US Elections – APDA Web http://apdaweb.org/ Tue, 13 Jul 2021 05:40:04 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.7.2 https://apdaweb.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/apda-150x150.png US Elections – APDA Web http://apdaweb.org/ 32 32 Trump publishes letter from ex-US attorney criticizing the Justice Department’s handling of election fraud allegations https://apdaweb.org/trump-publishes-letter-from-ex-us-attorney-criticizing-the-justice-departments-handling-of-election-fraud-allegations/ https://apdaweb.org/trump-publishes-letter-from-ex-us-attorney-criticizing-the-justice-departments-handling-of-election-fraud-allegations/#respond Tue, 13 Jul 2021 00:47:37 +0000 https://apdaweb.org/trump-publishes-letter-from-ex-us-attorney-criticizing-the-justice-departments-handling-of-election-fraud-allegations/ A former Pennsylvania federal attorney said he disagreed with the Justice Department on how to deal with allegations of election fraud and election irregularities, according to a letter from ex-President Donald Trump. William McSwain, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania from 2018 to January 2021, wrote to Trump in June expressing dismay at […]]]>


A former Pennsylvania federal attorney said he disagreed with the Justice Department on how to deal with allegations of election fraud and election irregularities, according to a letter from ex-President Donald Trump.

William McSwain, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania from 2018 to January 2021, wrote to Trump in June expressing dismay at the instructions allegedly received from former Attorney General William Barr.

“On election day and after, our office received various allegations of election fraud and election irregularities,” the letter said. “As part of my responsibilities as a US attorney, I wanted to be transparent to the public and, of course, fully investigate all allegations. However, Attorney General Barr directed me not to make any public statements or press releases about possible irregularities in the elections. I was also instructed to refer serious allegations to the attorney general for investigation – the same attorney general who said you can’t win. “

McSwain wrote that he “disagreed with this decision,” but noted that he was a Marine officer, so he would obey his manager’s orders even if he disagreed with them.

“The US attorney from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania was banned from investigating election fraud allegations. Outrageous!” Trump said that in a separate statement.

Barr issued a memo in November authorizing US attorneys to investigate “substantial allegations” of electoral irregularities before confirming the election. He later said publicly that the Justice Department did not see the fraud as sufficient to change the outcome of the 2020 election.

Barr said he believed Trump’s main allegations of electoral fraud were “all cops ***,” according to an article published by Atlantic last month.

Pennsylvania is a state won by President Joe Biden last year where post-election exams have shown no widespread fraud. Democratic Attorney General Josh Shapiro, who said the state had found “absolutely no evidence” of widespread electoral fraud, was criticized by Republicans for tweeting a few days before the November election: “Trump will lose. “He said, however, that this would be the case if in Pennsylvania” all votes were added together. “

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The state’s GOP-led Senate is underway to conduct an Arizona-style “forensic investigation” that prompted the State Department of Pennsylvania to warn that any optional equipment passed to “third-party companies” will be decertified.

In the same letter sent Monday by Trump’s PAC Save America, McSwain said the former president was “rightly angry” about how Democratic officials in his state conducted the 2020 elections. McSwain also said he intends to run for Pennsylvania governor in 2022 and spoke about electoral reforms he would support.

Washington Examiner videos

Keywords: News, 2020 Elections, Donald Trump, Pennsylvania, William Barr, Department of Justice

Original author: Daniel Chaitina

Original location: Trump publishes letter from ex-US attorney criticizing the Justice Department’s handling of election fraud allegations





Source link

]]>
https://apdaweb.org/trump-publishes-letter-from-ex-us-attorney-criticizing-the-justice-departments-handling-of-election-fraud-allegations/feed/ 0
Democrats are affected by the high unemployment in the blue state in the medium term https://apdaweb.org/democrats-are-affected-by-the-high-unemployment-in-the-blue-state-in-the-medium-term/ https://apdaweb.org/democrats-are-affected-by-the-high-unemployment-in-the-blue-state-in-the-medium-term/#respond Sat, 10 Jul 2021 13:00:09 +0000 https://apdaweb.org/democrats-are-affected-by-the-high-unemployment-in-the-blue-state-in-the-medium-term/ Unemployment in the blue state threatens to cause national problems for the Democrats in the mid-term of 2022. America has had a devastating fiscal year; This is especially true for many blue countries with persistently high unemployment. Historically tough for the party that holds the White House, next year’s elections could be especially if those […]]]>


Unemployment in the blue state threatens to cause national problems for the Democrats in the mid-term of 2022. America has had a devastating fiscal year; This is especially true for many blue countries with persistently high unemployment. Historically tough for the party that holds the White House, next year’s elections could be especially if those voters direct their frustration with unemployment on the Democrats in Congress.

Unemployment is the lagging variable in America’s economic recovery. The economy as a whole essentially returned in the fourth quarter of 2020 and exceeded its pre-pandemic levels in the first quarter of 2021. It will almost certainly see a fourth consecutive quarter of growth in the second quarter of this year.

In contrast, the country’s unemployment rate rose from 5.8 percent to 5.9 percent in the June employment report. This is well above the pre-pandemic rate of 3.5 percent from February 2020. Applying the higher labor force participation rate of 2020 to today’s employment level, the current rate would be an astronomical 8.5 percent.

As high as the official interest rate is today, it is far exceeded in many countries. Looking at unemployment from such a government perspective also makes it very biased. The countries with the highest unemployment rates are politically democratic.

Twenty jurisdictions (states and the District of Columbia) had unemployment rates at or above the national rate in May, with an average rate of 6.95 percent. Of these, the top 11 had Democratic governors (or mayors). Overall, 14 out of 20 also had Democratic governors, and these states had an average unemployment rate of 7.2 percent. If, as the official national quota, the quotas in these 20 countries are really higher, taking into account today’s low employment rate, then the real quotas in some countries would be in double digits.

These were not only strongly democratic in their chairman of the board. In the 2020 presidential election, 16 voted for the Democrats. Fourteen also have Democratic-controlled state senates and state houses.

The high unemployment in these 20 jurisdictions is not just a current state of slow recovery. They are a one year condition. In May 2020, unemployment in these 20 countries averaged 13.6 percent.

