#Texas Women’s Health Caucus | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

dontmeantobepoliticalbut · 2 years

Text

Texas health officials have missed a key window to complete the state's first major updated count of pregnancy related deaths in nearly a decade, saying the findings will now be released next summer, most likely after the Legislature's biennial session.

The delay, disclosed earlier this month by the Department of State Health Services, means lawmakers won't likely be able to use the analysis, covering deaths from 2019, until the 2025 legislative cycle. The most recent state-level data available is nine years old.

In a hearing this month with the state’s Maternal Mortality and Morbidity Review Committee, DSHS commissioner Dr. John Hellerstedt said the agency wanted to better align its methodology with that of other states, and that there hadn’t been enough staff and money to finish the review for a scheduled Sept. 1 release.

“The information we provide is not easily understood, and not easily and readily comparable to what goes on in other states,” Hellerstedt told the committee. “And the fact it isn’t easily understood or easily comparable in my mind leaves room for a great deal of misunderstanding about what the data really means.”

In a statement, DSHS spokesman Chris Van Deusen said the agency is reviewing its “internal processes” to try to develop more timely data.

“I expect we’ll be having conversations with legislators about what could be done to speed up the lengthy review process,” he said.

The setback comes four months before the start of the legislative session and two months before the midterm election, which has been dominated in part by the state’s new Republican-led abortion ban. Those restrictions have placed more scrutiny on the state’s maternal mortality rate, which is among the 10 highest in the country, according to national estimates that track pregnancy-related complications while pregnant or within a year of giving birth.

“There are a lot of us that want to know whether or not pregnancy in Texas is a death sentence,” said state Rep. Ann Johnson, a Houston Democrat and member of the Texas Women’s Health Caucus. “If we’ve got a higher rate of maternal mortality, we sure want to figure it out. You can’t figure it out if somebody’s sitting on the numbers, and that’s my worry.”

Like in other states, maternal outcomes in Texas are worse for Black women, who have died at about three times the rate of non-black women. This year’s findings were expected to drill further into the causes behind those disparities.

Rep. Shawn Thierry, a Houston Democrat who has described going through her own dangerous birthing experience, said the data is critical for understanding the role cesarean sections play in maternal deaths and whether implicit bias is playing a factor in the quality of maternal care for Black women.

“There is so much to unpack from the data,” Thierry said, adding that “no woman who chooses life should have to do so in exchange for their own.”

Members of the state’s maternal mortality committee, which compiles the official report, said they were disappointed by the decision to hold the preliminary findings.

“(We) do the work to honor the lives of women who lost their lives, and families that are forever impacted by the loss of a mother,” said Dr. Carla Ortique, the committee chair. “So there’s disappointment on both fronts: that we’re not honoring those women and families, and that we may be negatively impacting efforts to improve maternal health outcomes in our state.”

Ortique said the state has already identified 149 potential maternal deaths in 2019, of which 118 have been analyzed by the committee to see if they were pregnancy-related. Six newly identified deaths may be added to that group, she said. The numbers cover deaths during the pregnancy through one year after giving birth.

The state has published a maternal death report every other year since 2014, often based on preliminary data updated later. For example, the maternal death report in 2018 identified 29 deaths in 2012 that were not included in the previous report. The committee also released updating findings from its most recent report, studying deaths from 2013, at the Sept. 2 meeting.

Out of 175 potential maternal deaths in 2013, 70 have since been determined to be pregnancy-related.

The state has been collecting the updated numbers as part of the requirements of a new CDC grant, awarded to the DSHS in 2019. The balance, according to advocates, is in making sure data is as accurate as possible, but also released quickly enough to be of use to researchers and policymakers.

The reports usually come with wide-ranging recommendations to improve maternal health in the state, including expanding Medicaid to one year postpartum, proactively treating chronic conditions and addressing the disproportionately high number of maternal deaths among Black women.

Texas has extended Medicaid coverage for pregnant women until six months after they give birth or miscarry, but the state has declined to expand coverage to the recommended 12 months.

The unexpected delay has frustrated advocates, who are gearing up to push Republicans in the Senate and the Governor to back the full 12-month extension, as many other states have done.

“State leaders will be able to make better policy decisions for Texas moms if they have more recent data on maternal deaths as well as health challenges like infections or postpartum depression that new moms are facing in Texas,” said Diana Forrester, director of health care policy at Texans Care for Children.

Republican leaders, including Gov. Greg Abbott, who is running for re-election, have celebrated the overturning of federal abortion protections this summer by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Many have committed to boosting resources for pregnant women and new mothers. A spokesman for Abbott did not respond to a request for comment. Republican House Speaker Dade Phelan, who supports the 12-month extension, was critical of the delay, saying it “comes at a time when Texas must support moms and families.”

“Our work will start with passing legislation that further extends postpartum health coverage for new Texas mothers to a full year, which our chamber approved overwhelmingly in 2021 and I expect will do so again next year,” Phelan said in a statement.

In addition to providing updated recommendations for lawmakers, the report also helps nonprofits compete for grants that support new or expectant mothers, said Nakeenya Wilson, an Austin-based maternal health advocate and member of the state’s maternal mortality committee.

Her group, the Maternal Health Equity Collaborative, used data from past reports to earn a $1 million grant that provides childcare for new mothers in Central Texas.

“If they don’t have the most up-to-date information, then we run the risk of disenfranchising some of the most vulnerable in our state,” she said.

Johnson said the delay was “unacceptable” given the high rate of maternal mortalities.

“It is a crisis that we claim on bipartisan grounds to want to investigate,” Johnson said. “And yet here we are told at the last minute on the date that the report was supposed to be due, ‘Sorry, we couldn’t get around to it.’”

31 notes · View notes

kp777 · 1 month

Text

By Jessica Corbett

Common Dreams

March 20, 2024

"Trump has tried to walk back his support for Social Security and Medicare cuts," said the head of Social Security Works. "This budget is one of many reasons why no one should believe him."

Defenders of Social Security and Medicare on Wednesday swiftly criticized the biggest caucus of Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives for putting out a budget proposal for fiscal year 2025 that takes aim at the crucial programs.

The 180-page "Fiscal Sanity to Save America" plan from the Republican Study Committee (RSC) follows the release of proposals from Democratic President Joe Biden and U.S. House Budget Committee Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas)—who is leading the fight to create a fiscal commission for the programs that critics call a "death panel" designed to force through cuts.

The RSC document features full sections on "Saving Medicare" and "Preventing Biden's Cuts to Social Security," which both push back on the president's recent comments calling out Republican attacks on the programs that serve seniors.

The caucus plan promotes premium support for Medicare Advantage plans administered by private health insurance providers as well as changes to payments made to teaching hospitals. For Social Security, the proposal calls for tying retirement age to rising life expectancy and cutting benefits for younger workers over certain income levels, including phasing out auxiliary benefits.

The document also claims that the caucus budget "would promote trust fund solvency by increasing payroll tax revenues through pro-growth tax reform, pro-growth energy policy that lifts wages, work requirements that move Americans from welfare to work, and regulatory reforms that increase economic growth."

In a lengthy Wednesday statement blasting the RSC budget, Social Security Works president Nancy Altman pointed out that last week, former President Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee to face Biden in the November election, "toldCNBC that 'there's a lot you can do' to cut Social Security."

"Everyone who cares about the future of these vital earned benefits should vote accordingly in November."

"Now, congressional Republicans are confirming the party's support for cuts—to the tune of $1.5 trillion. They are also laying out some of those cuts," Altman said. "This budget would raise the retirement age, in line with prominent Republican influencer Ben Shapiro's recent comments that 'retirement itself is a stupid idea.' It would make annual cost-of-living increases stingier, so that benefits erode over time. It would slash middle-class benefits."

"Perhaps most insultingly, given the Republicans' claim to be the party of 'family values,' this budget would eliminate Social Security spousal benefits, as well as children's benefits, for middle-class families. That would punish women who take time out of the workforce to care for children and other loved ones," she continued. "This coming from a party that wants to take away women's reproductive rights!"

The caucus, chaired by Rep. Kevin Hern (R-Okla.), included 285 bills and initiatives from 192 members in its budget plan—among them are various proposals threatening abortion care, birth control, and in vitro fertilization (IVF) nationwide.

"The RSC budget would also take away Medicare's new power to negotiate lower prices on prescription drugs, putting more money into the pockets of the GOP's Big Pharma donors," Altman warned. "And it accelerates the privatization of Medicare, handing it over to private insurance companies who have a long history of ripping off the government and delaying and denying care to those who need it."

"In recent days, Trump has tried to walk back his support for Social Security and Medicare cuts," she noted. "This budget is one of many reasons why no one should believe him. The Republican Party is the party of cutting Social Security and Medicare, while giving tax handouts to billionaires."

"The Democratic Party is the party of expanding Social Security and Medicare, paid for by requiring the ultrawealthy to contribute their fair share," Altman added. "Everyone who cares about the future of these vital earned benefits should vote accordingly in November."

Biden campaign communications director Michael Tyler also targeted the Republican presidential candidate while slamming the RSC plan, saying that "Donald Trump's MAGA allies in Congress made it clear today: A vote for Trump is a vote to make the MAGA 2025 agenda of cutting Social Security, ripping away access to IVF, and banning abortion nationwide a hellish reality."

"While Trump and his allies push forward their extreme agenda, the American people are watching," Tyler added, suggesting that the RSC proposal will help motivate voters to give Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris four more years in the White House.

#social security #medicare #fiscal year 2025 budget #republicans #2024 elections #donald trump

86 notes · View notes

odinsblog · 2 years

Text

Even as SCOTUS is about to gut Roe v. Wade, Nancy Pelosi is now in Texas campaigning for a conservative, anti-abortion man over a young, pro-abortion woman who is a pro-immigration lawyer:

Rep. Henry Cuellar, a longtime Democratic congressman from Texas’ 28th Congressional District, won a plurality of support in the March primary over Jessica Cisneros, a progressive 28-year-old immigration lawyer, whom Cuellar narrowly defeated in 2020. They’ll face each other in a runoff election on May 24 to decide the Democratic nominee, which Democrats view as key to their slim chances of maintaining a House majority next year.

The conservative Cuellar is avowedly anti-choice, one of the few Democrats left in the House who fits that description. Last year, he was the only House Democrat to vote against the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would protect abortion access as a matter of federal law and was passed after Texas banned abortion after six weeks.

Cuellar has been endorsed by top House Democrats including Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, as well as the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, whose campaign arm funded attacks on Cisneros in 2020. Pelosi’s political action committee gave Cuellar $4,000 in December, according to FEC records.

Cisneros, on the other hand, is vehemently pro-choice, and has been endorsed by reproductive rights advocacy groups such as NARAL and EMILY’s List, as well as progressive politicians such as Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Cisneros slammed Cuellar after his vote last year.

“Once again, Henry Cuellar has refused to stand up for South Texans’ reproductive freedom and the constitutional right to abortion care,” Cisneros said in a statement to the Texas Tribune. “Even after our state’s Republican leaders just passed the country’s most extreme ban—ending almost all abortion access in Texas with no exceptions after 6 weeks—our Congressman refuses to defend us and our reproductive rights.”

👉🏿 https://www.vice.com/amp/en/article/jgm7xb/rep-henry-cuellar-abortion

#politics #jessica cisneros #nancy pelosi #henry cuellar #abortion #roe v wade #reproductive rights #womens rights #reproductive justice #scotus #conservadems #centrism #neoliberalism #triangulation #clintonism #bidenism

53 notes · View notes

coochiequeens · 2 years

Text

Women traveling from another state to get an abortion in Hawaii and medical professionals who do the procedure will be protected from legal punishment under an executive order signed Tuesday by Gov. David Ige.

The decision came after 14 states banned abortion in line with the U.S. Supreme Court decision in June that overturned Roe v. Wade. In addition, some states are seeking criminal liability for women obtaining an abortion elsewhere as well as medical providers who provide the service. The order takes immediate effect.

“We will not cooperate with any other state that tries to prosecute women who receive an abortion in Hawaii, and we will not cooperate with any other state that tries to sanction medical professionals who provide abortion in Hawaii,” Ige said at a news conference.

Cory Lum/Civil Beat/2022

Hawaii was the first state in the country to legalize abortion in 1970, and Ige pointed out that the state’s constitution guarantees privacy and personal autonomy.

The abortion bans have prompted some women to travel elsewhere for the medical procedure, drawing threats of legal action against them and those who facilitate the procedure. Texas has imposed a so-called bounty system, allowing ordinary people to sue those involved in the abortions and receive $10,000 if their efforts are successful, according to The New York Times.

Under the executive order, state departments and agencies will refuse to provide medical records, data and billing information to states seeking to impose legal penalties on women seeking an abortion in Hawaii and medical providers performing them.

Departments also are prohibited from providing information to states asking about medical providers and family members.

Hawaii joins 14 other states in issuing executive orders that protect health care providers and women seeking abortions.

State Rep. Linda Ichiyama, a women’s legislative caucus member, said she was concerned about moves by other states to sanction or discipline health care providers who may be licensed in multiple states.

Ige designated the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs to work with the physician’s board of

professional licensure to consider implementing policies to ensure that medical providers are not disqualified or disciplined by the Hawaii Board of professional licensing for providing abortions in the state.

“When we have medical professional doctors and nurses that are licensed in multiple states, if they, for some reason, are sanctioned or disciplined in another state like Texas or Arkansas … that disciplinary action on their license could have affected their license and ability to practice in Hawaii,” Ichiyama said.

