statement read.

The Western powers also warned against the military taking unilateral action to appoint a new prime minister and Cabinet that did not involve a broad range of civilian stakeholders.

Such a dialogue should be fully inclusive and representative of historically marginalized groups, include youth and women, and would help put the country back on the path to democracy, the statement read.

Sudans people have spoken as loudly and clearly as they did in 2019. They reject authoritarian rule and want the transition toward democracy to continue. Sudans leaders must now show they are listening, it added.

Read the rest here:

US, allies threaten action against Sudan military absent democratic transition | TheHill - The Hill

Democratic presidential nominee and former Vice President Joe Biden speaks to reporters before boarding his campaign plane at Duluth International Airport in Duluth, Minn., on Sep. 18, 2020.

Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images

If politics worked the way we learn about it in school, Biden and his party would have seized this fleeting opportunity to pass his popular agenda and cement and expand their power.

Instead, after a strong start with the American Rescue Plan, passed in March, the Democrats have puttered forward, slowly losing momentumand now appearing at a standstill. Here are all the things they could have done this year, in theory, but did not.

Its true that Democrats hold the Senate with the slimmest margin possible, needing the votes of all 50 Democratic senators including semi-quasi-Democrats like West Virginias Joe Manchin to pass anything.

But normal people will rightfully never accept this as an excuse if theyre even aware of it, which many likely are not. Since Bidens inauguration, his approval rating has fallen from 57 percent to 43 percent. Even among Democrats, its gone down from 98 percent to 78 percent.

Democratic voters might have maintained enthusiasm if the partys leaders had explained that they actually had a plan one to use all the power they now have to improve peoples lives and to get more power to do more in the future. Instead, their only plan appears to be to come up with as many excuses as possible for their sluggish drift to nowhere.

This dynamic is the same as when Barack Obama took office in 2009. He had the greatest grassroots army ever assembled in U.S. political history, one extremely eager to keep fighting. Instead, Obama essentially told them to go home, stay out of his hair, and let him handle things from there. The Democratic Party then spent the next eight years quietly collapsing into dust across America.

Biden did not have the same energy behind him as a person. But there was certainly lots of energy to be mobilized to keep Donald Trump from returning to the White House, via bold action that Americans would feel in their everyday lives. The Democrats have not done this.

One potential explanation for this is what can be called The Iron Law of Institutions i.e., that people within institutions like the Democratic Party are primarily interested in maintaining power inside the institution, rather than the institutions overall success. Any steps to expand the partys power would require bringing in new constituencies, which would in turn lead to some current constituencies losing their status.

This phenomenon could be seen clearly in the 1972 election. George McGovern won the Democratic nomination by taking advantage of new ruleswhich had madethe process much more small-d democratic; he sought out donors and voters from the anti-war movement, the civil rights movement, the youth movement, and more. The old guard of the Democratic Party did not like this at all. During the period between the convention and the election, they were given to saying that McGovern was gonna lose because were gonna make sure hes gonna lose. After McGovern did lose badly, his campaign gave their list of 600,000 volunteers and small donors to the Democratic National Committee, then run by the Robert Strauss, a right-wing powerbroker from Texas. The DNC promptly threw the list away.

Whatever the reason for Democratic stasis, its perplexing: Even if they dont care about making things better for Americans, you might think theyd be interested in self-preservation. Biden, for instance, will probably beimpeached if Republicans take back the House in the 2022 midterm elections. But this has not produced enough motivation for the Democrats to seriously try to make any of thefollowing things happen.

Presidents have enormous unilateral power, if they choose to use it. Biden doesnt need Congress to cancel student debt (as a candidate he called for forgiveness of a minimum of $10,000/person); make marijuana effectively legal (Bidens lack of action has frustrated even some Republicans); or force drug companies to lower prices (as issue Democrats have purportedly supported for 30 years). Biden has done none of these things, although he has utilizedexecutive orders in some areas.

Activists attend a rally about voting rights and ending the filibuster near the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Aug. 3, 2021.

Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images

There is no future for Democrats, or democracy, if the GOP succeeds in its ever-more strenuous efforts to undermine the meaningfulness of the ballot. There are three main things Democrats must do to prevent this, but havent.