In qualitative terms, the political burden of such high and persistent unemployment is obvious; it is also quantitative. These 20 jurisdictions include 230, more than half, members of the House of Representatives. Currently 152 of them are Democrats; only 78 are Republicans. They also contain 38 senators (DC doesn’t have two senators); 29 of them are Democrats and 10 are up for election in November 2022.

Moreover, this politically skewed unemployment will be on top of the historically adverse effects suffered by the presidential party during the midterm elections. The recent history of their governments is sobering enough for the Democrats. Bill ClintonWilliam (Bill) Jefferson ClintonHuawei hires three new lobbying firms Inside Biden’s Pragmatic Approach to Coronavirus Rules Sustainable economic growth requires congressional regulatory reform MORE lost 54 House seats and nine Senate seats during 1994 Barack ObamaBarack Hussein ObamaObama publishes 2021 summer reading list and continues tradition Republicans Want Democrats To Hammer Over Gas Prices Hillicon Valley: Warren Asks SEC To Take A Closer Look At Cryptocurrency Exchanges | Maryland City taken offline in massive ransomware attack | Huawei hires three new lobby companies MORE lost 63 House seats and six Senate seats in 2010.

Former House Speaker Tip O’Neill remarked, “All politics is local”. If voters with such persistently high unemployment see Democratic control at the local level as more a coincidence than a causation, it is a potentially big problem in November 2022.

The clear dominance of the Democrats in these states certainly shows that these voters are strongly inclined to them on issues. This would also be expected in 2022. In addition, the midterms of 2022 are well over a year away, giving unemployment time to recover.

But the economy is not just any issue and unemployment is not just part of it.

The state of the economy is the most widespread political issue. It affects everyone and a bad economy harms everyone. In addition, the economy has no more fundamental component than whether a person has a job.

Voters in these blue states tend to forgive the Democrats on issues. Still, asking them to forget is another matter. And asking them to forget the extremely high local unemployment for over a year requires even more. Therefore, not only do the Democrats need a general decline in unemployment, they need it in the blue states, where they are most politically and financially exposed.

JT Young served under President George W. Bush as director of communications in the Office of Management and Budget and as deputy assistant secretary for tax and budget matters in the Treasury Department. From 1987 to 2000 he worked as a congress employee.



Source link

]]>
https://apdaweb.org/democrats-are-affected-by-the-high-unemployment-in-the-blue-state-in-the-medium-term/feed/ 0
The dispute in Peru over the election result continues https://apdaweb.org/the-dispute-in-peru-over-the-election-result-continues/ https://apdaweb.org/the-dispute-in-peru-over-the-election-result-continues/#respond Thu, 08 Jul 2021 18:43:04 +0000 https://apdaweb.org/the-dispute-in-peru-over-the-election-result-continues/ July 10, 2021 F.OR A DEMOCRACY It takes democrats to survive. If large parts of the opposing political camps see themselves as enemies to be destroyed, and not as mere opponents with whom they can peacefully compete, then democracy is seriously threatened. That was the case in Spain on the eve of the civil war […]]]>


F.OR A DEMOCRACY It takes democrats to survive. If large parts of the opposing political camps see themselves as enemies to be destroyed, and not as mere opponents with whom they can peacefully compete, then democracy is seriously threatened. That was the case in Spain on the eve of the civil war in the 1930s, and in Brazil and Chile in the run-up to the military coups in 1964 and 1973, respectively. Peru has appeared worryingly unstable in recent weeks after a polarized election campaign split the country in half.

Listen to this story

Enjoy more audio and podcasts on iOS or Android.

The official count gave Pedro Castillo, a teacher and union leader who runs for a far-left party, victory in a runoff election on June 6 with just 44,000 votes (out of 17.6 million) ahead of his conservative opponent Keiko Fujimori. Ms. Fujimori’s supporters have spent the past month crying scams. They want to cancel 200,000 votes from Mr Castillo, claiming they are fake. But international observers found no serious irregularities on election day. The US and the European Union praised the conduct of the elections. Ms. Fujimori’s lawyers have provided no evidence of fraud. No one came forward to support claims that signatures had been forged. The electoral court has so far rejected the allegations. It seems ready to proclaim Mr Castillo president.

Will the conservative camp accept defeat? Ms. Fujimori said she will respect the tribunal’s verdict despite narrowly losing in 2016 to thwart the centrist who defeated her. Others were grosser. In one bizarre development, Vladimiro Montesinos, the corrupt spy chief when Fujimori’s father ruled Peru as an autocrat in the 1990s, appeared on a taped phone call from his prison cell with a collaborator to propose bribing members of the electoral court. Numerous retired military officials signed a letter last month calling on the armed forces not to recognize an “illegitimate” president. A former presidential candidate called for “a civil-military alliance”. It smells like an attempt to overthrow democracy in the name of its defense. “It’s very dangerous to question the rules,” says Paula Muñoz, political scientist at Pacific University in Lima.

But the Democrats also have legitimate reasons to be concerned about Mr Castillo – urgent ones because he will become president on July 28th. His party is Marxist-Leninist. Its founder and leader Vladimir Cerrón spent a decade in Cuba. Their program includes large-scale nationalizations. Mr Cerrón is under investigation (which he denies) alleging illegal campaign funding. Mr Castillo’s organized supporters include supporters of a follow-up movement to the Shining Path, a terrorist group whose uprisings between 1980 and 1992 cost around 70,000 lives.

Mr Castillo failed to use the runoff vote to convincingly get into the middle. Instead of distancing himself from Mr Cerrón, at a meeting last month he agreed that he would share power with him. Mr Castillo’s statements were contradictory. “We are not communists, we will not take property away from anyone,” he said before a meeting with business leaders. “We will respect this constitution.” Days later, he said his first act as president would be to ask Congress to convene a constituent assembly to write a new constitution “with the smell, color and taste of the people.” This was the means used by left-wing populists like Hugo Chavez from Venezuela and Evo Morales from Bolivia to concentrate power and try to rule as autocrats indefinitely.

Mr Castillo’s position is weaker than that of these leaders. In the first ballot he won only 15% of the vote; his allies hold 42 of the 130 seats in the new Congress. It only won because many moderate Peruvians couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Ms. Fujimori. But he can rely on the power of the teachers’ union and the Ronderos (rural vigilante). And he will have access to government resources.