Dr. Reni Soon, an OB-GYN, said she has performed abortions for patients who came from Texas, Georgia, and Louisiana due to the bans in those states.

But Soon said she doubts Hawaii will see a huge influx in women flying to the islands for an abortion due to the high costs and difficulties in doing so as well as a relatively small number of clinics that perform the procedure statewide.

“We are hard to get to, and it’s expensive,” Soon said.

Ige said the executive order would continue unless the new administration decided to end it.

Jen Wilber, Hawaii state director for Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates, said that Ige’s executive order is critical to “safeguarding and maintaining abortion access” in the state.

“We want our providers and patients to be safe, protected and empowered to continue to provide and access abortion care throughout the entire state — no matter what,” Wilber said in an email statement. “Legal penalties or investigations from extremist and over-zealous out-of-state prosecutors have no place in the provision of safe and legal health care protected by Hawaii state law.”

Civil Beat’s health coverage is supported by the Atherton Family Foundation, Swayne Family Fund of Hawaii Community Foundation, Cooke Foundation and Papa Ola Lokahi.

#Hawaii #abortion access #reproductive justice

3 notes · View notes

90363462 · 1 year

Text

Nancy Pelosi Reflects On the Not-Quite-End of An Era

Pelosi Announces She Is Stepping Down From Leadership But Keeping Her House Seat

0 of 30 seconds,

Nancy Pelosi Reflects On the Not-Quite-End of An Era

Ever since the election, Nancy Pelosi says, congressional Democrats have been begging her to remain as their leader. Of course, she knew what they were really doing: currying favor, just in case.

“Our members were just exploding my phone to stay,” she says, “which is a nice thing, because if I don’t stay, then they’ve gotten the points for saying ’stay,’ and if I do—“ she trailed off, laughing. No matter what she decided, they knew it would be in their interest to be on her good side going forward.

For two decades, it has been in every congressional Democrat’s interest to stay in Pelosi’s good graces. Since winning her first leadership position in 2001, she has ruled the House Democratic caucus with an iron fist and a velvet glove, keeping her fractious party in near-lockstep during historically tumultuous times. From the Iraq War to the financial crisis, through health-care reform and government shutdowns, through two presidential impeachments, a pandemic and an insurrection attempt, she has been a constant force and consummate operator. No national politician of her era can match her combination of legislative prowess, vote-counting savvy, negotiating skill, and fundraising ability.

Nancy Pelosi waves to colleagues while being nominated as the next Speaker of the House during a swearing in ceremony for the 110th Congress in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC., on Jan. 4, 2007.

Chip Somodevilla—Getty Images

Just after her speech, the 82-year-old House Speaker sat at a white-clothed table in a small, ornate room off the House floor known as the Board of Education, a hidden chamber where former Democratic Speaker Sam Rayburn used to hole up and relax. Then-vice president Harry Truman was playing cards with Rayburn here in 1945 when he learned that FDR had died and he would become President. One wall Rayburn had painted with a Texas seal; on two others, Pelosi recently added her own touches: a painting of the Golden Gate Bridge, and a tribute to women’s suffrage.

Pelosi was contemplating the not-quite-end of the era and struggling to unwrap a package of chocolate-chip cookies. “What was important to me was how we did in the election, because we were on a bad path,” she told a small group of reporters. “Storming the Capitol, really? And the reaction of Republicans, not taking a stand? And I knew we could win.”

Her party had just lost the House, weeks after a crazed intruder broke into her California home and bludgeoned her husband with a hammer. But it hardly felt as if Pelosi was giving up in defeat. In an election that history and many forecasters predicted would deliver a Republican wave, Democrats surprisingly held their own. The resulting GOP majority will be a narrow one, with the Senate remaining in Democrats’ hands.

The Oct. 28 attack on Paul Pelosi, the Speaker’s husband of 59 years, influenced her decision to remain in Congress, but not in the way many people thought. “It was not, ‘Oh, well, since they did that, I can’t even think of something else,’” she says. “No, it had the opposite effect. I couldn’t give them that satisfaction.”

Read More: Nancy Pelosi Doesn’t Care What You Think Of Her.

Nancy Pelosi at election headquarters on primary election night, on April 7, 1987.

Deanne Fitzmaurice—San Francisco Chronicle/Getty Images

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi stands behind President Barack Obama as he signs the Affordable Health Care for America Act during a ceremony with fellow Democrats in the East Room of the White House on March 23, 2010.

Win McNamee—Getty Images

She did it knowing there might be a political cost, and indeed there was. Republicans gained 63 seats in the House in the 2010 midterm elections, an election in which Pelosi was a central figure. Republicans made her the subject of millions of dollars’ worth of attack ads across the country, capitalizing on their base’s visceral loathing of her and giving Peosi unusual prominence for a congressional leader.

But Pelosi believed in gaining power not for its own sake but in order to do something with it. Obamacare is part of a legacy that includes two decades of liberal policy victories, from allowing gay people to serve openly in the military to the historic climate investments of this year’s Inflation Reduction Act. “This is a very difficult job,” she told us. “You have to really know how to be a legislator.”

These legislative successes were all the more remarkable for the era in which they came. Faced with unrelenting Republican opposition, she held together the diverse Democratic caucus and drove a hard bargain in negotiations across the aisle. After Donald Trump became president, she led her party back to power, becoming Speaker for the second time in 2019 in the middle of a government shutdown over border-wall funding. Pelosi refused to budge, and Trump soon capitulated. She would go on to impeach him twice while simultaneously negotiating with his Administration to secure trillions in COVID-19 relief funding.

Read More: Why Nancy Pelosi Is Going All In Against Trump.

Pelosi rejects the notion that she bears any blame for the toxic state of politics. “I don’t take any responsibility for what the Republicans have done to the Congress. This is not about gridlock,” she says. “This isn’t about some sort of equivalence between Democrats and Republicans. They are anti-science, anti-government, and that’s where they are.”

Mark Wilson—Getty Images (2); Chip Somodevilla—Getty Images; Jim Watson—Pool/AFP/Getty Images

Pelosi never groomed a successor, something for which she was often criticized. Ambitious Democrats languished for decades waiting for an opening in House leadership. She has often expressed the view that power is never given but must be taken by those who seek it. “I didn’t think that was the right approach, to anoint somebody,” she told us Thursday. “It’s really important for people to have the legitimacy that they were chosen by the members.”

A free-for-all appears unlikely. Pelosi’s longtime deputy Steny Hoyer, a fellow Marylander who has known her since they worked for the same Senator in 1963, announced Thursday that he would also stay in Congress but not in leadership. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the 52-year-old chair of the Democratic caucus, appears almost certain to win the minority leader position in the Democratic leadership elections scheduled for Nov. 30, becoming the first Black man to lead a party in Congress. The first woman Speaker, in passing the torch, will make history once again.

Pelosi intends to spend the next two years in valedictory mode. “My life ahead is full of thank-yous,” she says, to her constituents and all the others who have supported her over the years. She does not plan to serve on any committees and she does not want to serve as a sort of shadow speaker from the sidelines. “Thanksgiving is coming,” she says. “I have no intention of being the mother-in-law in the kitchen saying, ‘My son doesn’t like the stuffing that way, this is the way we make it in our family.’ They will have their vision. They will have their plan. It’s up to the caucus to decide which way they want to go.”

More Must-Reads From TIME

Steven Spielberg Waited 60 Years to Tell This Story

Who Should Be TIME's 2022 Person of the Year? Vote Now

Donald Trump, Grover Cleveland, and the History of Trying to Win Back the White House

Michelle Obama: Yes, We Still Need to ‘Go High’ When Everything Is Terrible

Columns: Voters Understand the Truth About Pregnancy Decisions.What Happened in Montana Proves It

Cold Weather Can Be Dangerous for the Human Body. This Winter Worries Experts

How to Prepare for Travel Chaos Over the Holidays

Big Tech's Implosion Could Save the Planet

The Best of Culture 2022

Write to Molly Ball at [email protected].

Sent from my iPhone

3 notes · View notes

thesheel · 1 year

Text

The most awaited event of 2020 is here, and Joe Biden is going to be the 46th President of the United States as he is enjoying a healthy lead over President Donald Trump. While you are waiting for the rest of the results in the swing states, we have come with an article on the 2020 election House race results and who are the winners and losers. There are 438 house races going on as all seats of the House of Representatives are to be filled by election, and the Democrats are keen to extend their control of the chamber along with fighting the race to the White House. It is important for Democrats, who control the House of Representatives, to make it easy for the Biden administration to make decisions. Democrats won 41 additional seats in 2018 compared to 2016. This time Democrats are likely to win the majority of the house however they may end up losing their majority. Progressive Squad re-elected All four members of the Progressive Squad won their respective house races and are re-elected for another two years in the House of Representatives and are no longer newcomers. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez won from New York, Ilhan Omar from Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley from Massachusetts, and Rashida Talib from Michigan will serve another two-year term in the House of Representatives after being re-elected. These four women of color were elected for the first time in 2018, and since that time, they have been active with regard to climate change, health care, and many other progressive causes for the people of the United States. Their agenda of a progressive approach and voicing the opinion of the American people has earned them the name of Progressive Squad. They have also been the subject of several controversies spread by the Republican Party and their supporters. Another important thing that is worth mentioning at this point is that Talib, along with Omar, is the first Muslim woman to be ever elected as a member of the House of Representatives in the United States. Additionally, other progressive representatives have also won their houses races. These include Parmila Jaypal, who won from Washington, and Mark Pocan, who won from Wisconsin. Both will serve another term in the House. Jamaal Bowman from New York and Cori Bush from Missouri came to the House of Representatives for the first time. Four Members of the Samosa Caucus won their house races: Samosa Caucus is an informal term that refers to the Indian-American lawmakers who are either part of the House of Representatives or the Senate. This election witnessed the emergence of the Indian-American community as a considerable voting population. Approximately 1.8 million Indian-Americans are registered as voters in the United States in the key states of Florida, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Texas. The group consists of five members, with four from the House of Representatives and the vice presidential nominee Kamala Harris. The senior-most member of the group, Dr. Ami Bera won his house race while defeating his Republican rival, Buzz Patterson, with a lead of more than 19 percent according to the latest reports. He is elected from the 7th Congressional District of California for the fifth consecutive term. Mr. Krishnamoorthi defeated Preston Nelson of the Liberation Party by gaining 71 percent of the total votes. Ro Khanna won from the 17th Congressional District of California for the third time by defeating Republican candidate Ritesh Tandon, another Indian-American. Pramila Jaypal also succeeded in gaining another two-year term in the House. Sri Preston Kulkarni lost the house race against Republican Troy Nehls in Texas. Republican Menga Anantatmula and Nisha Sharma lost in their maiden house race. Democrats appear to lose key House races: The Democratic Party still holds the majority in the House of Representatives, but it appears that they may not be able to add any new seats. With earlier results and p

olls, it was thought that Democrats could add from five to twenty seats on their benches but ended up losing six of their own and failed to pick off any Republican representatives. There are strong possibilities that the Democrats will lose three house races from New York, Michigan, and California. They also appear to have lost seats from Iowa, New Mexico, Florida, and Oklahoma. In the earlier scenario, Democrats were hoping to bag the seats of Ohio, Missouri, and from retiring representatives Susan Brooks and Pete Olson. Rather than expanding their margin with a new fifteen to twenty seats, the Democrat’s margin is now shrinking. According to the NRCC projection, the Democrats will have around 208 to 212 seats in the House of Representatives. This will have severe consequences for Democrats in terms of major legislation and bills. With the loss of moderates like Peterson and Kendra Horn, the House Democratic group is now expected to be more liberal. This has also resulted in doubts on the coronavirus package of Pelosi, as she will now be receiving pressure from both sides. Moreover, this also clears the path for a Republican Senate, as the House will have to reach an agreement to fund the government. Republicans flipped back several key states’ seats After the historic defeat in the 2018 house races, Republicans are again gaining considerable space in the House of Representatives. Although they will not be able to make the majority, they will still give a tough time to the Democrats. Republicans have flipped back several key seats that they lost to the Democrats in 2018. Republicans captured back two seats from the most populated district of Florida, Miami-Dade, from freshman Congresswomen. Donald Trump’s allegation of socialism on the part of the Democrats seems to work in the 26th and 27th Congressional District of Florida, where Cuban-Americans, many of whom have fled from the regime of Fidel Castro, make a large portion of the voting population. Other victories of the Republicans are in some key House races especially South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District, New Mexico’s 2nd Congressional District, 7th Congressional District of Minnesota, and 5th Congressional District of Oklahoma. Conclusion The exact number of electoral votes which each presidential nominee will get is not known yet. While many freshmen entered the House of Representatives by winning their respective house races, many also failed to do so. The fight is still going on, but the results are clear that Democrats hold the majority; however, with a very less margin. Donald Trump has declared premature victory, along with rejecting the results, and declared on the election night that he would go to the Supreme Court because of mismanagement in the polls. There are states whose elections have still have not been called; they will be updated as soon as they come out. Read About the Senate Races: Results of Vulnerable Senators in 2020 elections.

0 notes

dreaminginthedeepsouth · 3 years

Link

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

October 6, 2021

Heather Cox Richardson

Today, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) backed down from his obstructionism, agreeing to let the Democrats raise the debt ceiling by a simple majority rather than by the 60 votes they needed when the Republicans kept filibustering their bills.