First, they have to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. In 2013, the Supreme Court killed the most significant part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which requires that jurisdictions that have engaged in discrimination get permission from the federal government beforechanging their voting laws. The JLVRAA would restore preclearance.

Second, they have to pass theFreedom to Vote Act,which has eight cosponsors in the Senate, including Manchin. The bill incorporates many provisions of the now-deadFor the People Act, and would prevent partisan gerrymandering, purges of voter rolls, restrictions on ballot access, and more.

Third, they must reform the Electoral Count Act of 1887, a badly written law that Trumps allies planned to use to keep him in office despite his loss of the election.

The Senate was designed by James Madison to, in his words, protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The filibuster was invented by accident in 1806 and has generally been used to protect the opulent and thwart the will of the majority even moreadamantlythan Madison envisioned.

The Democrats could eliminate or restrict the filibuster today if they wanted to. So far they havent wanted to.

Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff both won in the January 5 Georgia Senate runoff election by promising voters that if they won, eligible Americans would receive $2,000 in additional support during the pandemic. Biden promised it too, saying, Their election will put an end to the block in Washington that $2,000 stimulus check that money would go out the door immediately. Then both Warnock and Ossoff did win. Then it turned out $2,000 didnt mean $2,000,but rather $1,400, because Democrats were now counting $600 from a bill already passed in December 2020 under Trump. A Democratic politician even edited a Warnock ad to convert the $2,000 into $1,400. Psych!

There should be a national minimum wage of $15 an hour, Biden said in his first address to Congress in April. Then the Senate parliamentarian declared that raising the minimum wage could not pass via budget reconciliation and hence would need to overcome a filibuster. The Democrats could have ignored the parliamentarian or as both Democrats and Republicans have done to previous parliamentarians dismissed her. Instead theyve just given up, leaving the minimum wage at $7.25 about the same level in real terms as during the 1950s. (In fairness, Biden has issued an executive order increasing the minimum wage to $15 for federal contractors.)

The world desperately needs the U.S. to take action to decarbonize the American economy. Various measures to make this happen were in various versions of the Build Back Better bills. But with the BBB agenda on life support, its anyones guess whether there will be significant climate accomplishmentsduringthe Biden administration.

Signs sit on the ground as a small group of pro-abortion protesters gather outside a New York City courthouse as oral arguments begin over Mississippis controversial abortion law begin at the Supreme Court on Dec. 1, 2021.

Photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images

Even if the Supreme Court overturnsRoe v. Wade, Congress possesses the power to prevent states from making it illegal. Of course, Texas has demonstrated how far the GOP will go to restrict abortion access even without a Roe decision. But Congress can also stop such state-level efforts. The House has passed such a bill, but it has no chance in the Senate.

Organized labor has always been the backbone of successful progressive politics, in the U.S. and around the world, and any progressive party would prioritize rejuvenating the labor movement. The decline of the U.S. middle class can be measured in the decline in unions: Almost 30 percent of the workforce was unionized in the 1950s. Its now barely 10 percent overall, and only 6 percent in the private sector. The Protect the Right to Organize Act would have made organizing unions much easier. (Some of the PRO Act was incorporatedinto a version of the Build Back Better bill, but again, its now unclear whether any BBB law will pass.)

The increase of the Child Tax Credit in the American Rescue Plan is estimated to have reduced child poverty in the U.S. by 40 percent. It is a moral and policy slam dunk and should be a political slam dunk actual, material support for family values, rather than cynical rhetoric. But the expansion will expire on January 1, 2022.

It shouldnt be beyond the capacity of the U.S. government to simply mail lots of high-quality masks and home Covid tests to everyone in the country, but apparently it is.

There are six justices on the Supreme Court appointed by GOP presidents. Yet only one of them, Clarence Thomas, was appointed by a Republican president who was first elected with a plurality of votes. (John Roberts and Samuel Alito were appointed by George W. Bush in his second term.)