The likely outcome is chaotic, poor governance at best. Mr. Castillo has shown little ability to build alliances or a team capable of governing. He will take over a country that is still affected by the pandemic and the associated recession. Peruvians want a government that takes care of their problems instead of adopting a new constitution that a majority say is not wanted by a majority. Then the question arises of how long the country can tolerate an incompetent president. Congress has deposed two presidents in the past five years. It wasn’t long before Peruvians started voting again. Or they can be faced with something much worse.

This article appeared in the The Americas section of the print version under the heading “The Clash in Peru”



Source link

]]>
https://apdaweb.org/the-dispute-in-peru-over-the-election-result-continues/feed/ 0
Haiti’s history of violence and turmoil https://apdaweb.org/haitis-history-of-violence-and-turmoil/ https://apdaweb.org/haitis-history-of-violence-and-turmoil/#respond Wed, 07 Jul 2021 13:09:00 +0000 https://apdaweb.org/haitis-history-of-violence-and-turmoil/ Haiti’s President Jovenel Moise and First Lady Martine attend a ceremony at a memorial marking the tenth anniversary of the January 12, 2010 earthquake in Titanyen, Haiti, Jan. 12, 2020. REUTERS / Andres Martinez Casares / File Photo PORT-AU-PRINCE, Jul 7 (Reuters) – Haiti became the first independent colonial state in Latin America and the […]]]>


Haiti’s President Jovenel Moise and First Lady Martine attend a ceremony at a memorial marking the tenth anniversary of the January 12, 2010 earthquake in Titanyen, Haiti, Jan. 12, 2020. REUTERS / Andres Martinez Casares / File Photo

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Jul 7 (Reuters) – Haiti became the first independent colonial state in Latin America and the Caribbean and the first black-led republic when it overturned French rule in the 19th century.

But it has suffered cycles of violence, invasion, and repression for most of its subsequent history, including the dynastic Duvalier dictatorship.

President Jovenel Moise was shot dead by unknown assailants overnight, raising fears of further rioting.

Here are some key events in Haiti’s political history.

1492 – Spain colonizes the island of Hispaniola after the arrival of Christopher Columbus. Two hundred years later, Spain ceded the western half to France. Plantations managed by slaves of African origin produce sugar, rum and coffee that enrich France.

1801 – Former slave Toussaint Louverture leads a successful revolt and abolishes slavery.

1804 – Haiti becomes independent under the former slave Jean-Jacques Dessalines, who is murdered in 1806.

1915 – The United States invades Haiti and withdraws in 1943, but retains financial control and political influence.

1937 – In the worst incident of longstanding rivalry with the neighboring Dominican Republic, thousands of Haitians are massacred in the border area by Dominican troops on the orders of the dictator Trujillo.

1957 – Francois “Papa Doc” Duvalier takes power with military support and ushers in a time when human rights violations are widespread.

1964 – Duvalier declares himself president for life. His dictatorship is marked by repression enforced by the feared secret police Tonton Macoutes.

1971 – Duvalier dies and is replaced by his son Jean-Claude or “Baby Doc”. Repression is increasing. In the decades that followed, thousands of Haitian boat people flee to Florida by sea, and many die on the way.

1986 – A popular revolt forces Baby Doc to flee Haiti into French exile. Lieutenant General Henri Namphy takes over.

1988 – General Prosper Avril takes over Namphy in a coup.

1990 – Avril declares the state of siege amid protests, but resigns before the elections under international pressure.

1990 – Former pastor Jean-Bertrand Aristide, a leftist defender of the poor, wins the first free elections in Haiti. In 1991 he was overthrown in a coup.

1994 – US forces intervene to overthrow the military regime and Aristide returns. In 1995 UN peacekeeping troops were stationed and Aristide protege Rene Preval was elected president.

1999 – Aristide is elected President for a second term despite controversial results.

2004 – Political unrest forces Aristide to flee, but the country falls into violence.

2006 – Preval wins the election.

2008 – 2010. Series of protests triggered by food shortages, cholera outbreaks and then elections.

2010 – A catastrophic earthquake kills between 100,000 and 300,000 people, according to various estimates, and causes great damage in Port-au-Prince and elsewhere. Despite international aid measures, the country is as good as overwhelmed, which exacerbates the political, social and economic problems.

2011 – Michel Martelly wins the second round of the presidential election.

2012-14 Frequent anti-government protests fueled by corruption and poverty. Protesters demand Martelly’s resignation.

2017 – Jovenel Moise, a banana exporter and politician, is declared the winner of the 2016 presidential election.

2019 – Moise is constantly gaining power and ruling by decree after Haiti fails to hold elections due to political deadlock and unrest

Thousands take to the streets, shout “No to the dictatorship” and demand Moise’s resignation.

Compiled by Angus MacSwan; Adaptation by Nick Macfie

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.



Source link

]]>
https://apdaweb.org/haitis-history-of-violence-and-turmoil/feed/ 0
America’s partisan fireworks will be hard for anyone to put out https://apdaweb.org/americas-partisan-fireworks-will-be-hard-for-anyone-to-put-out/ https://apdaweb.org/americas-partisan-fireworks-will-be-hard-for-anyone-to-put-out/#respond Tue, 06 Jul 2021 11:55:15 +0000 https://apdaweb.org/?p=613 From vaccination rates to voting rights, from immigration policy to racial equity, blue and red states are hurtling in antithetical directions at staggering speed, even amid President Joe Biden’s persistent calls for greater national unity and his attempts to foster more bipartisan agreement in Washington. Across all of these issues, and more, Republican-controlled states are […]]]>