A quick recap: the issue at stake was whether the United States would default on its debts, which it has never done before. The threat to default was purely a political ploy on the part of the Republicans to try to force the Democrats to abandon their very popular infrastructure measure.

Here’s the backstory: Congress actually originally intended the debt ceiling to enable the government to be flexible in its borrowing. In the era of World War I, when it needed to raise a lot of money fast, Congress stopped passing specific revenue measures and instead set a cap on how much money the government could borrow through all of the different instruments it used.

Now, though, the debt ceiling has become a political cudgel because if it is not raised when Congress spends more than it has the ability to repay, the country will default on its debts. The cap has been raised repeatedly since it was first imposed; indeed, the Republicans raised it three times under former president Donald Trump. Once again, it is too low, and by October 18, the Treasury will be unable to pay our debts.

To meet the nation’s obligations, Congress needs either to raise taxes, which Republicans passionately oppose, or to raise the debt ceiling so the Treasury can borrow more money. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who has voted to raise or suspend the debt ceiling 32 times in his career, including the three times under Trump, refused to allow Republicans to vote to raise the debt ceiling.

Although the ceiling needed to be lifted because Trump added $7.8 trillion to the debt (which now stands at about $28 trillion), in part with the huge 2017 tax cuts that went overwhelmingly to the wealthy, McConnell tried to tie the need for more money to the Democrats’ infrastructure plan. This was false: the debt ceiling is not an appropriation; it simply permits the government to borrow money it needs to pay debts already incurred.

But McConnell and the Republicans want to dismantle an active government, not to build it. They hope to convince Americans that Democrats are racking up huge debts—even though it is the Republicans on the hook for today’s crisis—and that they should not be permitted to pass a bill that supports children and working parents and addresses climate change.

The Democrats insisted that the Republicans should join them in raising the ceiling, since they had been instrumental in making it necessary, but McConnell and his caucus refused. Finally, with Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen warning that defaulting would crash the economy and with financial services firm Moody’s Analytics warning that a default would cost up to 6 million jobs, create an unemployment rate of nearly 9%, and wipe out $15 trillion in household wealth, the Democrats tried to pass a measure themselves.

Republicans wouldn’t let them. They filibustered it, trying to force the Democrats to save the country by raising the debt ceiling through a bill that can’t be filibustered, a process called reconciliation, which would make it harder for them to use reconciliation for their own infrastructure bill since Congress can pass only one of that type of reconciliation bill per year.

It was a remarkably cynical ploy, risking the financial health of the country and our standing in the world to make sure that a Republican minority could continue to hamstring what the Democratic majority considers a priority. Republicans have played chicken with government shutdowns since the 1980s, refusing to pass measures to fund the daily operations of the government and thereby stopping paychecks and government operations.

But defaulting on our obligations was a whole new game of brinksmanship. The greatest international asset the U.S. has right now is its financial system. To bring that to its knees to score political points would be interpreted, correctly, as a sign our country is so unstable it must be sidelined.

Midday today, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin highlighted this international doubt when he took the unusual step of weighing in on politics. He warned that a default would “undermine the economic strength on which our national security rests.” Paychecks for 1.4 million active duty military personnel and veterans’ benefits for 2.4 million veterans, as well as payments on military contracts, would stop. Equally dangerous, defaulting on loans would devastate the nation’s international reputation "as a reliable and trustworthy economic and national security partner."

Democrats said they could not guarantee the country would not default, and they were clearly starting to consider getting rid of the filibuster, at least for this particular issue, to enable them to pass a debt ceiling bill by a simple majority rather than by 60 votes.

Then McConnell blinked (although he didn’t cave). In a scorching statement that laid all the blame for the crisis on the Democrats, he offered to “allow” Democrats to use normal procedures—that is, the Republicans won’t filibuster them!—to extend the ceiling into December. Democrats indicate they will take that deal.

There is one major takeaway from this manufactured crisis: McConnell was willing to come right to the verge of burning the nation down to get his way. In the end, he stopped just before the sparks became an inferno, but it was much too close for comfort.

Still, he stopped. Trump and his supporters did not. The former president has been pushing Republicans to use the threat of default to get what they want, and he was not happy that McConnell had backed down. He issued a statement blaming McConnell for “folding” and added “He’s got all of the cards with the debt ceiling, it’s time to play the hand.”

Trump’s willingness to burn down the country is ramping up as the January 6 investigation gets closer to him. Tomorrow is the deadline for four of his aides to respond to subpoenas for documents and testimony from the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol: former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, deputy chief of staff Dan Scavino, adviser Steve Bannon, and Defense Department aide Kash Patel. Meadows worked to overturn the 2020 election results and was in the thick of things on January 6, Scavino had met with Trump to plot to get congresspeople not to count the certified votes on January 6, Bannon strategized with other officials on January 5 to stop the count, and Patel was part of discussions about the strength of the Capitol Police.

The four are expected to defy the subpoenas at Trump’s insistence, a defiance that suggests they think he and his people are going to regain power. According to Glenn Kirschner, a former U.S. Army prosecutor, contempt of Congress earns a year of prison time; obstruction of Congress, five years; and obstruction of justice, 20 years.

The rest of the former president’s statements today were unhinged attacks on the committee.

A final note for October 6: U.S. District Judge Robert L. Pitman has temporarily blocked enforcement of Texas’s S.B. 8, the so-called “heartbeat” bill prohibiting abortions after six weeks, when most women don’t know they’re pregnant. The Justice Department had sued to stop enforcement of the law. Pitman stopped it on the grounds that it deprived “citizens of a significant and well-established constitutional right.”

—

Notes:

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2021-10-06/pentagon-warns-of-national-security-fallout-from-debt-ceiling-crisis

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/oct/06/trump-aides-capitol-attack-house-select-committee

Glenn Kirschner @glennkirschner2Contempt of Congress - 1 year. If prosecutors bring obstruction of Congress charges - 5 years. Or obstruction of justice charges - 20 years. https://t.co/1UXtetgiMa@glennkirschner2 Glenn, how much jail time can they get for not answering supoenas?

Deeheart4 @Deeheart99

2,055 Retweets5,855 Likes

October 6th 2021

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/live-blog/gop-sens-ready-to-blow-up-debt-crisis-in-nakedly-political-gambit

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/show_temp.pdf

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/texas-abortion-lawsuit-decision/2021/10/06/ae70d946-22e7-11ec-9309-b743b79abc59_story.html

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

#Letters From An American #Heather Cox Richardson #history #debt ceiling #politics #political #corrupt gop #Criminal GOP

5 notes · View notes

robertreich · 4 years

Text

The Democratic Establishment is Freaking Out About Bernie. It should Calm Down.

The day after Bernie Sanders’s big win in Nevada, Joe Lockhart, Bill Clinton’s former press secretary, expressed the fear gripping the Democratic establishment: “I don't believe the country is prepared to support a Democratic socialist, and I agree with the theory that Sanders would lose in a matchup against Trump.”

Lockart, like the rest of the Democratic establishment, is viewing American politics through obsolete lenses of left versus right, with Bernie on the extreme left and Trump on the far right. “Moderates” like Bloomberg and Buttigieg supposedly occupy the center, appealing to a broader swath of the electorate.

This may have been the correct frame for politics decades ago when America still had a growing middle class, but it’s obsolete today. As wealth and power have moved to the top and the middle class has shrunk, more Americans feel politically dis-empowered and economically insecure. Today's main divide isn’t right versus left. It’s establishment versus anti-establishment.

Some background. In the fall of 2015 I visited Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Missouri, and North Carolina, researching the changing nature of work. I spoke with many of the same people I had met twenty years before when I was secretary of labor, as well as some of their grown children. I asked them about their jobs and their views about the economy. I was most interested in their sense of the system as a whole and how they were faring in it.

What I heard surprised me. Twenty years before, most said they’d been working hard and were frustrated they weren’t doing better. Now they were angry – at their employers, the government, and Wall Street; angry that they hadn’t been able to save for their retirement, and that their children weren’t doing any better than they did. Several had lost jobs, savings, or homes in the Great Recession. By the time I spoke with them, most were employed but the jobs paid no more than they had two decades before.

I heard the term “rigged system” so often I began asking people what they meant by it. They spoke about the bailout of Wall Street, political payoffs, insider deals, CEO pay, and “crony capitalism.” These came from self-identified Republicans, Democrats, and Independents; white, black, and Latino; union households and non-union. Their only common characteristic was they were middle class and below.

With the 2016 primaries looming, I asked which candidates they found most attractive. At the time, party leaders favored Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush. But the people I spoke with repeatedly mentioned Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. They said Sanders or Trump would “shake things up,” “make the system work again,” “stop the corruption,” or “end the rigging.”

In the following year, Sanders -- a 74-year-old Jew from Vermont who described himself as a democratic socialist and wasn’t even a Democrat until the 2016 presidential primary -- came within a whisker of beating Hillary Clinton in the Iowa caucus, routed her in the New Hampshire primary, garnered over 47 percent of the caucus-goers in Nevada, and ended up with 46 percent of the pledged delegates from Democratic primaries and caucuses.

Trump, a 69-year-old ego-maniacal billionaire reality TV star who had never held elective office or had anything to do with the Republican Party, and lied compulsively about almost everything -- won the Republican primaries and then went on to beat Clinton, one of the most experienced and well-connected politicians in modern America (granted, he didn’t win the popular vote, and had some help from the Kremlin).

Something very big happened, and it wasn’t because of Sanders’s magnetism or Trump’s likeability. It was a rebellion against the establishment. Clinton and Bush had all the advantages –funders, political advisors, name recognition -- but neither could credibly convince voters they weren’t part of the system.

A direct line connected four decades of stagnant wages, the financial crisis of 2008, the bailout of Wall Street, the rise of the Tea Party and the “Occupy” movement, and the emergence of Sanders and Trump in 2016. The people I spoke with no longer felt they had a fair chance to make it. National polls told much the same story. According to the Pew Research Center, the percentage of Americans who felt most people could get ahead through hard work dropped by 13 points between 2000 and 2015. In 2006, 59 percent of Americans thought government corruption was widespread; by 2013, 79 percent did.

Trump galvanized millions of blue-collar voters living in places that never recovered from the tidal wave of factory closings. He promised to bring back jobs, revive manufacturing, and get tough on trade and immigration. “We can’t continue to allow China to rape our country, and that’s what they’re doing,” he roared. “In five, ten years from now, you’re going to have a workers’ party. A party of people that haven’t had a real wage increase in eighteen years, that are angry.” He blasted politicians and financiers who had betrayed Americans by “taking away from the people their means of making a living and supporting their families.”

Trump’s pose as an anti-establishment populist was one of the biggest cons in American political history. Since elected he’s given the denizens of C-suites and the Street everything they’ve wanted and hasn’t markedly improved the lives of his working-class supporters, even if his politically-incorrect, damn-the-torpedo’s politics continues to make them feel as if he’s taking on the system.

The frustrations today are larger than they were four years ago. Even though corporate profits and executive pay have soared, the typical worker’s pay has barely risen, jobs are less secure, and health care less affordable.

The best way for Democrats to defeat Trump’s fake anti-establishment populism is with the real thing, coupled with an agenda of systemic reform. This is what Bernie Sanders offers. For the same reason, he has the best chance of generating energy and enthusiasm to flip at least three senate seats to the Democratic Party (the minimum needed to recapture the Senate, using the vice president as tie-breaker).

He’ll need a coalition of young voters, people of color, and the working class. He seems on his way. So far in the primaries he leads among white voters, has a massive edge among Latinos, dominates with both women and men, and has done best among both college and non-college graduates. And he’s narrowing Biden’s edge with older voters and African Americans. [Add line about South Carolina from today's primary.]

The “socialism” moniker doesn't seem to have bruised him, although it hasn't been tested outside a Democratic primary or caucus. Perhaps voters won't care, just as they many don’t care about Trump’s chronic lies.

Worries about a McGovern-like blowout in 2020 appear far-fetched. In 1972 the American middle class was expanding, not contracting. Besides, every national and swing state poll now shows Sanders tied with or beating Trump. A Quinnipiac Poll last week shows Sanders beating Trump in Michigan and Pennsylvania. A CBS News/YouGov poll has Sanders beating Trump nationally. A Texas Lyceum poll has Sanders doing better against Trump in Texas than any Democrat, losing by just three points.

Instead of the Democratic establishment worrying that Sanders is unelectable, maybe it should worry that a so-called "moderate” Democrat might be nominated instead.

