Podcasts about john lewis voting rights act

Congress reaches a deal to avoid a partial government shutdown – again. Arizona Republicans want to ensure Trump remains on their state ballot and Senate Democrats reintroduce the John Lewis Voting Rights Act.  

Congress reaches a deal to avoid a partial government shutdown again. Arizona Republicans want to ensure Trump remains on their state ballot and Senate Democrats reintroduce the John Lewis Voting Rights Act.Podcast from March 1, 2024, on the Heartland Newsfeed Radio Network, online at heartlandnewsfeed.com, Spreaker, the Heartland Newsfeed Alexa radio skill, and other platforms. Now available on Google Assistant speakers!Listen Live: https://www.heartlandnewsfeed.com/listenliveFollow us on social mediaFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/hlnfradionetworkTwitter: https://www.twitter.com/HLNF_BulletinInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/heartlandnewsfeedMastadon: https://liberdon.com/@heartlandnewsfeedTikTok: https://tiktok.com/@heartlandnewsfeedDiscord: https://discord.gg/6b6u6DTSupport us with your financial supportStreamlabs: https://streamlabs.com/heartlandmediaPayPal: https://www.paypal.me/heartlandmediaSquare Cash: https://cash.app/$heartlandnewsfeedPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/heartlandnewsfeedCrypto via 1UpCoin: https://1upcoin.com/donate/heartlandmediaBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/heartland-newsfeed-radio-network--2904397/support.

During the Civil Rights Movement, not only did African-Americans fight for equal protection under the law, but White Americans were also risking their lives in the name of social justice. Some were even murdered for participating in marches and protests aimed at ending segregation and racial discrimination. But in today's political climate and divisiveness, how come more White Americans prefer to remain silent on measures that support systemic change to end racism? Host Eddie Robinson returns from paternity leave and chats candidly with Joan Mulholland, the first White member of the historically Black organization, Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated. Her son, Loki Mulholland, who's an acclaimed film director and human rights activist, Mac Hulslander—the father of I SEE U's Technical Director, Todd Hulslander—offer up their own perspectives in this very provocative episode.

House Majority Whip James Clyburn lights the torch for future generations of Democratic leaders and makes a call to pass voting rights legislation before Republicans control the House of Representatives.

To break down all of the news from the 2022 election, Crystal Fincher welcomes political strategist Robert Cruickshank back to the show! They review key results from the election, starting with the race for Congress in Washington's 3rd Congressional District where Democrat Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez currently leads MAGA Republican Joe Kent in a race that's still up in the air, and the blueprint this race provides for Democrats for winning in rural areas while maintaining their values. Our co-hosts discuss the King County voters repeated rejection of punitive-punishment based measures, and the clear mandate from voters for action on comprehensive public safety reforms and alternate responses that address the root causes of crime with Leesa Manion's decisive victory over the punitive "law-and-order" candidate Jim Ferrell in the King County Prosecuting Attorney race, and the comprehensive public safety and alternative response measures passed in Redmond and Shoreline. They follow with a look at the Oregon gubernatorial race where Democrat Tina Kotek beat a well-funded Republican opponent in a close race, as well as a review of key Democratic legislative victories in swing districts across Washington by candidates who are younger and more diverse, and who leaned into strong progressive messages instead of being hesitant to talk about them. They discuss the results of King County even-year election vote and Seattle's opportunity for Ranked Choice voting reform in the near future if it doesn't prevail in its current close race. After breaking down the incredibly successful Raise the Wage Tukwila campaign, Crystal and Robert end the show by predicting how the resounding success of progressive Democrats this year will impact next year's Seattle City Council races and beyond.  As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Robert Cruickshank, on Twitter at @cruickshank. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources Institute for a Democratic Future 2023 applications are live! The final application deadline is November 13th. Hacks & Wonks is hosting a Post-Election Roundtable this Tuesday, November 15th at 7:30pm! Stream it live on our Twitter, Facebook or Youtube account.  “Gluesenkamp Perez, Schrier maintain leads in WA congressional races” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times  “$19 is the new $15: Lessons from Tukwila's Minimum Wage” by Katie Wilson from The Stranger   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: Chair of Sierra Club Seattle, longtime communications and political strategist, Robert Cruickshank - hey. [00:00:55] Robert Cruickshank: Good morning, Crystal. Thank you for having me on again. [00:00:57] Crystal Fincher: Good morning. Excited to have you on again in this election week 2022. We have a lot to cover. Before we get into that, I just want to give a couple reminders. We've talked about the Institute for a Democratic Future before - how it's been instrumental to my career in politics - just a great education and network. The deadline for applications is this Sunday, November 13th, so we'll include links to the website information about applying in the program if you are interested. And feel free to reach out to me directly on Twitter, via email if you have any questions about the program. I also want to mention that we are having a Hacks & Wonks Post-Election Roundtable - a live show Tuesday - this coming Tuesday, November 15th at 7:30 p.m. We're going to be streaming live on all platforms. It's going to include Dujie Tahat, Kelsey Hamlin, and Djibril Diop, who is the Director of Government Relations for Washington Education Association and played a very consequential role in a number of the elections and battleground districts around the state - just breaking down the