From vaccination rates to voting rights, from immigration policy to racial equity, blue and red states are hurtling in antithetical directions at staggering speed, even amid President Joe Biden’s persistent calls for greater national unity and his attempts to foster more bipartisan agreement in Washington. Across all of these issues, and more, Republican-controlled states are pursuing policies that amount to a wholesale effort to counter Biden’s direction at the national level — even as they look to block some of his key initiatives with lawsuits.
In some ways, the red state recoil from Biden’s agenda echoes the “resistance” that exploded in Democratic-controlled states to Donald Trump’s tumultuous presidency; in other ways, today’s actions in red states may constitute even greater evidence of the country pulling apart. Especially striking is that, as during last year’s lockdowns and mask mandates, the separation between red and blue America is occurring not only at the level of government policy, but also in individual behavior, with all studies showing Republicans are being vaccinated against the coronavirus at a much lower rate than Democrats.
Taken together, these centrifugal pressures call into question not only the ability of any president to unify the nation, but also his or her ability even to chart a common course for more than roughly half of the country — either red or blue America. This divergence, across a wide range of issues and personal choices, is rooted in the continuing political re-sorting that has divided the parties more sharply than ever along demographic and geographic lines and produced two political coalitions holding inimical views on the fundamental social and economic changes remaking America. And that destabilizing process shows no signs of slowing, much less reversing, even after Trump — who fomented division as a central component of his political strategy — has left the White House.
“This is the long arc of history,” says Lynn Vavreck, a political scientist at UCLA and one of the founders of the NationScape polling project studying American attitudes. “There are these moments that exacerbate things, like Trump running for that nomination in 2016: If he hadn’t run, the sorting would probably be taking a little longer. But it was always marching in that direction. You try to just ask yourself what stops it, or what reverses it, or what slows it? … I can’t come up with a good answer to that question.”

Presidential approval gap expands

The most common way to measure the daunting distance between red and blue America is through voting behavior and attitudes in public opinion polls. Polling has shown that the gap between voters from the two parties in their approval ratings for a newly elected president has steadily widened over recent decades. For Biden, despite all his efforts to govern as a unifying figure, that gap has reached a mountainous height: an ABC/Washington Post poll released on Saturday found that his approval rating among Democrats (at 94%) was 86 points above his rating among Republicans (8%).
These results came even as the nonpartisan Pew Research Center last week released its “validated voters” study, one of the most respected efforts to quantify how the key groups in the electorate voted in last November’s presidential election. Although the study found some shifts from the 2016 election (with Trump, for instance, improving among Hispanics and Biden gaining some ground among White men both with and without college degrees), mostly it recorded extraordinary stability in the lines of division between the parties over both elections. Other studies of the electorate’s behavior, from the media exit polls to the Cooperative Election Study sponsored by a consortium of academic researchers, have also concluded that continuity far exceeded change when comparing 2020 with 2016.

“To the extent we see differences between 2016 and 2020 we are talking about very marginal ones,” says Tufts University political scientist Brian Schaffner, a co-director of the Cooperative Election Study.

This stability may seem surprising after all the emotional and even unprecedented events of the Trump presidency, capped by a once-in-a-century pandemic that disrupted every aspect of daily life. But political scientists like Vavreck and Alan Abramowitz of Emory University say the continuity between the two elections reflects the intractability of the differences between voters in the two partisan coalitions. Reinforcing that picture is the striking finding that Biden’s current approval rating, both overall and among the electorate’s major groups, hasn’t really changed much from his vote among them last fall, even though Americans are expressing much more optimism about the country’s direction as society reopens and the economy recovers.

“I don’t think we are going to see an election anymore where a president wins with 52 or 53% of the vote and then has a 62% approval rating,” says Republican pollster Glen Bolger.

While some analysts have asserted that political polarization is driven primarily by leaders like Trump who encourage it, Abramowitz argues that today it is grounded in a much more intractable dynamic: As the electorate has sorted between the parties on lines of race, education, generation, religion and geography, the rank and file of each coalition now holds more ideologically consistent views on the core questions facing America — and those views are more consistently hostile to the perspective on the other side.

In an upcoming paper he shared with CNN, Abramowitz notes that long-term survey data shows that compared with the 1970s, voters in each party now hold much more negative views of the other party and its presidential nominee. That hostility, he argues, is rooted in these fundamentally clashing worldviews.

“One of the most important reasons why Democrats and Republicans intensely dislike each other is that they intensely disagree on a wide range of issues including the size and scope of the welfare state, abortion, gay and transgender rights, race relations, climate change, gun control and immigration,” Abramowitz writes. “As long as the parties remain on the opposite sides of almost all of the major issues facing the country, feelings of mistrust and animosity are unlikely to diminish even if Donald Trump ceases to play a major role in the political process.”

Moves to block Biden policies

This year’s sharp turn to the right in red states has provided immediate evidence to support that prediction. Red states have erupted in what looks like a spasm of resistance to the left-leaning tilt in national policy that Democrats are executing through their unified control of Washington.

As I’ve written, Republican-controlled states this year are advancing aggressively conservative initiatives across a panoramic array of issues. Among other things, red states are moving to loosen restrictions on gun owners and tighten (or even potentially eliminate) access to legal abortion; toughen penalties on public protesters; block transgender teens from competing in school sports; bar local governments from reducing their police budgets; and ban school curriculums that look to examine racism in American history.
Most of these policies steer in precisely the opposite direction that Biden is trying to set at the national level. Nine red states, for instance, have passed laws limiting or entirely blocking the ability of local law enforcement officials to enforce federal gun laws. But nowhere is this red state attempt to counter the President’s national direction more tangible than on immigration. As Biden has moved to reverse many of Trump’s hardline immigration policies, Republican attorneys general led by Texas’ Ken Paxton have already sued to block several of the new administration’s immigration initiatives.
Even more provocatively, Republican governors from states including Florida, Arkansas, Ohio and Tennessee have deployed National Guard troops or other law enforcement from their states to Texas’ border with Mexico in response to requests from Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, even though the federal government retains sole enforcement power there and National Guard members cannot apprehend undocumented migrants.

“This is definitely red states saying we want the kind of restrictive policies that Biden is dismantling,” says Doris Meissner, a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute and former commissioner of the US Immigration and Naturalization Service for President Bill Clinton.

Meissner says it’s possible to interpret these deployments as the mirror image of the “sanctuary” policies that Democratic-controlled cities and the state of California instituted to limit their cooperation with Trump’s immigration enforcement agenda. But Republicans have taken their resistance to a new level, she notes, in also seeking to counter Biden’s plan by mobilizing private resources from politically sympathetic supporters.
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, like Abbott a potential 2024 GOP presidential contender, announced last week that a conservative billionaire was funding the deployment of the South Dakota Guard to the Texas border. Abbott has already set up a website to solicit public donations to continue building the wall along the Texas border that Trump pursued but Biden has abandoned.