#bernie

236 notes · View notes

vettingsanders · 4 years

Text

Vetting Bernie Sanders

Sanders the Politician

Voted five times against the Brady Act which required universal background checks and a waiting period to buy firearms https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/oct/13/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-voted-against-brady/

Voted against the AMBER Alert System http://archive.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2006/09/21/sanders_vote_on_amber_alert_emerges_as_key_campaign_issue/

Voted in favor of dumping nuclear waste on the poor and predominantly Latinx community of Sierra Blanca, Texas https://www.texastribune.org/2016/02/28/Sanders-Nuclear-Waste-Votes-Divide-Texas-Activists/

When asked if he would visit the site in Sierra Blanca, answered “Absolutely not.” https://archives.texasobserver.org/issue/1998/09/11#page=11

Voted against the Iraq War in 2002 but voted to fund both the Iraq War and the war in Afghanistan https://www.alternet.org/2015/05/bernie-sanders-troubling-history-supporting-us-military-violence-abroad/

Voted for the 1994 crime bill https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/bernie-sanders-has-dodged-criticism-crime-bill-vote-while-others-n1020726

Touted his vote for the crime bill on his website at least until 2006, as proof he was “tough on crime” and “strong on the cops” https://web.archive.org/web/20061018180921/http:/www.bernie.org/truth/crime.html

Supported primarying President Obama in the 2012 election cycle https://www.thenation.com/article/yes-bernie-sanders-wanted-obama-primaried-in-2012-heres-why/

Signed a resolution as mayor of Burlington affirming that marriage is between “husband and wife” https://www.washingtonblade.com/2016/02/06/clinton-surrogates-pounce-on-sanders-over-82-marriage-resolution/

Argued same-sex marriage was a states’ rights issue in 2006 https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=57&v=kej9QAsS3uI&feature=emb_logo

In 2006, after same-sex civil unions had been legal in Vermont since 2000, responded to a reporter asking if same-sex marriage should be legalized in Vermont with “Not right now,” after the “very divisive debate” preceding the civil union legislation https://web.archive.org/web/20160407064606/http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060607/NEWS/606070302/1003/NEWS02

Has passed three bills in his twenty-nine years as a Congressman, two of which renamed post offices: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/browse?sponsor=400357#current_status[]=28&enacted_ex=on

Is nicknamed “the Amendment King” for his reputation of sponsoring roll call amendments to bills during his tenure in the House of Representatives, but came second in House amendments passed during that time period to Rep. James Traficant, whose tenure was 5 years shorter than that of Sanders: https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/mar/24/bernie-s/bernie-sanders-was-roll-call-amendment-king-1995-2/

In total, has introduced 513 amendments in 29 years in Congress (averaging 17.69 per year) in comparison to senior Vermont Senator Leahy’s 942 amendments in 44 years (21.41 per year avg.), Secretary Clinton’s 296 amendments in 8 years (37 per year avg.), Senator Warren’s 180 amendments in 6 years (30 per year avg.), Senator Klobuchar’s 254 amendments in 11 years (23.09 per year avg.), and Senator Booker’s 140 amendments in 6 years (23.33 per year avg.) https://www.congress.gov/member/bernard-sanders/S000033?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22Bernard+Sanders%22%5D%2C%22type%22%3A%22amendments%22%2C%22sponsorship%22%3A%22sponsored%22%7D

Oversaw the Department of Veteran Affairs as Senate chairman of the Veteran Affairs Committee during the 2014 scandal in which dozens of veterans died while waiting for medical care from Phoenix Veterans Health Administration Facilities https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-veterans-scandal-on-bernie-sanderss-watch

Sanders Campaign 2016

Breached the Clinton campaign’s voter data and harvested and stored voter information https://time.com/4155185/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-data/

Received a 645 page letter from the FEC detailing the campaign’s finance violations https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/the-bernie-sanders-donors-who-are-giving-too-much/482418/

Paid a $14.5 K fine to the FEC after receiving donations from non-citizens https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/376373-sanders-campaign-pays-145k-fine-to-settle-fec-complaint

The Nevada campaign director sought to rig the state’s caucus by urging staffers to buy double-sided coins for tie-breaking coin tosses http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/sanderss-nevada-director-floated-two-sided-coins-for-tiebreaks-report/ar-AAhHiAI?getstaticpage=true&automatedTracking=staticview

Initially decried superdelegates as “undemocratic” (https://www.cnn.com/2016/02/23/opinions/superdelegates-democratic-party-kohn/) before attempting to persuade them to go against the primary’s outcome and back Sanders instead of Clinton https://www.npr.org/2016/05/19/478705022/sanders-campaign-now-says-superdelegates-are-key-to-winning-nomination

The Mueller Report confirmed that Russian interference in the 2016 election boosted Sanders’ campaign as well as Trump’s https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/politics/read-the-mueller-report/

Had no reasonable path to victory after Super Tuesday (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/was-the-democratic-primary-a-close-call-or-a-landslide/) yet insisted on taking “our fight” to the DNC convention four months later https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/bernie-sanders-vows-continue-fight-convention-n588011

The campaign was accused by staffers of sexual harassment, demeaning treatment toward women, and pay disparity by gender https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/02/us/politics/bernie-sanders-campaign-sexism.html

Weeks before the 2016 general election, Jane Sanders retweeted a video from an April town hall of her husband telling an attendee to “make these decisions yourself” regarding whether or not to vote third party if Secretary Clinton won the primary https://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/politics/2016/09/26/retweet-bernie-sanders-wife-jane-raises-questions/91140254/

Sanders Campaign 2020

Appointed Russian interference denier and Jill Stein 2016 voter Briahna Joy Gray as the campaign’s National Press Secretary https://twitter.com/briebriejoy/status/888555665865814017?lang=en

Following promises to run a civil campaign, hired David Sirota, a man who’d spent months attacking other primary contenders online, as a speech writer. The campaign also confirmed that Sirota had already been serving in an advisory role prior to his official hiring https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/03/sanders-promised-civility-hired-twitter-attack-dog/585259/

Press Secretary Briahna Joy Gray called for the doxing of a Sanders critic on Twitter. If there was any repercussion for this behavior, it has never been made public. https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/8/14/1879124/-Bernie-Sanders-s-Campaign-Doxed-a-Critic-on-Twitter

Hired and fired YouTuber Matt Orfalea within 24 hours after being alerted of his sexist, racist, homophobic, and ableist content, suggesting he was not vetted before his hiring https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/bernie-sanders-matt-orfalea-mlk-youtube-video/

Hired and fired Darius Khalil Gordon after two days after being alerted of his sexist, racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic, and ableist Tweets https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2019/12/bernie-sanders-new-head-organizer-called-people-fgs-bhes/

Sanders National Campaign Co-Chair Nina Turner claimed that Biden’s strong support among Black voters is due to the voters’ “short memories” and “not a true understanding of the history” https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/473161-top-sanders-officials-hits-biden-over-riding-on-obamas-coattails

Paid staffers working 60 hours a week an average of 13 dollars per hour despite Sanders campaigning on a 15 dollar per hour minimum wage https://www.vox.com/2019/7/20/20700841/bernie-sanders-minimum-wage-staff-pay

Sanders Himself

Two days before the 2016 general election, Sanders tweeted “I do not believe that most of the people who are thinking about voting for Mr. Trump are racist or sexist” https://twitter.com/berniesanders/status/794941635931099136?lang=en

Unsuccessfully and habitually ran for office from 1972 until his election as mayor in 1982, during which time he held no steady job and could not afford to pay child support for his son Levi. In 1974, Levi’s mother Susan Mott was quoted in a Burlington Free Press article stating that she was refused apartments because she was a single mother on welfare: https://twitter.com/m_mendozaferrer/status/1093295853907922946

Despite conceding the 2016 primary and stating that “Secretary Clinton has won the Democratic nomination and I congratulate her for that” (https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/11/politics/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders/index.html), he later made the Trump-esque statement “Some people say that if maybe that system was not rigged against me, I would have won the nomination and defeated Donald Trump.” https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-defeat-donald-trump-2016-rigged-primary-dnc-nbc-kasie-hunt-1446116

Stole electricity from his neighbors in the 70s https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/07/bernie-sanders-vermont-119927

Stole food from the refrigerator of the Vermont Freeman’s publishers https://newrepublic.com/article/122005/he-was-presidential-candidate-bernie-sanders-was-radical

Was asked to leave a hippie commune in 1971 due to sitting around engaging in “endless political discussion” rather than working https://freebeacon.com/politics/bernie-sanders-asked-leave-hippie-commune/

At age 28, wrote an article for alternative newspaper Vermont Freeman entitled “Cancer, Disease, and Society.” In the article, he argues that sexual repression can cause cancer, and women who are virgins, have fewer orgasms than their peers, or simply don’t enjoy sex are more likely to develop cervical cancer. The article includes statements such as “the manner in which you bring up your daughter with regard to sexual attitudes may very well determine whether or not she will develop breast cancer, among other things” and “How much guilt, nervousness have you imbued in your daughter with regard to sex? If she is 16, 3 years beyond puberty and the time which nature set forth for child-bearing, and spent a night out with her boyfriend, what is your reaction? Do you take her to a psychiatrist because she is “maladjusted” or a "prostitute," or are you happy that she has found someone with whom she can share love?” He also argues that the education system contributes to cancer, as does having “an old bitch of a teacher (and there are many of them).” https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2157403-sanders-cancer.html

Appeared to still hold these views as of 1988, when he stated "I have my own feelings on what causes cancer and the psychosomatic aspects on cancer." https://time.com/4249034/bernie-sanders-alternative-medicine-cancer/

Called Planned Parenthood “part of the establishment” for endorsing Secretary Clinton https://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/planned-parenthood-bernie-sanders-218026

In his 1998 autobiography, quoted an article calling his 1996 primary opponent Susan Sweetser “too brassy, too bitchy” https://books.google.com/books?id=_2YjBm2_JGUC&pg=PA173&lpg=PA173&dq=sanders+too+brassy+too+bitchy&source=bl&ots=SWrIR5Xa8m&sig=ACfU3U2-Hj1-UXIOM0Zz274h6_Nu8juoBg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjHhtObq6LmAhWvUt8KHc8mDVUQ6AEwA3oECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=sanders%20too%20brassy%20too%20bitchy&f=false

In the same autobiography, repeatedly used the n-word and chose to keep the word in the text when republishing the book in 2015. Note that Lyndon B. Johnson was able to make this same point in the sixties without needless slurs https://www.inquisitr.com/5620596/bernie-sanders-under-fire-for-use-of-n-word-in-2015-book-clip-from-audiobook-version-goes-viral-friday/

After saying millionaire senators are immoral (https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/24/politics/bernie-millionaire-senators-immoral/index.html) and railing against millionaires and billionaires in his 2016 campaign, Sanders responded to criticism of his millionaire senator status by saying “if you write a best-selling book, you can be a millionaire, too.” https://theweek.com/speedreads/834228/bernie-sanders-says-millionaire-like-write-bestselling-book

Was booed by women of color at the She the People presidential forum by being unable to say anything of substance regarding racial issues, instead just constantly reminding everyone that he marched with MLK Jr. https://www.thedailybeast.com/bernie-sanders-met-with-boos-after-name-dropping-martin-luther-king-at-she-the-people-summit

As mayor of Burlington, fired the assistant city treasurer when she was jailed for an anti-war protest https://academic.oup.com/publius/article-abstract/21/2/131/1917641?redirectedFrom=PDF

Despite participating in a civil rights protest, never bothered to vote until he ran for election and voted for himself: https://imgur.com/gallery/mmS40Gq#460q6bS

Repeatedly accuses his female opponents of campaigning on identity politics, from saying “It is not good enough for someone to say, 'I'm a woman! Vote for me!” regarding Secretary Clinton’s campaign (https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/21/13699956/sanders-clinton-democratic-party), to his 1986 governor race against Madeleine Kunin, who stated, “When Sanders was my opponent he focused like a laser beam on “class analysis,” in which “women’s issues” were essentially a distraction from more important issues. He urged voters not to vote for me just because I was a woman. That would be a “sexist position,” he declared.” https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/02/04/when-bernie-sanders-ran-against-vermont/kNP6xUupbQ3Qbg9UUelvVM/story.html

Upheld a ban on rock concerts as mayor of Burlington like a Footloose villain https://i.redd.it/atpybo1rcwa31.jpg

Had a heart attack at age 78, making his continued life expectancy 3.1 years https://www.cardiovascularbusiness.com/topics/acute-coronary-syndrome/study-65-older-mi-patients-die-within-8-years

#Bernie Sanders #Senator Sanders #politics #US politics #2020 election

29 notes · View notes

dontmeantobepoliticalbut · 11 months

Text

After GOP House negotiators bailed on U.S. debt ceiling talks on Friday, around two-thirds of the Congressional Progressive Caucus urged President Joe Biden to "invoke his constitutional authority granted in the 14th Amendment" in order "to end Republican hostage-taking of the economy that could trigger a financial catastrophe."

Led by Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Deputy Chair Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), and Whip Greg Casar (D-Texas), 66 CPC members sent Biden a letter noting the "unremitting efforts by congressional Republicans to hold the economic health of our nation hostage," and calling on him to "fulfill the executive's constitutional duty to faithfully and impartially administer the funds already enacted by law at the direction of Congress."

The letter—which follows a similar call from some Senate Democrats and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—cites Section 4 of the 14th Amendment, which states that "the validity of the public debt of the United States... shall not be questioned."

Biden said earlier this month that he has been "considering" invoking the 14th Amendment, "but the problem is, it would have to be litigated," and "I don't think that solves our problem now."

"Congressional Republicans who now refuse to pass a clean debt ceiling increase voted on three separate occasions under President [Donald] Trump to raise the debt ceiling without any preconditions or extraneous, harmful policies attached," the lawmakers noted. "They now threaten the full faith and credit of the United States, which Treasury Secretary [Janet] Yellen warned would 'produce an economic and financial catastrophe' and could occur as soon as June 1."

The letter points out that although House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) "stated that 'the greatest threat to our future is our national debt,' he led House Republicans in passing the 'Limit, Save, Grow Act,' which rescinds funding for [Internal Revenue Service] enforcement against tax evasion by wealthy individuals, which would increase the deficit by nearly $500 billion over the next 10 years."

"Republicans—who in 2017 voted unanimously to pass the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) that increased the federal deficit by $1.9 trillion over 10 years, with 83% of the law's benefits estimated to accrue to the richest 1% by 2027—also rejected commonsense proposals offered by your negotiators to close tax loopholes and raise revenue in the current budget discussions," the progressives added.