results of this year's general election - expanding upon the conversation that we're going to have today from consultants' point of view and the view of people who were involved in the work being done. So please tune in Tuesday, November 15th at 7 30 p.m. - Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, all of the platforms - we'll share that information in the show notes. So now getting into election results - there was a lot that happened. We will go through a number of them. I think I want to start off talking about the Third Congressional District. What happened in this race, Robert? [00:02:56] Robert Cruickshank: So this is a fascinating, and I think potentially really important, race where we started off with the incumbent Jaime Herrera Beutler, one of the few Republicans to vote for Trump's second impeachment, and that made her a target. Joe Kent, a openly fascist Trump supporter, declared his intention to run against her and take the Republican nomination away from her. In response to that, we had Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez, who is a rural working class Democrat. She and her husband own a auto repair shop, they live in rural Skamania County in a house they built themselves. She's been active in Democratic Party politics as someone who wants to bring rural working class folks back into the party. And she saw, with increasing alarm, Joe Kent getting traction, getting support down there in Southwest Washington. And she decided she would step up and run, especially since it looked like the National Democratic Party wasn't going to take this very seriously, wasn't going to do much. And so she did step in and she and Joe Kent made it through the primary. And now, as of Friday - at least Friday morning - she's leading Joe Kent by a margin of just about 51% to 48%. She, depending on - today's ballot drop may be the final decider as to whether she hangs on and actually wins. And this would be a big victory not just to stop Joe Kent, which is important in and of itself. But Marie is a really smart, sharp person who's been working hard to bring, a populist, working class, rural voice back into the Democratic Party and do it in a way that's also economically progressive and socially progressive. And seeing the campaign she ran, the ads she ran, I think potentially point to a direction forward for Democrats as they really try to figure out what do they do about rural America. She's winning right now because she has a huge lead in Clark County by double digits, but she's holding her own in the rural parts of the county. She's at 45-46% in Kelso-Longview area out on the rural Washington coast. She's not going to win this race without running up decent numbers in the rural parts of the district. And so I think there's a lot Democrats can learn from here. [00:05:16] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And really cannot be overstated how almost miraculous it is for a Democrat to be leading in any situation in this district, given what you just talked about in some of those rural areas - that's better Democratic performance than we have seen in I don't know how long. I don't know that we have. And so even accounting for the fact that Joe Kent is a fascist, not in touch with reality, completely taken with conspiracy theories, white nationalist rhetoric, all of that stuff, she did have to run a positive campaign. It wasn't enough for Joe Kent to be bad. We saw candidates across the country who sounded like him, some of whom won. And we didn't see that here because she was such a strong candidate. She did connect with voters throughout the district in both rural and suburban areas. And it really does seem like it points to the path to victory. First of all - showing up, having a belief that you can, being willing to talk to all kinds of voters, but really connecting the issues that she's talking about - the issues that are important to people in their everyday lives - to the progressive values that actually do improve things materially on the ground and for those families. Just really, really exciting to see. I do hope that as votes continue to come in, she does hang on. We are recording this before we're receiving results on Friday, but I think it is fair to say that the Joe Kent race - if they're hanging their hopes on a comeback, was certainly hoping to see returns that would have been more in their favor yesterday than they actually were. So that is pointing to some signs of hope. We won't know until we see results today, but the ballots did not trend as hard right as they certainly could have yesterday. [00:07:21] Robert Cruickshank: That's correct. And what Marie has done is, in some ways, reclaimed Southwest Washington. There were Democrats representing it in Congress off and on. At the state level, Southwest Washington used to be more reliably Democratic than King County, for example. Like in 1980, Ronald Reagan carried King County, Jimmy Carter carried a lot of Southwest Washington - those old school, rural, logging Democrats, Union democrats had been abandoned by a large swath of the Democratic Party who just gave up. And that outraged Marie. And I know that because I've worked with her personally before within the Democratic Party. And she was one of these leaders who stepped up and said, we can win these places back, but we have to win with authentic values that are rooted in these communities. She ran ads talking not just about working class values, about inflation - she also talked about abortion without hesitation, talking about how important reproductive rights were. And you would hear from Democratic consultants around the country that - oh, if you're in a district like this, you probably shouldn't be doing that. She proved them completely wrong. Even if she narrowly loses at the very end, the fact that she made it this far, that she made it close, and potentially even wins - proves her theory of change in rural America correct. And I think Democrats going forward need to listen to Marie and people from her campaign and people like her about how we reclaim these districts. Again, she may win ultimately based on votes in Vancouver and Vancouver suburbs, but she's not going to be close without running up some good numbers in rural parts of the district. Democrats like John Fetterman in Pennsylvania did the same thing. There's a model here that the party needs to learn