Emergence of 2-tier systems

As on immigration, red states are directly confronting Biden on voting rights. Republican-controlled states from Florida, Georgia and Arkansas to Iowa, Montana and Arizona this year have approved a torrent of measures making it more difficult to vote, almost all of them with virtually every state legislative Republican voting yes and nearly every Democrat voting no. Democrats have responded both by advancing legislation to establish a nationwide floor of voting rights — such as guaranteed early voting and on-demand absentee balloting — and with a Justice Department lawsuit against the Georgia law.
But after a GOP filibuster recently blocked the Democrats’ federal voting rights legislation, it’s uncertain whether the Democratic Senate majority will revise the chamber’s rules to enable them to pass a modified version of it. And the six Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices raised huge obstacles to the legal efforts to block the red state offensive on voting with their ruling last week weakening the Voting Rights Act.
What Manchin and Sinema can learn from the Lincoln Republicans on voting rights
Those twin barriers to national action raise the prospect that the months ahead will see the continued emergence of a two-tier system of American voting, with access becoming increasingly curtailed in red states even as blue states from Virginia to Washington take steps to expand it.
A two-tier system is exactly what’s already apparent in utilization of the coronavirus vaccine. All of the 20 states (plus the District of Columbia) where the highest shares of adults have received at least one shot were won last fall by Biden; 20 of the 21 states where the lowest percentage have obtained at least one shot were won by Trump (Georgia, the sole exception, is controlled by a Republican state government). The latest surveys — including polls from the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation and the new ABC/Washington Post poll — find an enormous gulf between the share of Democrats (86% in the ABC/WP) and Republicans (45%) who say they have received at least one dose of the vaccine so far. Stunningly, almost all of the remaining Republicans say they do not expect to get vaccinated at any point.
A new study released last week by researchers at UCLA underscores how head-spinning these contrasts are. The paper, from a team of researchers led by anthropology professor Daniel Fessler and graduate student Theodore Samore, notes that studies typically have found that individuals who express socially conservative views typically display more, not less, concern than social liberals about threats like a virus outbreak. But that pattern shattered for the coronavirus outbreak: While the small number of Democrats who identified as social conservatives showed heightened sensitivity to the threat — measured by their willingness to take steps such as wearing masks and washing hands — socially conservative Republicans were less willing to engage in any of those behaviors.

The researchers, Samore said, found that rejection of those safety precautions was linked most closely with distrust of scientists, distrust of the mainstream media (and lack of exposure to it) and attitudes of economic conservatism (which may have translated into greater priority on reopening the economy than combating the virus). All of those, of course, are attitudes now common in the modern Republican coalition.

“What we think is going on here is a clash between people’s inclinations … and their political beliefs about trusting science or exposure to different media sources,” says Samore.

Fessler says these tendencies are reinforced by the social and political sorting that has diminished Americans’ exposure to neighbors of contrasting political views.

“You might be a liberal 20-something, and you might feel not particularly threatened, but if everyone around is saying, ‘I got vaxxed,’ you can get tipping point effects” that encourage you to do so as well, he says; the opposite, he adds, works in reducing appetite for the vaccine among conservatives.

Information niches

The latest Kaiser poll dramatically underlines Fessler’s observation. Kaiser found that while two-thirds of Democrats say they live in households where everyone has been vaccinated, that’s true for less than 40% of Republicans; nearly that many Republicans, in fact, say they live in households where no one has been vaccinated.
The 2021 vaccination map looks like the 2020 election map

Fessler says these diverging attitudes on the value of vaccines, despite all the evidence of their effectiveness and safety, encapsulates a much larger problem: the development of information “niches” that allow falsehoods to take root for a large audience. The key “challenge facing democracies in the 21st century,” he argues, is that “while the internet promised the democratization of knowledge — the idea anyone can learn anything, and the connection of people regardless of geography and personal characteristics — instead the perverse result has been that it’s possible to occupy one’s own little niche in the information environment.”

Because “there are lots of other people occupying that” same space, he adds, no matter how implausible the ideas being presented in those circles, “our evolved psychology tells us this must be reality because everyone I am interacting with thinks the way that I do.”

That dynamic likely helps explain why such a staggeringly large percentage of Republicans accept Trump’s claims that the 2020 election was stolen, even though courts uniformly have dismissed his “evidence.” It also helps explain why an ominously large share of Republican voters (especially those who most rely on far-right media sources) even accept the byzantine QAnon conspiracy theory.

Divergent information flows are not the only reason that red and blue America are pulling apart; the preference for contrasting information sources, in fact, may be more symptom than cause of the underlying demographic, generational and geographic separation of the parties. Taken together, all of these factors produced an Independence Day weekend when foundational questions of American unity and commitment to democracy seemed more fraught than at any time since the Civil War.

The Declaration of Independence that Americans celebrated over the weekend begins with the confident assertion that it is “The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America.” Today, it is unclear what set of principles, if any, America’s fractious 50 states might agree on across the widening red-blue divide.



Source link

]]>
https://apdaweb.org/americas-partisan-fireworks-will-be-hard-for-anyone-to-put-out/feed/ 0
New man from London launches his own election investigation | Wisconsin News https://apdaweb.org/new-man-from-london-launches-his-own-election-investigation-wisconsin-news/ https://apdaweb.org/new-man-from-london-launches-his-own-election-investigation-wisconsin-news/#respond Mon, 05 Jul 2021 12:42:00 +0000 https://apdaweb.org/new-man-from-london-launches-his-own-election-investigation-wisconsin-news/ MADISON, Wisconsin (AP) – A New London man has launched his own review of the 2020 presidential election in Wisconsin. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported Monday that Peter Bernegger was reviewing ballot papers in communities across the state, including Westport and Verona. Robert Anderson, assistant clerk at Westport, said Bernegger wanted to review more than […]]]>


MADISON, Wisconsin (AP) – A New London man has launched his own review of the 2020 presidential election in Wisconsin.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported Monday that Peter Bernegger was reviewing ballot papers in communities across the state, including Westport and Verona.