The current courts makeup guarantees that any new Democratic initiatives will face a real prospect of being declared unconstitutional. This is so blatantly anti-democratic that it will inevitably lead to some kind of political explosion. The only way to defuse this would be to add members to the court appointed by Biden, plus some common-sense reforms that would lower the stakes of future appointments. Biden created a commission to study what to do about the court, the classic move when you plan to do nothing.

Supreme Court Associate Justice Stephen Breyer testifies before the House Judiciary Committees Commercial and Administrative Law Subcommittee on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on May 20, 2010.

Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

At the very least, Democrats could have exerted pressure in every way possible to encourageStephen Breyer to retire, so Biden could replace him with a younger justice. Breyer, now 83, has seen Ruth Bader Ginsburgs example right in front of him: She was diagnosed with two forms of cancer yet refused to step down during the Obama presidency, finally dying while Trump was president. Yet this seems to have made no impression on either Breyer or Democratic elites, who surely could influence him if they wanted to.

The disenfranchisement of Washington, D.C. residentsis an incredible, ongoing scandal yet it endures because ending it would lessen GOP power, and Democrats dont press the issue. With a population larger than that of Wyoming and Vermont, D.C. hasno representation in the Senate, and one representative in the House, whocan sometimes vote as long as it doesnt matter. D.C. residents clearly want statehood and should get it.

Meanwhile, more people live in Puerto Rico than 20 states. The most recent referendum on statehood there found a small majority does want to become a member of the union.

Biden has pumped the brakes on the U.S. use of drones, and he managed to withdraw from Afghanistan, something three previous presidents couldnt bring themselves to do. But beyond that, his foreign policy trundles onward down predictable paths. Hes spoken nice words about ending the Saudi war on Yemen, with little follow-up in reality. Remarkably, he did not move immediately to rejoin theIran nuclear deal negotiated by Obama and with the election of a new Iranian president in June, the window for that may have closed. His policy toward China bears a lot of similarities to that of Trumps.

Thanks to a drought, plus U.S. sanctions and a halt to much international aid after the Taliban takeover, tens of millions of Afghans face potentially life-threatening hunger this winter. Aid organizations say a million Afghan children could die. Its within the power of the Biden administration to greatly ameliorate this situation, but so far its largely paid lip serviceto any humanitarian concerns. Members of the Senate appear to share a bipartisan indifferenceto this looming catastrophe.

That brings us to 2022, which begins tomorrow. It is, of course, theoretically possible that the Democrats will take significant action on some of these issues in the coming year.But with rareexceptions, thats not how U.S. politics work. The biggest things happen in a presidents first year in office, or they dont happen at all.

See the rest here:

Everything Democrats Didn't Do in 2021 - The Intercept

After Barack ObamaBarack Hussein ObamaWill Biden's 2021 foreign policy failures reverberate in 2022? Voting rights: The safety pin that holds America together Eleven interesting races to watch in 2022 MOREs 2008 White House victory, Democrats believed they had created an unbreakable coalition of the ascendant voters, driven by increasing participation of minority groups and college-educated women. But recent left-wing economic and policy woes have brought about a demographic realignment that threatens to sink Democrats chances not just for 2022, but for the next several decades.

As President BidenJoe BidenKentucky governor declares state of emergency after powerful storm Seven most vulnerable governors facing reelection in 2022 At least 20 states to increase minimum wage starting Saturday MOREs approval ratings have tanked with nonwhite voters, the Democratic Party increasingly has become dominated by liberal white women who virtue-signal with suburban lawn signs and then henpeck people in supermarkets to pull their face masks up over their noses. Or, put more simply, the Democratic Party is at risk of becoming a party of Karens. Recent polling suggests that Hispanic and Black voters are abandoning the party many of these individuals are being harmed by thesurging inflation,anti-business COVID measures, and explodingcrimerates in urban areas brought about by a year of left-wing measures.

For more than a decade, Democrats worked to build a voting base composed of minorities and unmarried women. After Donald TrumpDonald TrumpOne in three Americans say violence against government sometimes justified: poll Seven most vulnerable governors facing reelection in 2022 Sunday shows preview: Omicron surge continues; anniversary of Jan. 6 attack approaches MOREs 2020 loss, it would appear the mission was being accomplished. White voters dropped from 81 percent of the electorate in 2000 to just 67 percent two decades later. Meanwhile, Biden carried a whopping 63 percent of single women in 2020.