The letter continues:

“We believe that relenting to Congressional Republicans' economic ransom and negotiating on devastating budget cuts, additional work requirements for essential food and economic support, and fast-tracking fossil fuel projects that undermine our shared climate achievements is antithetical to our shared Democratic values. Surrendering to these extremist demands also sets a dangerous precedent that emboldens Republicans to pursue additional, anti-democratic hostage-taking, particularly after having been told previously that a clean debt ceiling increase was nonnegotiable.”

GOP leaders insist that any debt ceiling deal would have to come with cuts to social safety net programs, and Biden has signaled his openness to considering some reductions. The CPC letter warns that the Republican framework could take jobs from 780,000 people; nutrition assistance from 1.2 million women, infants, and children; Medicaid coverage from up to 21 million Americans; rental assistance from 640,000 families; and more.

"If the options are either agreeing to major cuts to domestic priorities under the Republican threat of destroying the economy and moving forward to honor America's debts, we join prominent legal scholars, economists, former budget officials, and a former president in advocating for invoking the 14th Amendment of the Constitution," the progressives wrote.

"Not only does the debt ceiling run counter to the Constitution's mandate that the validity of America's public debt shall not be questioned," their letter adds, "it contradicts the appropriations law that requires the Treasury to issue debt for the funding you are obligated to administer at Congress' direction."

15 notes · View notes

ademocrat · 4 years

Text

Mark Takano is taking charge of protecting veterans & LGBTQ people in Congress

Representative Mark Takano is one of seven out members in the current House of Representatives. He has served California’s 41st District, covering mostly Riverside County, since its inception in 2013. Takano was also the first person of color that was openly gay upon his election to Congress, and now he is one of two in the legislature, alongside Native American Rep. Sharice Davids (D-KS).

Takano also co-chairs the LGBTQ Equality Caucus alongside the six other LGBTQ members of the House, which works with over 160 other members, and serves on the Committee on Education and the Workforce. Additionally, since last year, he has also served as the Chair of the House’s Veterans’ Affairs Committee – the first, and only LGBTQ Representative currently, to have the distinction of chairing a committee.

Related: EXCLUSIVE: Maxine Waters cheers Mayor Pete’s likely Iowa win

That’s a lot of communities and constituents that one person is expected to proudly represent, but Takano is up for the task. Topics of importance to him as of late have included ending conversion therapy, gun control legislation, and protecting Medical Care for All. He has also called for an official Congressional Office of Technology to deal with the modern issues of our time.

He spoke with LGBTQ Nation live at the 2020 Millennial Media Row, hosted by his fellow California Rep. Maxine Waters. “I have a gavel, just like Maxine,” he says about chairing the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, “and like Maxine, I know how to use it.”

I had the opportunity to talk with @DanReynolds from Imagine Dragons about the effort to end conversion therapy nationwide.

Dan is using his platform to shine light on the struggles LGBTQ youth face and spreading love and acceptance. I'm grateful for his work. #ImagineEquality pic.twitter.com/h91g5QYBrM

— Mark Takano (@RepMarkTakano) February 6, 2020

No child should EVER have to endure the immoral and dangerous practice of conversion therapy.

19 states have already banned this despicable practice, we owe it to #LGBTQ youth to ban it nationwide.#DefundConversionTherapy

— Mark Takano (@RepMarkTakano) February 5, 2020

Takano begins to speak on his experience working on the Committee, reminding us that “VA is the second largest department in the federal government – only second behind the Department of Defense.”

Speaking on the population he’s tasked with serving while acting as chair of the committee, the self-declared “Gaysian” talks about the uncertain population of LGBTQ people under his purview. “The Veterans’ population is becoming more diverse, we know 15-20% of all service members are women…I can’t tell you an exact number of LGBTQ people, but there’s going to be more of them that are open, because 10 years ago, we overturned ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.'”

Takano remembers to point out, however, that trans people are not within that group. “They’re mistreating [trans people] in the army, and the navy, and the military…you know, don’t get me started on what this President said he was going to do for the LGBTQ community, and made it sound like he was an alright Republican.”

“He turned out to be someone who’s going to discriminate [and] promote discrimination against our community,” Takano says.

As a former teacher, Takano first tells us about how personally he takes Trump’s “undermining” of public schools, most effectively by allowing Betsy DeVos – “an enemy of public schools for most of her life” – to run the Department of Education. “This is not a good thing for minorities, and especially LGBTQ people!” Takano declared.

“They want to move in a direction where federal tax dollars can be given to private schools that can discriminate against LGBTQ people,” Takano tells LGBTQ Nation, “and, that’s a terrible policy, it’s a horrible thing. We need a strong public school system where everyone, regardless of who they’re attracted to, regardless of their gender identity, regardless of their race, regardless of their gender…is protected by laws, and they have rights, and that no citizen’s dollars are being used to discriminate.”

We ask Takano to explain to us what he plans to do for the remaining Congressional session, with up to a year left in the current administration. How does he hope to help the LGBTQ people under attack by Trump, DeVos, and so many others? What about Veterans and current military members? What can be done to support trans military veterans?

Takano answers, “I have a lot of legislative agenda that I want to achieve in terms of preventing suicide among veterans, that’s a whole agenda in itself…people who are most vulnerable to suicide are people who have been subjected to military sexual assault,” explaining that men are committing most sexual assaults against men within the military, although the sexual assaults against women happen at a much faster rate. “There are ways in which I think we need to reform our process, so that people who have been subjected to assault will come forward, and will report what has been done to them,” Takano says.

He also looks forward to pushing an agenda in order to protect student veterans that become targets “from predatory, for-profit schools…because of their generous veterans’ benefits.” He points out that “these aren’t specifically LGBTQ issues, but they are issues that affect all veterans, and actually, affect all students.”

What Takano believes is “the most important thing to do” is holding everyone accountable for better results. “Hold this administration accountable, hold the VA accountable, to serve veterans well – to make sure the VA is a welcoming and inclusive place.”

Specifically in regards to trans people, he says that the overall treatment of trans veterans has been positive, “as far as I can tell.” Alluding to the struggle in clear results caused by the Trump administration’s policies, Takano admits that “we need to make sure.”

“I just want all trans people to know that I’m here to listen to trans veterans, who need better access,” Takano promises. “The Veteran’s Health Administration treats veterans on a medical basis, they don’t – they’re not supposed to be discriminating, and as chairman, I’m going to keep it that way.”

In looking ahead to the next Presidential administration, Takano speaks on Pete Buttigieg’s success in becoming a ‘leading’ candidate (“I was going to say, ‘on top’, but that expression, in our community…” he trails off.)

“It’s amazing that an openly, gay, VETERAN is leading in Iowa,” Takano exlaims. He clarifies that he has “not gotten behind any candidate,” but he finds Buttigieg’s performance “remarkable.” Looking ahead to the upcoming New Hampshire caucus, Takano points out that Ann McLane Kuster – one of two Representatives of the state – has endorsed Buttigieg – “So 50% of the state,” essentially.

“I think [people saying], ‘Oh, I can’t believe the mayor of South Bend is gonna really get to the end’ – we don’t know that,” he says of Pete’s electability detractors. “…so, my congratulations to him, for representing our community, the LGBTQ community, and showing those LGBTQ teenagers across the country…'[you can] have worth in themselves, and you too, can run for President.'”

In his parting words, Takano urges Democratic voters across the country to get out and vote – “take these names down,” he requests – so something special can happen in Congress.

He names four candidates – Ritchie Torres, Georgette Gómez, Jon Hoadley, and Gina Ortiz Jones as “just a few LGBTQ [candidates]” of color that can be elected into Congress in the upcoming year.

According to Takano, here’s how the candidates shape up: Torres, running in New York’s 15th District, “could be the first Afro-Latino who’s gay to become a member of Congress.” Gomez would be “a[n out] Latina [from] San Diego” if elected, and Hoadley is a Victory Fund-rated ‘game changer’ that is “running out of Michigan”. Jones is a veteran vying to represent Texas’ 23rd Congressional District on her second attempt at the seat.

Takano actively wants to welcome these candidates to the House chambers, having even endorsed some of them. Why?

“Actually, I could start a whole new caucus,” he says. While he remains “the only Gaysian, still,” he says that along with Rep. Davids, they could form a subcaucus within the LGBT Equality Caucus that would represent LGBTQ people of color.

“That’s not only going to be LGBTQ diversity, but intersectional diversity, right? I think that’s very cool.”

3 notes · View notes

bountyofbeads · 5 years

Text

House Democrats Move to Rein In Trump on Immigration https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/25/us/politics/border-funding-vote.html

House Democrats Move to Rein In Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

By Julie Hirschfeld Davis and Emily Cochrane | Published June 25, 2019 | New York Times | Posted June 25, 2019

WASHINGTON — The House pressed toward a vote Tuesday evening on an emergency $4.5 billion humanitarian aid bill to address the plight of migrants at the border, as Democratic leaders appeared confident they had quelled a rebellion in their ranks by adding new health and safety requirements for children and adults held by the government.

A group of liberals and Hispanic-American lawmakers had threatened to withhold their backing for the bill because they fear that the aid package would enable President Trump’s immigration crackdown.

But Representative Pramila Jayapal, Democrat of Washington and a co-chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said she had reached an agreement on the House floor with Speaker Nancy Pelosi and others to include a provision in the bill that would require government contractors operating temporary shelters to meet strict standards of care within six months or lose their contract. Ms. Jayapal said she would wait to see the final bill language but anticipated that the agreement would bring many of her colleagues on board.

“If this final language is what we’ve agreed to, then I plan to support it,” she told reporters. “I have tremendous apprehensions about doing so. I am not doing so with a free heart. I am not doing so believing that this is going to solve the problems. I am doing so because I am willing in the name of these children to see if we can do something to improve those conditions at the border.”

[An exclusive from “The Weekly,” a new TV series from The New York Times, on FX and Hulu: Meet the youngest known child taken from his parents at the United States-Mexico border.]

The breakthrough indicated the power that the party’s liberal wing is now willing to wield. Many of them, including Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, have said they will not vote to send one cent to the agencies that have carried out the president’s harsh immigration policies, even with strings attached to rein in those policies and even if the package is intended to help vulnerable women and children living in badly overcrowded, squalid shelters.

“I am not planning on voting as it is,” said Representative Ilhan Omar, Democrat of Minnesota. “We have a humanitarian crisis, and what we are trying to do does not match that crisis.”

Efforts to meet liberal demands will only bolster the White House’s opposition to a spending bill that Mr. Trump initially requested. But they could get the measure through the House — and spare Democrats an embarrassing floor defeat.

“The overwhelming majority of House Democrats, including the overwhelming majority of the Progressive Caucus, will support this legislation, because we understand the urgency of the moment,” Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the chairman of the Democratic caucus, told reporters on Monday. “This week, we have to resolve the humanitarian crisis.”

During a closed-door meeting of House Democrats at their campaign headquarters near the Capitol on Tuesday morning, Ms. Pelosi made an impassioned plea for her rank and file to support the bill, arguing that it would send a signal to the world that Democrats want to help suffering children at the border, according to a senior Democratic aide who described her private remarks on the condition of anonymity. Ms. Pelosi also warned that allowing their divisions over the measure to sink it would play into the president’s hands.

“The president would love for this bill to go down today,” Ms. Pelosi told Democrats, according to the aide. “A vote against this bill is a vote for Donald Trump and his inhumane, outside-the-circle-of-civilized attitude toward the children.”

Then the speaker, who is well known for her flair for tamping down internal rebellions in her ranks, asked a room packed with Democrats whether anyone had a problem with the legislation. Nobody spoke up, the aide said. She concluded the session by saying she expected “very few noes” and urging those thinking of opposing the bill to bring their questions to her and other House leaders.

Later, she repeated to reporters a point she had made to lawmakers behind closed doors, saying that the bill was a spending measure, not a policy plan.

“This isn’t an immigration bill,” Ms. Pelosi said. “It’s an appropriations bill to meet the needs of the children.”

Critics of the package huddled with Ms. Pelosi in her Capitol office on Monday night to air their complaints, and some emerged saying changes would be needed to garner their support. Leaders met into the night to discuss those modifications and came up with a handful that they plan to add to the bill before it reaches the floor on Tuesday afternoon.

Democrats plan to add language that would require Customs and Border Protection to establish plans and protocols to deliver medical care, improve nutrition and hygiene, and train personnel to ensure the health and safety of children and adults in custody. Another new provision would require the secretary of health and human services to specify which requirements are being temporarily waived to deal with a sudden influx of migrants. That amendment would limit the detention-center stay of any unaccompanied child to 90 days unless written notification is submitted to Congress attesting that no other facilities are available.

Democrats also intended to add new requirements for translators at Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Citizenship and Immigration Services.

The White House has already threatened that Mr. Trump would veto the House bill because of restrictions that were included even before those new measures.

Senate Republicans and Democrats came together last week to draft a $4.6 billion version of the humanitarian aid package that also includes limitations on the use of the funds and several other conditions.

With House Republicans almost uniformly opposed to the stricter House measure, the fate of the entire effort remains uncertain. If the changes Ms. Pelosi settled on win over enough Democrats to push the package through the House on Tuesday afternoon, it would still have to be reconciled with the Senate’s bill before being sent to Mr. Trump for his signature.

Ms. Pelosi has argued that in order to give the House leverage in any such negotiation with the Senate, Democrats have to show the broadest possible support for the bill. Some lawmakers said the changes that leaders had agreed to over the last 24 hours persuaded them to support the measure.