from. [00:09:12] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And as you alluded to, this has impacts potentially down the ballot. We are seeing super close races in the 17th and 18th Legislative Districts. These are areas that are potentially in play for Democrats, if they do invest in expanding on the strategy that Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez has started. These areas are ready to vote for Democratic policies if people just connect with them and talk with them, listen, and understand how to communicate how these values can be helpful. I certainly hope to see much more Democratic investment, Democratic engagement on the ground next year in the off year, the year beyond, in the next cycle - these are areas that we can win if we put in the effort and if we put in the resources. And so I am certainly excited and anticipating a significant effort to continue to turn Clark County and beyond blue. [00:10:18] Robert Cruickshank: I would hope so. That's going to take the established structures of the party to take it seriously. Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez has had to do this without that support - the Democratic campaign structures of the House didn't show up, they put in maybe a small token amount of money towards the end. But Marie built this herself with a great campaign team around her. This is not something where DC consultants parachuted themselves in. In fact, they've tried that in this district before in the recent past and lost. So I think another key piece of this is that those party leadership, those folks in leadership from Pelosi on down need to do a better job of listening to the voices of Democrats on the ground who know how to win, know how to win without compromising our values. That's, I think, one of the most important things Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez has shown - we can win on our values with authentic voices, especially authentic working class Democratic voices in the rural parts of the country. May not win everywhere, but if you run up some better numbers, you make a lot of things possible. [00:11:23] Crystal Fincher: There were a number of other races that we saw - races that people were expecting to be close. Of course, Patty Murray versus Tiffany Smiley was not at all close. We saw some polling results that a number of people doubted and cast some doubt on. One polling firm had this polling on a one-point race a week before the election, which just never passed the smell test, and they certainly have a lot of answering to do. But this was a race where Tiffany Smiley and the case she was trying to make was pretty soundly rejected. And certainly, I think Republicans - I know Republicans genuinely thought they had a message that was resonating, particularly with suburban voters. And wow - suburban voters just flatly rejected just about everything they were throwing out - from the fearmongering about crime that was not at all attached to reality or evidenced-based practices about what actually does make streets safer, to the economy, to health care, and absolutely with abortion. That affected the Kim Schrier versus Matt Larkin race. Several races here where it just seems that what they had fell flat. And so just a pretty sound drubbing by Democrats to Republicans across the board - certainly in the Senate and in many of the Congressional races that were originally anticipated to be close. Now, the King County Prosecutor race is another interesting one. What did you see here? [00:13:14] Robert Cruickshank: Again, this is another one of those races that - going into the election - if you listen to some of the observers in the media, was expected to be very close, expected to be an example of backlash to efforts to reform criminal justice. Jim Ferrell, very much running on the Ann Davison platform of cracking down on crime and homelessness and things like that. Leesa Manion, running not as a bold reformer, but running certainly as a reformer - someone who wants to do criminal justice correctly and certainly better than it's done now. And the assumption was that Jim Ferrell would either make it very close or win outright. That's not what happened. Leesa Manion has won convincingly, and won throughout King County. This is not just a Seattle victory. Her victory is countywide. And I think that's a pretty big rebuke to the "law and order" politics that someone like Jim Ferrell has been running on, that The Seattle Times has been trying to push hard, that KOMO has been trying to push hard. King County voters aren't there - that's not what they're looking for in terms of how we address public safety. [00:14:20] Crystal Fincher: That's not at all what they're looking for. And once again, we saw a sound rejection countywide - certainly not limited to the City of Seattle - in every corner of the county, saying that, no, we don't want these punitive politics, punishment that is not at all connected to public safety, making the streets safer, reducing the amount of people who are victimized. And that really is the ultimate goal. There's a lot of talk about punishment. There was a lot of support from very conservative forces, a lot of talk about - hey, we need to enforce the law and put these people in jail and calling into question bail reform, any kind of criminal justice reform, any kind of alternative response that does not include police. We saw police unions rally around this campaign and really see this as a vehicle for increasing their footprint and moving away from some of the things that have been asked for for voters for quite some time. In 2020, we saw with the King County Charter Amendments that - once again, countywide - voters want accountability in terms of public safety. Voters want to address the root causes of crime. They understand that even those who are saying, hey, I'm fine with the amount of police that are there, I have no issue with increasing the amount of police, but we know they can't do everything. We know they don't have the tools to address homelessness. We know criminalizing homelessness doesn't make the problem any better. We've seen them try and fail repeatedly. It's time to do things a different way that actually do have a shot at making this issue better. We know that police don't have the tools to address behavioral health issues, mental health issues - and those services are too hard to find, completely underfunded, and