However, poor public policy over the past year is already casting the idea of a continuing Democratic majority in doubt. Recent polling suggests that Hispanic and Black Americans are more likely to vote as individuals than as aggrieved racial blocs.

In February, nearly 70 percent of Hispanic voters supported Biden by November, that number had crashed to below 50 percent. In early polling for the 2022 midterms, Hispanic voters split 37-37 percent between the two major parties in their congressional preferences. There are many fingers that could be pointed at why, but two factors seem most significant. First, to borrow a phrase from James Carville, Its the economy, stupid. Record high stock prices and artificially low unemployment rates cant paper up rampant inflation, supply shortages and decreasing numbers of employees in the workforce. Among a population that owns their own businesses at parity rates with whites and whose average incomes are catching up with the majority population, the wider economy is more than an abstract concept. Second, the cancer of wokeness is downright anathema to Hispanic Americans. Forty percent find the phrase Latinx offensive and just 2 percent of the group actually uses the phrase.

The panic must be real for Democrats. Not only are migrs from socialism among Venezuelan and Cuban Americans increasingly voting Republican, so are Mexican Americans especially in South Texas. The disapproval rate for Biden among the group is higher than that among whites.

Among Black voters, Bidens approval had fallen from 85 percent to 67 percent by September and has continued to slide. The increasingly vapid demands of the urbane upper-middle class often harm the communities that liberals claim to help. NIMBYism drives up housing prices for minority residents. Defund the police rhetoric has led to major cuts in law enforcement in some cities, as violent crime soars and quality of life declines. Families in cities such as Chicago, which has experienced more murders in 2021 than any year since 1996, are forced to live with shootings that occur routinely in public areas in some cases, young children have been killed by flying bullets. Black Democrats are 20 percent more likely to support more police funding than their white counterparts.Large looting gangs rove San Francisco and Chicago. Poor policy and rampant handouts have created tent cities in former tourist areas such as Venice Beach, Calif. Homeless people and drug addicts fill subway cars in New York City. Philadelphias Kensington neighborhood is known for being a large, open-air drug market. Now, COVID-19 vaccine mandates have helped to destroy immigrant-owned businesses and may disproportionately affect Black residents. The issues most crucial to the new kingmakers of the Democratic Party are not only counter to the popular will of many nonwhite voters but may actively harm them.

If the Democratic Party no longer has Hispanic and Black voters as electoral locks, it is left with a diminishing constituency of its most consistent members: single, college-educated white women, who dominated last years social media slacktivism and protests. It is possible that this liberal woman demographic would be able to hold enough sway to choose Democrat nominees for the foreseeable future. And yet, party bigwigs must understand that as offensive as much of the electorate considered Donald Trump, morphing into the party of Karens who are more concerned about your carbon footprint than keeping your community safe, likely will further alienate Hispanic and Black voters.

The coming Second Great Awokening not only threatens the fabric of Americas history and future, but also threatens to rip apart the Democratic Party coalition. Voters of all races who support public safety, economic opportunity and a dose of sanity in politics may find a home in the Republican Party. For many, such a choice will be natural. For others, it will be because the new Democratic Party simply left them behind.

Kristin Tate is a libertarian writer whose latest book is How Do I Tax Thee? A Field Guide to the Great American Rip-Off. Follow her on Twitter @KristinBTate.

Go here to read the rest:

The party of 'Karens': The new Democratic Party alienates nonwhite voters | TheHill - The Hill

After Joe Manchin killed President Bidens ambitious Build Back Better spending bill, some Senate Democrats have moved onto a plan to pass voting rights legislation by exempting the topic from the filibusters requirement of 60 votes. This is the wrong lesson to take from their legislative defeat, which actually shows why Democratic leaders have been wise to preserve the filibuster. Until maverick Democrats Joe Manchin and Krystin Sinema become reliable partisans, getting 50 votes for legislation will be almost as difficult as getting 60.