“I was on the fence, but that makes me feel much better, so I’m leaning to supporting it,” said Representative Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, Democrat of Florida. “For me, specifically, it was the time frame that we had to set for reunification.”

Lawmakers from districts along the border have been among the strongest proponents of the bill, arguing that Democrats must put aside their antipathy for Mr. Trump’s immigration policies and focus on alleviating a humanitarian debacle.

“There are legitimate concerns about trust with the administration, and there is a legitimate fear that we are funding a dysfunctional system,” said Representative Veronica Escobar, Democrat of Texas, whose El Paso district abuts the border. “But we have to meet our obligations as human beings and fund the needs for the care of these children.”

Nicholas Fandos contributed reporting.

1 note · View note

theliberaltony · 5 years

Link

via FiveThirtyEight

Bernie Sanders is a famous, successful loser.

When he announced his run for the Democratic nomination in April 2015, Sanders trailed Hillary Clinton in the polls by nearly 57 percentage points. By spring of 2016, some polls showed him within single digits. Sanders was no longer an obscure senatorial frump from Vermont — he was a bona fide political phenomenon whose primary success embodied the Democratic Party’s leftward drift.

But 2020 is not 2016. Sanders kicked-off his 2020 run early on Tuesday, and as he navigates his second presidential primary, he’ll need to prove he can build on his past success, not coast on his 2016 coalition.

Sanders enters the 2020 race not as an underdog but as a Democratic Socialist leader of the pack; an early Iowa poll showed him commanding 19 percent of the vote of likely caucusgoers, second only to former Vice President Joe Biden. Sanders comes to the race with the high name recognition that many candidates in the crowded field lack, and with a glossy pelt hanging off his political belt: the grassroots movement that propelled him to unexpected heights in 2016.

While many 2020 contenders will spend the early days of their campaigns conveying just what sort of candidate they would be and delicately trying to signal what kinds of voters they think they appeal to, Sanders is already a known quantity. In a recent YouGov poll, only 16 percent of respondents said they didn’t know what they thought of him, compared with 38 percent who said the same of Kamala Harris and 29 percent who didn’t know what to think of Elizabeth Warren. Engaged Democratic voters will know that Sanders’s brand is populist — free college, $15 minimum wage, “Medicare for all” — and polemical. The senator’s early charm in 2016 seemed to lie in his harangues against an unmitigated free-market system and the need for political revolution. In the age of President Trump, many Democrats might be looking for a pure-of-heart angry warrior figure in their candidate — someone with a distinct brand of politics that hasn’t been formed solely in reaction to the president. Sanders certainly is that.

We know who was attracted to that kind of candidate in the last Democratic primary. In 2016, Sanders outperformed Clinton with young voters and voters who live in more rural places. He won primaries in states with sizable white populations like Michigan and Wisconsin — states that Clinton went on to lose in the general election to Trump. In the months and years following Clinton’s loss to Trump, Democrats have debated ways to win back this disillusioned group. Sanders could hold some appeal to those Obama-Trump voters given his primary performance in upper Midwest states and the fact that he did well with independents.

While Clinton won the 2016 primary by a substantial number of votes — more than 3 million — it’s safe to say the Democratic Party has gone through a bout of soul searching over the past couple of years. Voters who might have dismissed Sanders during the 2016 primary could well have come around to him in the interim. A Gallup survey found that 2016 was the first year in which Democrats felt more positively about socialism than they did about capitalism — Sanders’s message might well have seeped in. Another potential strength is his proven track record of attracting small-dollar donations. Sanders raised more than $100 million from donors giving less than $200 during the 2016 run, and in the 2020 campaign era, in which candidates are eschewing PAC money, that donor base is powerful.

Small donors gave big to Sanders

The five 2018 U.S. Senate candidates who raised the largest share of their donations from small donors as of Nov. 1, 2018

Candidate Party State Share of Contributions From Small Donors Bernie Sanders I Vermont 77%

–

Elizabeth Warren D Massachusetts 56

–

Corey Stewart R Virginia 50

–

Beto O’Rourke D Texas 46

–

Geoff Diehl R Massachusetts 45

–

Source: Federal Election Commission via Center for Responsive Politics

Sanders also may have a leg up in early primary states like Iowa and New Hampshire, where all-important local activists play an outsized role in building candidate momentum. Sanders knows them, and he won’t have to do as much as others to build up grassroots support.

But Sanders’s 2016 success could also be the makings of his greatest 2020 challenge. When he entered the race in 2015, it was in large part to push his progressive left ideas. Other politicians picked up on the fact that Democratic voters liked the big ideas that Sanders was selling, and now the 2020 field is packed with contenders who are campaigning on platforms similar to his 2016 campaign. Sanders’s 2017 “Medicare for all” bill became something of a litmus test for those senators considering a 2020 run — Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand and Elizabeth Warren all signed on as co-sponsors. Even Clinton acknowledged the appeal in her campaign memoir, “What Happened”: “I have a new appreciation for the galvanizing power of big, simple ideas. I still think my health care and college plans were more achievable than Bernie’s and that his were fraught with problems, but they were easier to explain and understand, and that counts for a lot.”

This means the progressive-left lane in 2020 is quite a bit more crowded than it was in 2016, which is a problem for Sanders, albeit a problem that stems from his own success. Warren is perhaps his most direct ideological competition — she’s been a critic of American capitalism for decades, though unlike Sanders, she still calls herself a capitalist and a Democrat. She also hired his 2016 Iowa caucus director — inside baseball to be sure, but it’s worth paying attention to the campaigns Democratic operatives choose to work for this early on.

Another potential complexifier for Sanders is that many Democrats appear to be prioritizing “electability” over ideology in 2020. A Monmouth University poll found that 56 percent of Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents wanted a candidate who will perform well against Trump, even if they disagree with that person on most issues. What electability actually means in this context is quite vague, but if it becomes a proxy for a centrist candidate palatable to swing voters, Sanders might be out of luck. Or, even if voters decide that “electable” means more left, Sanders could lose out to new faces trying to sell their pragmatic progressivism — Harris, Warren or potential candidate Beto O’Rourke. We might be wise not to discount voters’ affinity for these new, shiny candidates: 59 percent of respondents in a recent USA Today/Suffolk University poll said they would be interested in “someone entirely new” as their nominee. Forty-one percent of those polled said Sanders shouldn’t even run again.

Sanders also would need to work to improve his performance with black voters, a crucial demographic in the Democratic primary.

In 2016, Clinton and Sanders split the white vote, but she did better among black voters overall, though young black voters trended toward Sanders. 2020 will likely be a whole different ballgame when it comes to courting the black vote. The field has two top-tier contenders who are black — Harris and Booker — and Joe Biden could hold some appeal given that he served as vice president under Barack Obama.

And then there is the matter of allegations of sexual harassment and gendered pay inequity that have been leveled against the Sanders campaign itself. Women who worked for the candidate in 2016 said there was a lack of accountability on the campaign when it came to the harassment, and Sanders’s initial response to the reporting was that he had been unaware of the allegations. “I was little bit busy running around the country trying to make the case,” he said. “If I run, we will do better next time.” Sanders issued a more full-throated apology via Twitter days later, but the allegations have served to compound the impression that there were whiffs of sexism swirling around the Sanders campaign and its supporters. “Bernie bros,” as some male supporters of Sanders came to be called, were sometimes blamed for sexist online attacks on Clinton.

#IFTTT #FiveThirtyEight #politics #538 #Clare Malone

2 notes · View notes

patriotsnet · 3 years

Text

Why Are Republicans Against The Era

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/why-are-republicans-against-the-era/

Why Are Republicans Against The Era

Republican Governors Revolt Against Cdc Mask Guidance

Bill Maher explains why intelligent people vote Republican

Republican governors are rejecting new mask recommendations the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued Tuesday, casting the health guidance as a step back amid a push to vaccinate millions of Americans that is already struggling in their states.

In statements and public comments, governors said their states would not return to the mask orders issued in 2020.

“The CDC’s new guidance suggesting that vaccinated people wear masks indoors flies in the face of the public health goals that should guide the agency’s decision making,” Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts said in a statement. “The State of Nebraska will not be adopting their mask guidance.”

“Public health officials in Arizona and across the country have made it clear that the best protection against COVID-19 is the vaccine. Today’s announcement by the CDC will unfortunately only diminish confidence in the vaccine and create more challenges for public health officials – people who have worked tirelessly to increase vaccination rates,” Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey said in a statement.

Newly revised guidance from the Atlanta-based agency recommends that some fully vaccinated people wear masks indoors if they live in areas where the virus is spreading rapidly.

Most of Nevada, Utah and Wyoming are areas of high concern. So are parts of California, much of Indiana and Kentucky, and eastern swaths of Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas.

Video: CDC Reverses Mask Guidelines

CNBC

President Truman Integrates The Troops: 1948

Fast forward about sixty shitty years. Black people are still living in segregation under Jim Crow. Nonetheless, African Americans agree to serve in World War II.

At wars end, President Harry Truman, a Democrat, used an Executive Order to integrate the troops.

These racist Southern Democrats got so mad that their chief goblin, Senator Strom Thurmond, decided to run for President against Truman. They called themselves the Dixiecrats.

Of course, he lost. Thurmond remained a Democrat until 1964. He continued to oppose civil rights as a Democrat. He gave the longest filibuster in Senate history speaking for 24 hours against the 1957 Civil Rights Act.

House Votes To Reauthorize Violence Against Women Act Despite Gop Opposition

WASHINGTON The House on Thursday passed an extension of the Violence Against Women Act, which provides protections for survivors of domestic violence, and includes new gun-related provisions that are opposed by the NRA.

Lawmakers approved the bill in a 263-158 vote, with most Republicans voting against it.

The measure, which expired in February, was sponsored by Congressional Black Caucus chairwoman Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa. The bill today, which would extend the law for five years, includes new provisions that would make it harder for domestic abusers to gain access to guns.

Those include an attempt to close the so-called ‘boyfriend’ loophole, prohibiting those convicted of stalking or abusing individuals with whom they have been in a relationship that did not include marriage from buying a gun.

TAGS

Proposed Removal Of Ratification Deadline

On March 8, 2011, the 100th anniversary of International Women’s Day, Representative Tammy Baldwin introduced legislation to remove the congressionally imposed deadline for ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. The resolution had 56 cosponsors. The resolution was referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution by the House Committee on the Judiciary. The Subcommittee failed to vote on the resolution, and as such, the resolution died in subcommittee when the 112th Congress ended in January 2013. On March 22, 2012, the 40th anniversary of the ERA’s congressional approval, Senator Benjamin L. Cardin introduced âwhich is worded with slight differences from Representative Baldwin’s . Senator Cardin was joined by seventeen other senators who cosponsored the Senate Joint Resolution. The resolution was referred to Senate Committee on the Judiciary, where a vote on it was never brought. The resolution, therefore, died in committee when the 112th Congress ended in January 2013.

On February 24, 2013, the New Mexico House of Representatives adopted House Memorial No. 7 asking that the congressionally imposed deadline for ERA ratification be removed. House Memorial No. 7 was officially received by the U.S. Senate on January 6, 2014, was designated as “POM-175”, was referred to the Senate’s Committee on the Judiciary, and was published verbatim in the Congressional Record at page S24.

Don’t Miss: Republicans 2016

0 notes

statetalks · 3 years

Text

Who Will Be Speaker Of The House If Republicans Win

Weakening Of The Investigations Against Trump

Pelosi Says She Will Not Let Republican ‘Antics’ Interfere With Jan. 6 Committee

If Democrats dont control the House or the Senate, they cant initiate investigations of Trump or some of his more controversial cabinet members, such as Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt.

More importantly, after the 2018 elections, the electoral process will recede as a constraint on the president and GOP in terms of the Russia investigation at least for a while.

We dont really know why Trump, despite his constant criticisms of the investigation, has not fired Attorney General Jeff Sessions or Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, or why he has not directly tried to stop the probe by special counsel Robert Mueller. Maybe Trump, despite his rhetoric, has some real respect for the rule of law. I think its more likely that Trump understands that firing Rosenstein or making a drastic move to stop the Mueller probe would increase both the chances of Democrats winning the House and/or Senate this year, and the odds that the resulting Democratic-led chamber would feel compelled to push to impeach Trump. But if the GOP emerges from 2017 and 2018 without losing control of the House or the Senate, I suspect that, with the next election two years away, the president will feel freer to take controversial steps to end the Russia probe. And I doubt Republicans on Capitol Hill would try to stop him.

List Of Speakers Of The United States House Of Representatives

The speaker of the United States House of Representatives is the presiding officer of the United States House of Representatives. The office was established in 1789 by Article I, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution. The speaker is the political and parliamentary leader of the House, and is simultaneously the body’s presiding officer, the de facto leader of the body’s majority party, and the institution’s administrative head. Speakers also perform various administrative and procedural functions, all in addition to representing their own congressional district. Given these several roles and responsibilities, the speaker usually does not personally preside over debates. That duty is instead delegated to members of the House from the majority party. Neither does the speaker regularly participate in floor debates. Additionally, the speaker is second in the presidential line of succession, after the vice president and ahead of the president pro tempore of the Senate.

The House elects a new speaker by roll call vote when it first convenes after a general election for its two-year term, or when a speaker dies, resigns or is removed from the position intra-term. A majority of votes cast is necessary to elect a speaker. If no candidate receives a majority vote, then the roll call is repeated until a speaker is elected. The Constitution does not require the speaker to be an incumbent member of the House, although every speaker thus far has been.