Robert Anderson, assistant clerk at Westport, said Bernegger wanted to review more than 3,000 ballots cast there. Bernegger and three others spent about four hours there last month scanning copies of devices they brought with them, Anderson said. Verona city administrator Adam Sayre said Bernegger and several others spent half a day scanning ballot papers from a parish.

Bernegger sued Door County clerk Jill Lau in May for copying election papers. A judge has yet to rule on the case.

Bernegger told the Sentinel journal that he worked with people of different political backgrounds but declined to disclose whether he was a Republican or a Democrat.

Political cartoons

An online editorial, published under Bernegger’s name in March, questioned the reliability of the Wisconsin election, claiming the contest was rigged because large numbers of people showed up to the polls and were told they had already voted, though they hadn’t.

Prosecutors found no evidence of widespread fraud in Wisconsin, and a recount confirmed that Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump.

Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



Source link

]]>
https://apdaweb.org/new-man-from-london-launches-his-own-election-investigation-wisconsin-news/feed/ 0
Ravnsborg Elected Vice Chairman of the Attorneys General Group | News from South Dakota https://apdaweb.org/ravnsborg-elected-vice-chairman-of-the-attorneys-general-group-news-from-south-dakota/ https://apdaweb.org/ravnsborg-elected-vice-chairman-of-the-attorneys-general-group-news-from-south-dakota/#respond Sat, 03 Jul 2021 21:10:00 +0000 https://apdaweb.org/ravnsborg-elected-vice-chairman-of-the-attorneys-general-group-news-from-south-dakota/ PIERRE, SD (AP) – South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg has been elected vice chairman of a bipartisan group of attorneys general. As Vice Chairman of the Conference of Western Attorneys General, Ravnsborg will also serve on the Group’s board of directors. The conference addresses new legal issues and common areas of interest in the […]]]>


PIERRE, SD (AP) – South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg has been elected vice chairman of a bipartisan group of attorneys general.

As Vice Chairman of the Conference of Western Attorneys General, Ravnsborg will also serve on the Group’s board of directors.

The conference addresses new legal issues and common areas of interest in the West, including water, fish and wildlife, public land, minerals, energy, the environment and Native American law, reported KOTA-TV. The group comprises 18 member states and territories.

Ravnsborg got the approval of his colleagues, although there are currently three criminal charges pending against him relating to his driving the night he hit and killed Joe Boever on a motorway last September.

The Attorney General is charged with negligent driving, driving a vehicle on an electronic device, and driving outside of his lane.

Political cartoons

Investigators say Ravnsborg was distracted on the night of September 12, lost its lane near Highmore and met 55-year-old Boever, who was walking with a flashlight on his shoulder.

Governor Kristi Noem, three law enforcement agencies and some lawmakers have urged Ravnsborg to resign.

Ravnsborg has not confirmed whether he will be re-elected in 2022. However, he is listed on the Republican Attorneys General Association’s website as a candidate to donate to in 2022.

Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



Source link

]]>
https://apdaweb.org/ravnsborg-elected-vice-chairman-of-the-attorneys-general-group-news-from-south-dakota/feed/ 0
The real risk to America’s democracy https://apdaweb.org/the-real-risk-to-americas-democracy/ https://apdaweb.org/the-real-risk-to-americas-democracy/#respond Fri, 02 Jul 2021 09:02:20 +0000 https://apdaweb.org/the-real-risk-to-americas-democracy/ July 3, 2021 HAVING CAMPAIGN For the presidency with promises to rejuvenate democracy around the world, Joe Biden is in a fight to defend it at home. In June, 200 prominent American democracy scholars signed a letter warning that changes in the law would “turn multiple states into political systems that no longer meet the […]]]>


HAVING CAMPAIGN For the presidency with promises to rejuvenate democracy around the world, Joe Biden is in a fight to defend it at home. In June, 200 prominent American democracy scholars signed a letter warning that changes in the law would “turn multiple states into political systems that no longer meet the minimum requirements for free and fair elections.” Another longtime student of American democracy, Republican Senate chairman Mitch McConnell, said in January that if an election were overturned by factual loser claims, “our democracy would get caught in a death spiral.” But that is exactly what his party makes possible.

Listen to this story

Enjoy more audio and podcasts on iOS or Android.

For the Democrats, the threat to elections is who can vote. They criticize changes in identification laws, postal voting, and so on, which they call “the new Jim Crow.” While there is no excuse for curtailing things like the Sunday election, which is popular with African American churches, their fears are exaggerated. Under old Jim Crow, only 2% of African Americans were registered as voters in some southern states. Political scientists, on the other hand, are unsure whether today’s programs will have any effect on voter turnout at all.

Instead, the real threat comes after the votes have been cast. In Arizona, for example, lawmakers want to restrict election officers’ independence; a state official passed a law allowing lawmakers to overturn the results of a presidential election and then launched a campaign of his own to monitor the elections. In Georgia, the state legislature can now replace the leadership of the district electoral committee. Texas is considering legislation to make it easier for election officials to prosecute. Across the country, officials who administer elections in Republican-run states have been attacked for upholding election results. Many are at risk of being replaced.

These may seem like distant, bureaucratic changes. In fact, they increase the likelihood of a contested choice that the courts cannot resolve. They are weakening America’s electoral system in a way that will outlast the hysteria over the 2020 outcome.

The inspiration behind this is Donald Trump, who continues to take every chance to insist that the election has been stolen. While it’s hard to say how seriously to take him, Mr Trump is already running campaign rallies for 2024 (to win the White House for the third year in a row, of course).

Claiming to win while actually losing may seem like a joke. But most Republican voters take it literally. Two out of three believe that Mr Biden did not win the November election, and just under half believe that the result should have been overturned. This puts Trump skeptics into a well-known dilemma among the Republican elite. Caught between their main constituents and loyalty to the Constitution, most have come to the conclusion that unless the Capitol is under siege, it is best to just keep silent.

Yet Mr Trump’s threats and the threat to the Constitution operate on different time scales. Mr Trump may or may not run again. In contrast, the changes to the electoral machinery made by Republican lawmakers in the states will be available to a candidate from either party starting in 2024 and beyond. To understand why this is so worrying, consider three resilient mechanisms built into American elections.