Democrats are rightfully frustrated by their inability to pass legislation. But their problems are rooted in the politics of 2020, not 1837, the year of the first Senate filibuster. Democrats cannot lose a single vote in the 50-50 Senate, yet Manchin and Sinema regularly break with the party on issues like rolling back the Trump tax cuts and letting Medicaid pay for abortion. They also disagree with each other on many issues, so concessions to one may further alienate the other.

Even without the filibuster, either Manchin or Sinema could still kill any voting rights bill. The same is true for codifying Roe v. Wade into law, universal background checks for gun buyers, and making it easier for workers to organize into a union. Indeed, given their actions so far, the chance of these bills getting 50 votes is almost zero.

George W. Bush faced a similar dynamic in the first two years of his presidency, with an evenly divided Senate that included liberal Republicans Lincoln Chaffee and Jim Jeffords. His domestic legislative agenda was limited to a tax cut that got 12 Democratic votes and an education bill co-sponsored by liberal icon Ted Kennedy.

Weakening the filibuster will not lead to transformative progressive legislation but a stronger Republican Party. Because every state gets two senators, the Senate favors less populous, rural states that are now Republican strongholds. Unless Democrats somehow reverse a decade of decline with white, non-college educated voters, Republicans will control the Senate most of the time. That means Democrats should preserve the filibuster at all costs, not out of devotion to 19th century legislative norms, but because it is in their political interest to preserve the power of the Senates minority party.

Many progressives want to ignore this grim reality. Some argue the filibuster doesnt check Republican majorities because Republicans only goals are confirming conservative apparatchiks as judges and cutting taxes which only require 50 votes under the rules of the Senate. This ignores the potent power of conservative legislation. Free from the 60-vote threshold, a Republican majority could pass a federal right to work law, a version of Texass de facto abortion ban, and allow nationwide unrestricted concealed carry of handguns. Without the filibuster, Democrats only response to far-right legislation will be sending angry Tweets and frantic fundraising emails while Mitch McConnell sends his agenda to a Republican president.

The other Democratic argument for strengthening the power of Senate majorities is that Republicans will eliminate the filibuster the moment it limits their agenda. Under this logic, Democrats should strike first. This ignores reality. While McConnell will use the 50-vote threshold if its handed to him, he has shown no appetite for creating it on his own. In 2016, while Donald Trump was president and Republicans had a 52-48 Senate majority, the legislative filibuster went untouched.

Democrats should not hand the Republicans the political equivalent of a loaded gun just because theyre rightfully frustrated by the constraints of a 50-50 Senate majority. Instead, Charles Schumer and President Biden should try to salvage as much of Build Back Better as they can. That could mean shrinking the bill to something Manchin can support or going bipartisan and embracing Mitt Romneys alternative plan for a child tax credit. Neither of these options will thrill progressives, but theyre certainly better than weakening the filibuster a year away from Republicans controlling at least one chamber of Congress.

Brian Jencunas is a Massachusetts-based political and government relations consultant.

Original post:

Jencunas: Democrats would be smart to protect the filibuster - Boston Herald

Recently ousted Democratic Nassau County (N.Y.) Executive Laura Curran told "Watters' World" on Saturday that her party is conveying weakness and faces a "bloodbath" in the 2022 midterms if it doesn't step up.

LAURA CURRAN: Unfortunately, my party, the Democratic Party, just conveys weakness right now. It almost feels like elder abuse with what's going on with President Biden. He has a hard time putting a sentence together. I think everyone gets nervous listening to him talk, he's going to mess up. What we need always, and especially now, is someone who exudes confidence and competence. Someone who sets a reassuring tone. And we're not getting that at the top right now, and unfortunately, I think your previous guest, Karl Rove, is absolutely right. I think it's going to be a bloodbath for the Democrats in the midterms.