Cbs News Projects Hickenlooper Wins Colorado Senate Seat Democrats’ First Pickup

Democrats picked up their first Senate seat of the night, with CBS News projecting former Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper has defeated incumbent GOP Senator Cory Gardner. Hickenlooper decided to run for Senate after running briefly in the Democratic presidential primary.

Gardner was considered one of the most vulnerable Republican senators up for reelection this year, especially since he’s the only major statewide elected GOP official. Gardner has also been trailing Hickenlooper in polls leading up to Election Day.

While this is a victory for Democrats, they will have to pick up several other seats to gain a majority in the Senate.

Read Also: When Did The Republicans And Democrats Switch

Pelosi Says It Doesn’t Matter Right Now If She’ll Seek Another Term As Speaker Beyond 2022

In a press call, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi shot down a question about whether this upcoming term would be her last as speaker, calling it the “least important question you could ask today.” She added that “the fate of our nation, the soul of the nation” is at stake in the election.

“Elections are about the future,” Pelosi said. “One of these days I’ll let you know what my plans are, when it is appropriate and when it matters. It doesn’t matter right now.”

After the 2018 election, Pelosi agreed to term limits on Democratic leaders that would prevent her from serving as speaker beyond 2022.

How Maine And Nebraska’s Split Electoral Votes Could Affect The Election

As the race drags into Wednesday, it appears two congressional districts in Maine and Nebraska could prove pivotal in deciding the outcome of the election.

Maine and Nebraska are the only states in the nation that split their electoral votes. Maine awards two of its four electoral votes to the statewide winner, but also allocates an electoral vote to the popular vote winner in each of its two congressional districts. Nebraska gives two of its five electoral votes to the statewide winner, with the remaining three going to the popular vote winner in each of its three congressional districts.

You May Like: What Republicans Are Running For Governor In Nevada

Pelosi Wins Tight Race For House Speaker

Pelosi, 80, is the only woman to ever serve as speaker.

Nancy Pelosi re-elected for House Speaker

The House of Representatives has narrowly reelected Nancy Pelosi as speaker with 216 votes, giving the California Democrat a fourth – and likely final – term leading the House.

Pelosi, 80, is the third speaker in the last 25 years to win with less than 218 votes, after former Republican Speakers Newt Gingrich and Paul Ryan. Five Democrats did not support Pelosi on the floor, and instead voted for alternative candidates or “present.”

After seizing the gavel, Pelosi said the “most urgent priority” of the 117th Congress will be defeating the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Two weeks ago, we passed an emergency relief package to crush the virus and put money in the pockets of workers and families, which is now the law. But we must do more to recognize our heroes,” she said Sunday. “Indeed, the pandemic has pulled back the curtain on even worsened disparities in our economy and our society. We must pursue justice: economic justice, justice in health, racial justice, environmental and climate justice.”

Rep. Kevin McCarthy, the Republican leader, won unanimous support from the Republican conference garnering 209 votes on the floor.

Still, many new members were spotted with friends and family members around the Capitol.

Roy was shut down 371-2.

Grumblings From Within The Gop Could Cause Long

GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois has been a pointed critic of Trump’s conduct on January 6, and alongside Cheney, was one of 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach the former president for his role in provoking the Capitol attack.

Kinzinger, who was first elected to the House in 2010, was dismayed by Cheney’s removal from leadership.

“Liz may lose, and MAGA-lago may celebrate,” he tweeted on May 12. “But I predict that the history books of the future will not celebrate. They will say this was the low point of the Republican Party.”

The congressman has increasingly directed his ire toward McCarthy.

He added: “Liz stayed consistent. She didn’t look for opportunities to attack Jan. 6, but as conference chair she does press and is naturally asked about it. She responds truthfully. Kevin? He felt threatened, so instead of fighting for his job he went on offense against Liz.”

Kinzinger then said that McCarthy wants to be speaker so badly that he’ll do anything to appease the far-right Freedom Caucus, filled with bombastic Trump loyalists like Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio and Louie Gohmert of Texas.

“Kevin … made the determination that if he appeased the Trump crowd, he could raise money and take the credit, when he was up for speaker,” Kinzinger wrote. “He also assumes that people like me will vote for him for speaker, but the legislative terrorists in the Freedom Club wouldn’t, so he needs to be all in with them.”

Also Check: How Many Republicans Are In The 116th Congress

Why Democrats Struggled More Than Expected In Some House Races

Its too early to say exactly what went wrong for House Democrats, who broadly hoped to comfortably expand their majority.District-level internal party polling had shown Republicans with the potential to lose even more seats in 2020.

Many Republican strategists had resigned themselves to the possibility that their House ranks could decrease. Instead, Republicans were the ones making gains albeit modest enough ones to stay the minority party in the House.

Cook Political Reports House editor Dave Wasserman had some early thoughts on Wednesday: Just like Biden, Democratic congressional candidates suffered losses among Hispanic voters in key races. Democrats had bad nights particularly in Florida and Texas; they lost a couple of incumbents in Florida and didnt defeat a single Republican incumbent in Texas, despite making a massive investment in the state to target 10 districts.

Republicans also learned from their losses in 2018 and recruited top-tier women candidates, who were on a winning streak.

After last night, Republicans are on track to more than double their current count of 13 women, Wasserman wrote.

These outcomes all elude a clean narrative. Its difficult to say early on how much is based on strategic error, and how much is owed to the bizarre nature of this election year amid a pandemic that significantly hampered Democrats ability to do basic campaigning tasks like door-knocking.

Gop Chatter About Possibly Electing Trump As House Speaker Grows

Former Speaker Boehner Discusses GOP’s Future, U.S. Political Division | NBC Nightly News

A Fox host asked House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy late last week whether he’d support electing Donald Trump as Speaker of the House. The answer raised a few eyebrows.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy was asked Friday about the possibility of Trump becoming Speaker of the House if Republicans win control of the chamber in the 2022 midterms…. “You know, I’ve talked to President Trump many times, he tells me he wants to be speaker, and I think he should be president,” McCarthy told Fox News.

It wasn’t long before McCarthy’s office clarified that he’d misspoken during the interview: McCarthy meant that Trump supported the California congressman’s bid for Speaker, not that the former president wanted the job for himself.

That said, the question that prompted the confusion didn’t come out of nowhere.

Steve Bannon, who used to advise the former president, seemed to get the ball rolling on this, recently touting a scenario in which House Republicans take back the majority next year and support Trump as their new Speaker. Under the fanciful hypothetical, once Trump held the gavel, he could start exacting revenge against those who defeated him, launching investigations into imagined scandals, and initiating impeachment proceedings against President Biden and Vice President Harris.

Soon after, Trump was asked about the idea and replied, “That’s so interesting…. Yeah, you know it’s very interesting…. It’s very interesting.”

Chatter in conservative media soon followed.

Don’t Miss: Are Other Republicans Running For President

House Republicans Vow To Vote Against Raising Debtceiling

U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C.

More than 100 House Republicans have vowed to vote against raising the debt ceiling. In a letter released on Monday, a group of 103 lawmakers said in order for Democrats multi-trillion spending plans to come to fruition, the debt limit would have to be significantly increased.

They contended a vote to raise the debt ceiling would imply consent to new spending. The lawmakers also made it clear Democrats alone were responsible for the effort to spend trillions.

We do not accept Pelosis agenda. We will not be on the hook for Bidens failures, and we sure as hell do not consent to this kind of reckless, wasteful, useless spending in our nations capital.

Gop Women Made Big Gains

While the majority of the Republican caucus will still be men come 2021, there will be far more Republican women in Congress than there were this year. So far, it looks like at least 26 GOP women will be in the House next year, surpassing the record of 25 from the 109th Congress. Thats thanks in part to the record number of non-incumbent Republican women 15 whove won House contests. And its also because of how well Republican women did in tight races. The table below shows the Republican women who ran in Democratic-held House districts that were at least potentially competitive,1 according to FiveThirtyEights forecast. As of this writing, seven of them have won.

GOP women have flipped several Democratic seats

Republican women running for potentially competitive Democratic-held House seats and the status of their race as of 4:30 p.m Eastern on Nov. 11

District D+22.1

Results are unofficial. Races are counted as projected only if the projection comes from ABC News. Excludes races in which the Republican candidate has either a less than 1 in 100 chance or greater than 99 in 100 chance of winning.

Don’t Miss: Can Republicans Vote In The Nevada Caucus

New Yorkers Become First Black And Openly Gay Members Of Congress

Tuesday night will be historic in part because of the diversity of candidates elected to the House. Democrats Ritchie Torres and Mondaire Jones, both of New York, are the first Black and openly gay members of Congress.

Meanwhile, Republican Madison Cawthorn of North Carolina is leading in North Carolina’s 11th district, a safe Republican seat. Cawthorn, 25, won the June primary against a Trump-backed candidate for the seat vacated by White House chief of staff Mark Meadows . He has come under fire for visiting Hitler’s retreat and for his campaign launching a website which included a racist broadside against his Democratic opponent.

Us House Speaker Pelosi Names Republican Kinzinger To Jan 6 Panel

WASHINGTON, July 25 – U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Sunday formally named Republican Representative Adam Kinzinger to serve on a select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol by supporters of then-President Donald Trump.

Kinzinger, Pelosi said in a statement, “brings great patriotism to the committees mission: to find the facts and protect our democracy.”

It was unclear whether she would name additional Republicans. Earlier in the day, Pelosi was interviewed on ABC’s “This Week” and said that other Republicans also had expressed interest in working on the panel.

Kinzinger, 43, is an Air Force veteran and an outspoken critic of Trump. He was one of seven House Republicans who voted with Democrats to impeach Trump earlier this year on a charge of inciting an insurrection at the Capitol.

He now joins fellow Republican lawmaker Liz Cheney on the panel as it prepares to hold its first hearing on Tuesday on the deadly attack.

House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy, who initially said Trump bore responsibility for the Jan. 6 attack that brought the worst violence at the Capitol since the War of 1812, has since mended his relationship with Trump as the two attempt to win Republican control of Congress in the 2022 elections.

Representative Adam Kinzinger speaks during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 10, 2021. Ting Shen/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo

Also Check: Which Republicans Will Vote To Impeach

Its Not All Bad News For Democrats

While it was unquestionably a good night for Republicans, Democrats still held onto most of the seats they won in 2018 and will continue to be the majority party in the House. Thats in part because they retained most of the suburban districts they picked up in 2018.

Of the 233 seats that Democrats held coming into the election,2 186 of them were in districts that were predominantly or partly suburban in nature, according to density categorizations by Bloombergs CityLab. Thus far, Democrats have lost seven of those seats, but they captured one GOP-held suburban seat around Atlanta. And thanks to redistricting, theyve also won two formerly Republican seats around Greensboro and Raleigh in North Carolina, which reflect the partys strength in more populous areas.

Because of their relative success in the suburbs, Democrats kept many seats in places President Trump won in 2016. Coming into the election, Democrats held 30 seats in districts Trump carried in 2016, and they wouldve lost their majority if theyd lost more than half of them . But theyve won 18 of them so far and picked up one from the GOP . In fact, more than half of Republicans gains have come in seats representing places that Trump won by a pretty sizable margin in 2016. Well have to wait a bit before data can tell us how congressional districts voted in 2020,3 but for now it seems many Republican gains were made by picking off the lowest-hanging fruit.

Maine Senate Race A Toss

With polls closing at 8 p.m., the hotly contested Maine Senate race remains a toss-up. Senator Susan Collins, running for her fifth term, is considered one of the most moderate Republicans in the Senate, but she is facing considerable skepticism from Democrats and independents who previously supported her. State Speaker of the House Sara Gideon is the Democratic candidate, and has posted record fundraising.

CBS News projects that Democratic Senator Chris Coons of Delaware and Democratic Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts have both won reelection. Republican Senator Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma also won reelection.

The Alabama Senate race is leaning toward Republican Tommy Tuberville, who is taking on incumbent Senator Doug Jones, the most vulnerable Democrat in the Senate.

The Tennessee Senate race is also leaning Republican. The Mississippi Senate race is likely Republican. The Senate races in New Hampshire, Illinois, and Rhode Island are lean Democratic, and New Jersey is likely Democratic.

Also Check: Did Any Republicans Vote To Impeach

Mcconnell Not Troubled At All By Trump’s Suggestion Of Supreme Court Challenge

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell defended Mr. Trump for falsely claiming that he won reelection, although he acknowledged that the presidential race had not yet been decided.

“It’s not unusual for people to claim they have won the election. I can think of that happening on numerous occasions,” McConnell told reporters in Kentucky. “But, claiming to win the election is different from finishing the counting.”

“Claiming to win the election is different from finishing the counting,” Mitch McConnell says, adding that Americans “should not be shocked” that Democrats and Republicans are both lawyering up for the close races

CBS News

He also said he was “not troubled at all” by the president suggesting that the outcome of the election might be determined by the Supreme Court. The president cannot unilaterally bring a case to the Supreme Court, what it’s unclear what case the Trump campaign would have if it challenged the counting of legally cast absentee ballots.

McConnell, who won his own closely watched reelection race on Tuesday evening, expressed measured confidence about Republicans maintaining their majority in the Senate. He said he believed there is a “chance we will know by the end of the day” if Republicans won races in states like Georgia and North Carolina.