The first is the principle that the loser admits. Mr Trump gave up on that in 2020. The second is the integrity of local election officials, regardless of their partisan loyalty. Although they were under great pressure to do something else over the past year, they stood firm. As a reward, they have been stripped of their powers or new crimes created to intimidate them. Many Republican officials who confirmed the election results were reprimanded by their local party committees and received death threats. Brad Raffensperger, Georgia’s Republican Secretary of State, stood out in 2020 for his willingness to stand up against Mr Trump when he was asked directly to “find” the votes needed to overturn the results. The Georgian legislature responded by removing some of its powers.

That leaves the third fail-safe one – the dishes. These too did well under stress and would probably do the same next time. But transferring the primary responsibility for the legitimacy of elections in election to election to the judiciary runs the risk of overloading and ultimately breaking it. How long would it be before a Supreme Court decision was ignored?

It was customary in parts of the right to catastrophize democracy in America: remember the Flight 93 Election in 2016 when patriots were asked to storm the cockpit to deny Hillary Clinton the presidency? It has since spread to the left and center as well. Talk of an endangered democracy arouses the specter of a country under an autocrat as it was abandoned on July 4, 1776. The greater danger is that the chaos will normalize after the 2020 elections. By the latest standards, 2020 wasn’t that close. Imagine competition so tight that no national consensus could decide who is ahead. America would, to quote Mr McConnell again, be on “a poisonous path in which only the winners of an election actually accept the result”.

My party, right or wrong

The elites of the Republican Party are in a bind that they have created themselves. Under pressure from Mr. Trump and his allies, state legislatures are making changes that will weaken American democracy. The solution is for leaders to uphold the norm that election administrators are above the party. However, they have given in to the lie of a stolen election so much that confirmation of the fraud has become an essential requirement for carrying out the next vote.

The silent non-Trump faction of the Republican Party can hope all of this will pass and exaggerate those who are sounding the alarm about democracy. They may believe that as long as they stay on good terms with their base, they can play a bigger role in protecting America. Yet that logic has proven flawed since Mr. Trump’s inauguration in 2016. Meanwhile, the composition of her party changes around her. It would be safer for the Constitution and more in line with the flag-waving spirit of July 4th for Republicans to speak out now, before it gets even harder to speak out.

This article appeared in the Leaders section of the print version under the heading “The Real Risk to America’s Democracy”



Source link

]]>
https://apdaweb.org/the-real-risk-to-americas-democracy/feed/ 0
The UNC Board of Directors will vote on Nikole Hannah-Jones’s term in office in the face of outcry from the black faculty and students https://apdaweb.org/the-unc-board-of-directors-will-vote-on-nikole-hannah-joness-term-in-office-in-the-face-of-outcry-from-the-black-faculty-and-students/ https://apdaweb.org/the-unc-board-of-directors-will-vote-on-nikole-hannah-joness-term-in-office-in-the-face-of-outcry-from-the-black-faculty-and-students/#respond Wed, 30 Jun 2021 22:37:00 +0000 https://apdaweb.org/the-unc-board-of-directors-will-vote-on-nikole-hannah-joness-term-in-office-in-the-face-of-outcry-from-the-black-faculty-and-students/ Following the vote, board chairman Richard Stevens said the board had “endured false claims” and had been called “the most unpleasant names” in recent weeks. “There have been some who have unfairly challenged this university’s commitment to academic freedom and open research,” said Stevens. “We strive to be a light that shines brightly on the […]]]>


Following the vote, board chairman Richard Stevens said the board had “endured false claims” and had been called “the most unpleasant names” in recent weeks.

“There have been some who have unfairly challenged this university’s commitment to academic freedom and open research,” said Stevens. “We strive to be a light that shines brightly on the hill. We welcome and support academic freedom, open and rigorous debates and scientific research, constructive disagreements.”

Approval came just one day before Hannah-Jones was to officially join the Hussman School of Journalism and Media as Knight Chair in Race and Investigative Journalism. It was revealed last month that her appointment did not involve a tenure, a break with tradition for the position. Hannah-Jones’s legal team had said that if it did not include a tenure, she would not accept the position.
University officials posted an announcement of the special session online on Wednesday, but a university spokeswoman declined to comment on plans for a term vote if it was hit by CNN.
Trish Harris, vice chairwoman of the Carolina Black Caucus and director of recruitment at the UNC School of Education, confirmed that the vote on Jones’ term would take place at the meeting. The Carolina Black Caucus is a campus group that advocates for black teachers and staff at the UNC.
The board’s refusal to give Hannah-Jones the term sparked outcry from the UNC’s black community as more than 100 students gathered on campus last week to demand that the board reconsider Hannah-Jones’s tenure . At least three black faculty Members have reportedly announced their resignation amid the controversy, including one who said the tenure issue with Hannah-Jones was a primary reason for her impending departure. CNN couldn’t confirm why the other two resigned.
In early June, 42 faculty members from the Hussman School of Journalism and Media wrote a letter condemning the board of directors for not granting Hannah-Jones the term, calling it “blatant disregard for long-standing tenure procedures and the values ​​supported by the university and the board of trustees “. of diversity, equity and inclusion. ”

The President and Trustee of the UNC Student Union, Lamar Richards, requested that the Board hold a special meeting to vote on the motion for Hannah-Jones.

In Richard’s letter to the board of directors of the 23rd for Karolina. ”

“A punch in the face”

Black faculty, students and alumni say the controversy is just the latest example of the bias and discrimination blacks face at the UNC.

Dawna Jones, chairwoman of the Carolina Black Caucus and assistant dean of studies at UNC, said black faculty members have complained for years about being overlooked in promotions, not receiving professional development, being overworked and taking on additional responsibilities such as diversity -Chairs of selection committees and mentoring students.

The uproar over Hannah-Jones getting out of office felt like another “slap in the face” for many faculty members, Jones said.

“I think to us on campus it feels like another trigger of what goes on behind the scenes in the rooms where black leaders are,” said Jones. “We have the feeling that we are treated very differently from our (white) colleagues.”

UNC Chapel Hill Chancellor Kevin M. Guskiewicz released a statement saying he was concerned about the complaints from the black faculty.

“It has always been my goal to build a community where everyone really knows they belong and is valued for their own unique perspectives and experiences,” said Guskiewicz. “I am deeply concerned that some members of the Carolina Black community feel they cannot thrive in this setting.”