LONG ISLAND COUNTY LEADER ON WHY HE WON'T ENFORCE MASK MANDATE: NOT NECESSARY

As a Democrat, I think it's really important to have a strong, two-party system. I think it's good for democracy. I don't think it should be one-party rule either way, but unfortunately it seems like we're giving the Republicans ammunition just to shoot us because we exude this weakness. People want to be reassured that government is there for them, not telling them what to do, but making sure the roads are in good shape, making sure the sewage is properly run, making sure that public safety is where it should be. That's what people are expecting. Unfortunately, my party is not delivering this right now.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

WATCH THE FULL INTERVIEWBELOW:

Read more from the original source:

Ousted Democratic county executive warns her party faces 'bloodbath' in 2022, conveys 'weakness' - Fox News

As 2022 is kicking off, America nears the first anniversary of Joe Bidens presidency. Following the tenures ambitious start, the last few months witnessed some serious tumult around the overall health of the United States economy, the administrations handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the tense debate around Bidens opus magnum the $1.7 trillion Build Back Better infrastructure legislation plan.

But even as the Democrats ability to maintain undivided power after the 2022 midterm elections can raise doubts, the partys prevailing view of crypto has become more consolidated than ever. The incumbent presidents party will be setting the tone of the regulatory discussion for at least three more years, so a thorough look at the fundamental premises and potential directions of its emerging crypto stance is in order.

The path that mainstream Democrat thinking on crypto has traveled over the last three years is perfectly captured by an anecdote featuring two crypto-related public statements made by a Clinton. One is by the 42nd U.S. president, Bill Clinton, then 72, who said at Ripples Swell Conference in October 2018 that the "permutations and possibilities" of blockchain were "staggeringly great.

Three years later, speaking at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum in Singapore, Bills wife and ex-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, though calling the cryptocurrencies an interesting technology, warned about their power to undermine the U.S. dollar and destabilize nations perhaps starting with small ones but going much larger.

This startling difference in opinion within the power couple reflects the recent evolution of the Democratic party, itself from a third way, business, tech and finance-friendly centrism of its 1990s generation to the newfound statism with a heavy emphasis on redistributional justice and big government projects. By current standards, the former first lady sounded rather balanced in comparison to her party comrade Senator Elizabeth Warren, who has famously lashed out at the crypto market after the volatility outburst in early September:

Warren berated crypto on numerous occasions, calling it a fourth-rate alternative to real currency that is unsuitable as a medium of exchange; a lousy investment, that has no consumer protection; and a tool that makes many illegal activities easier.

The negative sentiment is largely shared by Senator Sherrod Brown, which is arguably even more unsettling given his status as chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Browns opening statements at Congress hearings have never been amicable towards crypto. Their overall spirit can be summarized in the introduction that opened the July hearing entitled Cryptocurrencies: What are they good for?

Brown blamed the cottage industry of decentralized financial schemes for an attempt to create a parallel financial system with no rules, no oversight, and no limits, calling it a shady, diffuse network of online funny money, with nothing democratic or transparent about it. The lawmaker repeatedly rejected the notion that crypto could be an alternative to legacy money last time at a December Congress hearing:

Its not all dark, though. One figure that represents a more moderate, if not pragmatic approach to crypto Congresswoman Maxime Waters would also play a major role in any future outcome for the industry. As a chairwoman of the House Committee on Financial Services, she initiated the Digital Assets Working Group of Democratic Members with a mission to ensure responsible innovation in the cryptocurrency and digital asset space and meet with leading regulators, advocates, and other experts on how these novel products and services are reshaping our financial system.

Related: Lines in the sand: US Congress is bringing partisan politics to crypto

Sen. Waters has publicly recognized that Americans are increasingly making financial decisions using digital assets every day, and affirmed that her Committee will explore the promise of digital assets in providing faster payments, instantaneous settlements and lower transaction fees for remittances.

The good news is that underneath the redoubtable oratory, there is a keyword: regulation. It is clear, at this point, that a China-style total war on crypto isnt an option in the U.S. Therefore, what drives the heated activity of congressional committees and federal agencies in recent months is a clear intention of the Democratic establishment to sort out the rules of the game before the next presidential election.

Part of this effort of the Biden administration is the launch of the President's Working Group on Financial Markets, a superhero team composed of the SEC, CFTC, OCC, FDIC and Federal Reserve System executives, with the secretary of the Treasury Department leading the group.