Trump’s Save America Pac Released A Photo Showing The Former President Meeting With House Minority Leader Kevin Mccarthy On January 28 2021 Save America Pac Mccarthy Gets A Mixed Reception From Trumpworld

NBC Projects Democrats Take Control Of House | NBC News

Trump continues to hold immense sway over conservatives, and House Republicans delivered an easy victory for Stefanik in becoming the party’s Conference Chair last week, despite her having a more moderate voting record than Cheney.

Loyalty to Trump, which Stefanik displayed in lending credence to the former president’s grievances regarding the 2020 presidential election, is a true tenet of being accepted in his orbit.

Only weeks after the January 6 Capitol riot and Trump’s impeachment by the House, McCarthy made a sojourn to the former president’s residence at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida, even taking a smiling photo with him.

However, according to a report from Insider’s Tom LoBianco and Warren Rojas, some loyalists in Trumpworld view McCarthy with a heap of skepticism.

A Trump advisor recently told the former president that McCarthy likely wouldn’t lock up the requisite number of votes to obtain the speakership if the GOP regains the majority in 2022.

“He’s left too many people unhappy and unsettled and time is not on his side,” the advisor told Insider.

However, a veteran GOP strategist with close ties to Trump who spoke to Insider noted that McCarthy was a stellar fundraiser who backed the former president in a very public way in ousting Cheney from her leadership role.

“He’s not gotten crosswise with Trump,” the strategist said.

Read Also: How Many Seats Do Republicans Need To Keep The House

Trump’s Former Physician Wins House Seat

Ronny Jackson, the former White House physician who served under both Presidents Trump and Obama, has won his race in Texas’ 13th Congressional District. Jackson rose to prominence in 2018 when he gave a glowing press conference about Mr. Trump’s health.

Mr. Trump nominated Jackson to be Veterans Affairs secretary last year, but Jackson withdrew amid allegations that he drank on the job and over-prescribed medications. In his House race, Jackson has closely aligned himself with Mr. Trump. He has downplayed the coronavirus pandemic and criticized mask-wearing requirements. He has also promoted baseless claims about Biden’s mental health.

Republican Congressman Dan Crenshaw also won reelection. Crenshaw is a conservative firebrand and a rising GOP star in the House.

Pelosi Says American People Have Made Their Choice Clear In Voting For Biden

In a letter to her Democratic colleagues in the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi expressed confidence that Biden would be elected president, even though several states have yet to be called.

“The American people have made their choice clear at the ballot box, and are sending Joe Biden and Kamala Harris to the White House,” Pelosi said.

She also praised House Democrats for keeping their majority, saying that the House will “now have the opportunity to deliver extraordinary progress.” However, she only obliquely referenced the heavy losses by several freshmen Democrats who had flipped red seats.

“Though it was a challenging election, all of our candidates both Frontline and Red to Blue made us proud,” Pelosi said.

Don’t Miss: Do Any House Republicans Support Impeachment

Analysis: Donald Trump For Speaker Of The House

Want to hear a crazy idea? Of course you do!

Let’s go step by step.

1. Florida gained another seat in its congressional delegation thanks to faster-than-the-national-average growth over the last decade.

2. Republicans control both chambers in the state Legislature as well as the governorship, meaning they will have total control over the redistricting process and where the new seat will be drawn.

3. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is a BIG friend of former President Donald Trump.

4. Trump makes his permanent home in Palm Beach, Florida.

Which brings me to this exchange between the former President and conservative radio talk-show host Wayne Allyn Root late last week as recounted by the Washington Times:

ROOT: “Why not instead of just waiting for 2024, and I’m hoping you run in 2024, but why not run in 2022 for the United States Congress, a House seat in Florida, win big, lead us to a dramatic landslide victory, taking the House by 50 seats, and then you become the speaker of the House?”

TRUMP: “You know, it’s very interesting. That’s so interesting. And people have said, run for the Senate, OK, run for the Senate, but you know what? Your idea might be better. It’s very interesting.”

Now that idea doesn’t seem so crazy, does it?!

Well, OK, it’s still very unlikely to happen. Mostly because Trump doesn’t really seem like the kind of guy who would be cool serving in the House after he had been president. Too small potatoes for him — even as speaker!

source https://www.patriotsnet.com/who-will-be-speaker-of-the-house-if-republicans-win/

0 notes

your-dietician · 3 years

Text

High Risk Pregnancy – Mitigating Risks for Type 1 Diabetes + Black Maternal Health Outcomes – Diabetes Daily

New Post has been published on https://depression-md.com/high-risk-pregnancy-mitigating-risks-for-type-1-diabetes-black-maternal-health-outcomes-diabetes-daily/

High Risk Pregnancy – Mitigating Risks for Type 1 Diabetes + Black Maternal Health Outcomes – Diabetes Daily

This content originally appeared on Beyond Type 1. Republished with permission.

By Kayla Hui, MPH

In 2020, Ariel Lawrence, a diabetes advocate and creator of Just A Little Suga–a storytelling platform that centers people of color with diabetes–found out that she was pregnant. Although Lawrence was excited, she couldn’t help but feel anxious. As a Black woman living with type 1 diabetes, Lawrence worried about how the intersection of having diabetes and being a Black woman would impact her and her baby.

According to Christopher Nau, MD, a doctor of maternal fetal medicine based in Cleveland, Ohio, timely access to diabetes and maternal health care is crucial, especially for Black women who—due to multiple factors including systemic racism and implicit bias— are three times more likely to die from childbirth compared to white women in the U.S.

“Once I found out that I was pregnant, I was experiencing a lot of anxiety. And although I was working with the care team to make sure that my management was tighter and my blood sugars were in range, the reality was that there were moments where it wasn’t in range, there were high blood sugars, and sometimes, there were high blood sugars for extended periods of time,” Lawrence tells Beyond Type 1.

Lawrence’s blood sugar level concerns lingered since getting diagnosed with type 1 when she was in the tenth grade. “In college, there was a nurse who had said to me, type 1 diabetes and pregnancy don’t mix,” Lawrence recalls. “At that point in my diabetes journey, I remember struggling to get my A1c below a 7.2. So for the longest, there was this question of can I actually do what I need to sustain a healthy pregnancy while living with diabetes?”

According to research, Black women are four times more likely to receive zero to five prenatal care visits when compared with white women. In addition to receiving statistically lower levels of care, “Black women are less likely to get into care early in the first trimester, which is important specifically for someone who has diabetes,” Nau says.

One of the contributing factors to poor health outcomes for pregnant Black people is systemic racism. Compared to pregnant white people, pregnant Black people are more likely to experience unfair treatment and discrimination within the healthcare system, such as being spoken to disrespectfully by healthcare personnel, being ignored after expressing fears/concerns, and experiencing poor bedside manner.

In addition to systemic racism, implicit bias–attitudes and stereotypes of other groups that manifest in overt and intentional discrimination–hampers maternal health for Black pregnant people. Implicit bias can impact a medical professional’s judgement to provide treatment and care in a timely manner. It can also hinder patient and provider communication.

When racial biases are expressed in a condescending manner, it can decrease the likelihood that patients will feel valued or heard and providers will recommend treatment options for patients.

Research shows that implicit bias is directly correlated with lower quality of care. A 2012 study found that cesarean deliveries–deliveries that can lead to more negative health outcomes for the pregnant individual and baby, including maternal mortality–were more common among Black and Latina women than white women.

From 2007 to 2016, there were 40.8 pregnancy-related deaths for Black women per 100,000 live births, triple the mortality rate compared to white women, who had 12.7 pregnancy-related deaths per 100,000 live births.

“I’m concerned as a Black woman with my own health, and whether or not I’ll live to share the experience of my birth because there have been so many women who unfortunately have passed away,” Lawrence says.

When Black pregnant people with diabetes do not receive timely maternal and diabetes care, Nau says that their blood sugar levels can rise, increasing the risk of miscarriage and birth defects increases. “The risk can be as high as 20 to 25 percent in someone who’s very poorly controlled,” Nau explains.

As a result, fetuses can have birth defects, such as cardiac malformations. Poorly controlled diabetes may also result in increased risk for stillbirth, respiratory distress, and jaundice, Nau explains. He adds that babies are at risk of hypoglycemia, also known as low blood sugar, initially after delivery.

When pregnant people have consistently elevated blood glucose levels, it can also increase the chances of having a c-section. When a baby is delivered by a c-section, pregnant people may take longer to recover post childbirth.

Strength of a Medical and Health Support System

Aware of the maternal health outcomes for Black women, Lawrence hired a doula, which helped ease her anxiety surrounding pregnancy. “I was aware that when it came to Black maternal health outcomes, Black women are more likely to experience a C-section and have complications as a result,” Lawrence says. “To help minimize my anxiety, I decided to find a doula.” For Lawrence, having a doula meant having an advocate and support system.

According to DONA International, doulas offer physical, emotional, and partner support throughout the pregnancy, birth, and early postpartum period. Research shows that women who use a birth doula are less likely to have a c-section, use pain medication, need pitocin, and more likely to rate their childbirth experience positively.

During the birthing process, Lawrence’s doula liaised and communicated between Lawrence and medical professionals to ensure that Lawrence knew what the doctors were doing.

Coupled with a doula, Lawrence also leaned on her therapist for support. “I was afraid that something bad might happen. So, I had a therapist supporting me through that,” Lawrence says.

Improving Maternal Health Outcomes for Black Pregnant People With Diabetes

Alissa Erogbogbo, MD, medical director of operations at Hospitalist Group, says that there are opportunities to improve maternal health outcomes for Black pregnant people with diabetes through legislation. She says that an ideal bill would include postpartum follow up. “Whether it’s a nurse that they follow up with, a phone call to make sure they [pregnant people] are checking their blood sugars, there’s a lot of opportunity to really decrease the maternal mortality rate,” Erobogbo says.

In the U.S, the Medicaid program provides coverage for almost half of all births. Unfortunately, coverage only lasts 60 days postpartum. States have the option to extend Medicaid postpartum coverage for 12 months by applying for a section 1115 waiver. In April 2021, Illinois became the first state to extend Medicaid coverage for up to one full year after pregnancy. Joining Illinois’s postpartum Medicaid expansion are Missouri and Georgia.

However, there is still a long way to go, according to Erogbogbo. A handful of states including Colorado, Texas, Wisconsin, and Florida have enacted legislation to seek federal approval of their 1115 waiver, but the majority of states have taken no direction.

“Most states need to follow that bandwagon. Continuity of care helps you understand how your health is progressing, what preventative measures that you can take,” Erogbogbo tells Beyond Type 1.

While postpartum coverage is available in some states, Medicaid program expansion is far from sufficient. To build on current maternal health efforts, Congresswoman Alma Adams, Senator Cory Booker, and members of the Black Maternal Health Caucus introduced the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act of 2021, a bill that would not only expand postpartum coverage for up to 24 months postpartum under the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Woman, Infants, and Children, but improve maternal health among racial and ethnic groups by addressing the social determinants of health.

If the Momnibus Act is passed, it would implement several actions such as providing funding to community-based organizations that are working to improve the maternal health space, diversifying the perinatal workforce to ensure that pregnant people are receiving culturally sensitive maternity care, improving data collection to better understand the causes of maternal health outcomes, and promoting innovative payment models to incentivize high-quality maternal health care and non-clinical perinatal support.

The bill was first introduced to the house on February 8, 2021 and was referred to the subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security on April 23, 2021. Since the bill’s inception, it has been endorsed by over 240 organizations.

The aforementioned policies are not an end-all solution, but serve as a start to addressing disparate health outcomes for Black pregnant people on the policy level. People can also advocate to improve Black maternal and health conditions by:

Resources

Post Views: 45

Read more about A1c, childbirth, Intensive management, low blood sugar (hypoglycemia), medicaid, pregnancy, pregnancy with type 1 diabetes.

window.fbAsyncInit = function () //Initialize the Facebook JavaScript SDK FB.init( appId: '8485090309', //App ID from the app dashboard channelUrl: 'http://www.diabetesdaily.com/channel.php', //Channel file for x-domain communication status: true, //Check Facebook Login status xfbml: true //Look for social plugins on the page );

//Logged In Users FB.getLoginStatus(function (response) if (response.status !== "unknown") ga('set', 'dimension1', 'Logged In'); );

//Facebook Likes FB.Event.subscribe('edge.create', function (href, widget) var currentPage = jQuery(document).attr('title'); ga('send', 'hitType': 'social', 'socialNetwork': 'Facebook', 'socialAction': 'Like', 'socialTarget': href, 'page': currentPage ); );

//Facebook Unlikes FB.Event.subscribe('edge.remove', function (href, widget) var currentPage = jQuery(document).attr('title'); ga('send', 'hitType': 'social', 'socialNetwork': 'Facebook', 'socialAction': 'Unlike', 'socialTarget': href, 'page': currentPage,

); );

//Facebook Send/Share FB.Event.subscribe('message.send', function (href, widget) var currentPage = jQuery(document).attr('title'); ga('send', 'hitType': 'social', 'socialNetwork': 'Facebook', 'socialAction': 'Send', 'socialTarget': href, 'page': currentPage ); );

//Facebook Comments FB.Event.subscribe('comment.create', function (href, widget) var currentPage = jQuery(document).attr('title'); ga('send', 'hitType': 'social', 'socialNetwork': 'Facebook', 'socialAction': 'Comment', 'socialTarget': href, 'page': currentPage ); ); ;

//Load the SDK asynchronously (function (d, s, id) var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "https://connect.facebook.net/en_GB/all.js"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); (document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk')); Source link

0 notes