Sibby Anderson-Thompkins, who serves as special advisor to the provost, chancellor for justice and inclusion and interim chief diversity officer at UNC, said the board’s failure to transfer a term to Hannah-Jones was the turning point in her decision to resign . She has accepted a position as Vice Province for Diversity, Justice and Inclusion at Sewanee, The University of the South.

Anderson-Thompkins said the board’s actions felt counterproductive to her work on diversity and inclusion initiatives at the UNC and her advocacy for transparency in leadership. The board, she said, was not transparent in its discussions about Hannah-Jones’ tenure. Newly hired various faculty members have also reached out to her over concerns about the university’s climate, Anderson-Thompkins said.

“My concern is that we are not counting on our current decisions and decisions,” she said. “We just perpetuate our history, but we repeat many of the mistakes we made in the past.”

Jones said there was value in having a black woman as a full faculty member at UNC, as this is rare at many universities. There is currently only one black faculty lecturer in tenure at the UNC School of Journalism and Media, and that is Dr. Trevy McDonald, who serves as Associate Professor and Director of Diversity, Equity & Inclusion.

“Having a black woman of her stature at the University of North Carolina is a piece of cake for us, and it’s very confusing that we are in this situation right now,” said Jones.

Student rally for journalists

UNC students have also expressed frustration with the way Hannah-Jones is being treated.

At a UNC Black Student Movement rally on campus last week, Jaylen Harrell, an aspiring sophomore, told CNN subsidiary WRAL that the controversy over Jones’s tenure was “shocking” and made him question how much the UNC values ​​its colored students.

“As minority students on campus, it’s important that our faculties and staff help us represent ourselves,” said Harrell. “We want our voices to be heard not only through us, but also through our lecturers and staff.”

In addition to her Masters degree from the UNC School of Journalism, Hannah-Jones has received awards including the MacArthur Foundation Fellowship (known as the Genius Grant) and the Pulitzer Prize for her landmark 1619 project.

That year she was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

McDonald said she was confident the board would grant Hannah-Jones the term.

“It won’t be a unanimous vote, but it will have the required majority,” said McDonald.

Correction: A previous version of this article incorrectly stated how many black faculty members were employed at the UNC. There is a permanent teacher at the journalism school.

CNN’s Melissa Alonso contributed to this report.





Source link

]]>
https://apdaweb.org/the-unc-board-of-directors-will-vote-on-nikole-hannah-joness-term-in-office-in-the-face-of-outcry-from-the-black-faculty-and-students/feed/ 0
Newsom is suing the election chief for calling himself a Democrat when he is voted out https://apdaweb.org/newsom-is-suing-the-election-chief-for-calling-himself-a-democrat-when-he-is-voted-out/ https://apdaweb.org/newsom-is-suing-the-election-chief-for-calling-himself-a-democrat-when-he-is-voted-out/#respond Tue, 29 Jun 2021 05:30:41 +0000 https://apdaweb.org/newsom-is-suing-the-election-chief-for-calling-himself-a-democrat-when-he-is-voted-out/ California Governor Gavin Newsom speaks during a press conference in Sacramento, California. | Justin Sullivan / Getty Images SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom is suing his own appointed election chief for having two words next to his name on the recall election: Democratic Party. The governor and his staff overlooked the paperwork that would have […]]]>






California Governor Gavin Newsom speaks during a press conference in Sacramento, California. | Justin Sullivan / Getty Images

SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom is suing his own appointed election chief for having two words next to his name on the recall election: Democratic Party.

The governor and his staff overlooked the paperwork that would have allowed him to state his party preference in a recall vote last year, according to a legal file first reported on Monday by Courthouse News. This blatant misstep means Newsom would appear on the recall vote without a party name while dozens of challengers list their party preferences.

Newsom filed a lawsuit against Secretary of State Shirley Weber in the Sacramento Supreme Court on Monday seeking his party preference on the ballot based on the Courthouse News document. The Democratic governor nominated Weber for her post in December, replacing Alex Padilla, whom Newsom had appointed to the US Senate.

Weber, a former Democratic MP, took office in January and is now responsible for confirming the dismissal.

The legal challenge comes as the California governor’s dismissal approaches and elections may be held in September. Weber confirmed last week that proponents had more than enough signatures to qualify the competition, and several ministerial steps remain before the date is confirmed. Weber’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday evening.

The lawsuit brought by Olson Remcho, LLP – a long-standing powerhouse of Democratic Party electoral law – argues that the tight window of time for filing the paperwork was unnecessarily arbitrary and that there is plenty of time to practically add the governor’s party preference, considering that the callback dial is not yet certified. Under state law, Newsom had to file his party preference within seven days along with his response to the now successful recall petition that started in February 2020.

In another twist, Newsom not only appointed the election chief blocking his party designation on the ballot, but he also signed the exact law whose timing he is questioning.

Prior to 2020, California officials threatened with recall had no way of getting their party name on the ballot, which Senator Tom Umberg (D-Santa Ana) saw as a problem. Democratic lawmakers wrote Senate Bill 151 in 2019 to allow demolished officials to add their party.

Umberg argued that “unlike the recalled elected official, candidates who wish to succeed the elected official in a recall election can have a ballot title,” according to an analysis of the Senate draft. He also argued, “By providing additional identifying information on the ballot, voters can make a more informed decision when deciding to keep or remove a person from office.”

The proposal passed the Assembly 77-0 and the Senate 38-0 before receiving the signature of Newsom.

The governor’s lawsuit argues that the bill tied the deadline for choosing party preferences to an existing response schedule for the sake of convenience for the incumbent, rather than out of concerns about electoral efficiency. It also suggests Newsom is being wrongly punished by having to submit his party preference 16 months in advance, while challengers have 59 days to go to the polls.

“Applying this deadline here would also lead to absurd results,” said the lawsuit. “Voters would be depriving voters of the very information that lawmakers deemed important just because the governor’s attorney inadvertently failed to submit a form over the governor’s Ballot title at least sixteen months before the recall was called and long before it became clear that the recall would even be eligible for election. “



Source link

]]>
https://apdaweb.org/newsom-is-suing-the-election-chief-for-calling-himself-a-democrat-when-he-is-voted-out/feed/ 0