So far, the key product of the Working Group is a 26-page report on stablecoins, which advises Congress to designate some stablecoin-related activities such as payment, clearing and settlement as systemically important (which would inevitably lead to a tighter oversight) and limit stablecoin issuance to insured depository institutions, i.e., banks.

As in the pre-Biden era, the main problem lies with the core classification of digital assets. The PWG report failed to propose a novel interpretation and give precedence to a single regulatory body, thus perpetuating a situation where a variety of regulators oversee different types of crypto-related activity.

In October, Rostin Behnam, the chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and a member of the Democratic Party, claimed that as much as 60% of digital assets can be classified as commodities, which amounts to proposing that the agency become the lead U.S. cryptocurrency regulator. He also further stated that his agency, as well as the Securities and Exchange Commission, would likely need a regulatory structure for both securities and commodities. How exactly that would help the ongoing patchwork approach to regulation is still a mystery.

There are several reasons to believe that the largely proclamatory activity of 2021 will be followed up by some real action in the following year. The first is the general idealistic mindset of U.S. Democrats. For example, the drive to aggressively regulate Big Tech is part and parcel of this mindset.

While President Barack Obama and some regulators worked alongside Google and Twitter to facilitate the growth of internet businesses, Joe Bidens administration came to power amid the wave of popular anxiety over international cyberattacks, personal data leaks, Metas crisis mismanagement and the overall outsize influence on the political process accumulated by tech goliaths.

While Meta and Google have been fighting federal and state regulators in courts over allegations of anticompetitive conduct for a while, Bidens team also pledged to hold tech companies to account for toxic speech they host and strengthen policing anti-competitive practices.

However, in 2021, we havent witnessed any significant policy steps in this direction. Neither of the two major legislative proposals Amy Klobuchars bill, which would bar big tech platforms from favoring their own products and services, and a bill by House Democrats that seeks to remove some protections afforded tech companies by Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act has become law.

The second reason behind the Democratic rush to put crypto within the regulatory perimeter is pragmatic: The Biden administration and its allies on Capitol Hill need money. Bidens first-term agenda relies heavily on ambitious Roosveltian infrastructure projects. While the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act managed to get bipartisan support and was signed into law on November 5, the Build Back Better Act, which now hangs by a thread after Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin had announced his opposition to the current draft, would cost nearly $2 trillion.

By some estimates, should it make it to the presidents desk, the spending program would increase the deficit by $360 billion over 10 years, making it urgent to raise more tax revenue. This is what makes a thriving crypto industry an important battlefield for Democrats, who see the possibility of harvesting some cash from it and an urgency to prevent tax evasion via digital tools.

Theres no doubt that the Biden administration will continue to pursue a strict regulatory agenda in 2022. We will see more Congressional hearings next year, but even more consequential negotiations will be taking place behind closed doors, where Democrats will have to finally decide whether the SEC, CFTC or any other body should dominate crypto oversight. Despite Sharrod Browns recent with or without Congress remarks, it is also hard to believe that Republicans will let their opponents single-handedly decide the fate of the industry.

Go here to see the original:

How the Democratic Party didnt stop worrying and fearing crypto in 2021 - Cointelegraph

Even a most optimistic gloss on 2021 would say it was a year of high hopes and huge disappointments. All the things that looked to have been chased away in 2020totalitarian Republicans in control, coronavirus out of controlare either back, or a near-certainty to return imminently. Democrats seized power at the beginning of the year and by its end had proven beyond argument that they, as ever, had no intention of wielding it. My year in review traces a few of those steps.

Six days into the new year, a mob stormed the Capitol in a coup attempt that was orchestrated in close collaboration with Republican leadershipremember that? That group intended to ensure that democratically elected Democrats could never again hold power; they might have been happy to pick off a few choice Democrats (and Mike Pence) in the process. And yet most Democrats were content to scold Donald Trump and his conspirators with a few harsh tweets. Only the Squad extendedyoung members of the progressive flankwere willing to call for impeachment from the get-go, and theyre the only reason that it happened. Moderate Dems were not comfortable with the message it sent. Of course, even those progressives couldnt get Democratic leadership to use its mandate to prosecute Trump, and now those people will just return to power the old-fashioned way, and pick up where they left off.

By May, Democrats were off to the races, by which I mean abandoning their legislative ambitions at full tilt. With the anniversary of George Floyds death and a late-May deadline on police reform looming, and not long after House Democrats knelt on the floor of the Capitol Visitor Center in kente cloths in an oddball stunt signaling their support for the largest protest movement in American history, third-ranking Democrat Jim Clyburn went into undertaker mode, hitting the cable news circuit to undermine his very own Congressional Black Caucuss chief ambitions on police reform (and the party broadly). After swearing on national television that qualified-immunity reforms were not important, Clyburn armed Republican Tim Scott to renege on commitments hed already made in the bill, and condemned it to death. It would be a few months before this was acknowledged broadly, but I wrote about it in mid-May. Another mild legislative ambition rerouted to the dustbin.

While the Biden administration was showing next to no urgency in its legislative program, attention turned to its judicial appointments, another arena where Democrats swore theyd learn hard lessons from the mistakes of their predecessors. While President Obama decided the courts werent a priority, President Trump had done the opposite, stuffing the judiciary full of underqualified ideologues with lifetime appointments. Biden put out a call to his Senate contemporaries for civil rights and public-interest lawyers to help balance out an irredeemably unbalanced court system; that call was heeded only partway, a troubling sign of the widespread disrespect from Senate Democrats toward their former colleague and self-identified Senate whisperer. Of course, with his primary loyalty to norms and not an agenda, Biden just appointed those corporate lawyer nominees he had explicitly disavowed anyway.

This year featured few elections, and with congressional Democrats theoretically in the heat of the legislative process in early August, a special primary election to replace Housing and Urban Development Secretary Marcia Fudge in a D+60 district should have been a non-event. The Marcia Fudge/Shontel Brown race proved to be anything but. A party far more interested in quashing the ascendant progressive bloc than battling Republicans and accomplishing anything in Washington instead went all out in Cleveland. The Congressional Black Caucus, fresh off stranding police reform, went all out to push its preferred candidate, Shontel Brown, across the finish line, with the CBC endorsing Brown without her even receiving a majority of endorsements from caucus members. Browns campaign meanwhile relied on a campaign finance gambit of an extremely dubious nature, one that would have been in clear violation of the campaign finance reforms on super PAC collaboration in the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, also a priority of the CBC. Brown won, proving that congressional Dems can achieve something if they care enough. The John Lewis Voting Rights Act was not so lucky.

If Senate Democrats had no real regard for the Democratic agenda by June, House Democrats caught up in August. In this profile of New Jersey Problem Solver Josh Gottheimer, I traced how the face of legislative sabotage in the House was a true institutional make and model, a product of the Clinton administration from his first day in politicsthe very sort of centrist, lifetime Democrat who is always accusing progressives of party disloyalty. Without ever summoning an intellectually legitimate argument, Gottheimer spearheaded the corporate-funded attempt to pass a fossil fuelheavy, lobbyist-authored highway bill (bipartisan infrastructure) and untether it from the Build Back Better Act, where the entirety of the Democratic agenda resided. He didnt succeed, nor did he win any style points, but it was evidence enough of a growing appetite for self-sabotage that was ready to reveal itself months down the line.

This session, according to Nancy Pelosis own House rules, was sure to be the last with octogenarians Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, and Jim Clyburn in the top three ranking leadership spots. With Democrats staring down a possible House minority after 2022s midterms, the party was going to swiftly pass its ambitious agenda and allow its leaders to ride off into the sunset, with Build Back Better acting as Pelosis legacyor so she said. Of course, the bench of Democratic talent is paper-thin, and the odds-on favorite to succeed Pelosi, New Yorks Hakeem Jeffries, had spent the year engaging in internecine squabbles, settling scores with the progressive flank while arming the right-wing minority that helped sabotage Build Back Better. Not long after, Pelosi announced she did not feel comfortable handing over the reins. An aged party gets even older.

December 29, 2021

5:30 AM

Read the original here:

How Democrats Blew It in 2021 - The American Prospect