not at all in the shape that they need to be to adequately address this problem. We need to invest in and expand those services and the availability of that. We know that simply throwing people in jail, especially when the issues are poverty, their health, they're related around education - that that doesn't help them and it doesn't help the community. It doesn't reduce the chance that they're going to commit another crime or that people are going to be victimized. We need to do the things that reduce the likelihood of those things happening. We need to do the things where there is evidence and data to show what the path forward is. We've seen plenty of examples of those in pilot programs in Seattle and in King County and have been promised that that was the way things are going - to only see, especially with recent administrations, including the current ones, moving in the opposite direction. And not only in King County, but we also saw propositions in Redmond, in Shoreline that also reinforced that people want accountability and investing in root causes and responses to issues that do need help, issues that do need intervention. If someone is having a behavioral health crisis, if someone is out on the street, that absolutely needs intervention - but by someone who can address the issue. And that's not a policeman in those situations. And so we need mental health professionals, we need service providers, we need all of those. We saw both in local initiatives in Seattle suburbs throughout the county and countywide that this is what voters want. I really hope that our leaders listen this time. I really hope that our media listens this time. And we stop having this conversation that is such a disservice to voters and members of this community that simply focuses on - are we recruiting, are we hiring, are we doing policing? Policing is not the whole picture of public safety. We have to address those other issues. We've seen many cities increase funding and address policing, but have left everything else unaddressed. And voters are practically begging our leaders to take action on a holistic view of public safety to keep us all safer where we all benefit. And I really do hope we start seeing coverage of what's going right, of what voters are saying - beyond whatever police union has the bully pulpit for the day. Talk to people on the ground. Voters are in a much more nuanced place in this than we hear in a lot of the public rhetoric and media. It is, certainly for me, been a source of frustration that this has been pretty obvious for a while and we keep not listening as a whole. I hope finally people will start to listen to what voters keep trying to say. [00:19:24] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, I think what you said resonates with voters, Crystal. It's also something we've seen in the election results. When you were talking, I was thinking of the signs I saw from a Republican candidate in the 32nd Legislative District up in Shoreline that said - at the top of her signs - Make Crime Illegal Again. She got a whopping 18%. You talk about the public wanting investment in alternatives - I think of a young man named Kenneth Mejia who ran for Los Angeles City Controller. He put up billboards all over LA and very prominent places showing with bar charts how much money was being spent on the police and how much was being spent on things like mental health services, and how the police were overfunded yet no one was feeling safe. And he ran against a conservative law and order type guy, and won by 20+ points. The public is making it very clear - they do want crime addressed, but they want violent crime to be addressed through solutions of root causes as well as an officer showing up in the right appropriate moment. And the public recognizes that sending a officer with a gun to a mental health crisis is not the right answer. Sending an officer with a gun because someone's in a tent somewhere is not the right answer. There are other solutions we need to be looking at and the public wants those. I think also what we're seeing is that candidates who address this issue, who don't try to duck it and hide from it, do better. Again, Fetterman was a good example of this. But we saw Leesa Manion here as well and we can even look at Oregon. When Democrats start talking about this, the public will listen. When they address it and say, yeah, I hear you and here's a solution, we're not going down this ridiculous law and order path that hasn't worked. Here's what we're going to do instead, and the data shows this works and this matches our values. Democrats do pretty well. And I think that's a lesson for Democrats in local state and federal races going forward. [00:21:22] Crystal Fincher: We also saw, in a neighbor of ours, down in Oregon a really interesting race for governor. How did this shape up? [00:21:31] Robert Cruickshank: It was a race that was dominated by conversation about crime, homelessness - Portland got hit harder by the pandemic and certainly by Trump than we did in Seattle. Whereas we had a short amount of protests here in the city, Portland was where Trump sent in the Department of Homeland Security, picked people up off the streets, there's reports that he was trying to manufacture terrorism cases, working with local officials. They had 100+ nights of battles with protesters and police in the streets. What this led to was - you go to downtown Portland today and it's taking a lot longer to recover than downtown Seattle. There are real issues with folks living unhoused and not getting support services they need. And Republicans, who have come close to winning the Oregon governor's race in the past, thought they could capitalize on this. And certainly didn't hurt that Republicans had Phil Knight, the Nike founder and billionaire, funding them to the tune of millions of dollars. And Tina Kotek, who was the Democratic Speaker of the House from Portland, was being blamed for this. And the media and the Republicans and Phil Knight were all saying - it's your fault, Tina, that all these awful things are happening in Portland. Portland is dying. And what Tina did was she turned into it and said, here's actually what we're going to do, here are the solutions we're going to talk about. Yeah, we're going to get everybody housed and we're going to get everyone's needs met, because that's what Oregon is and that's what we do in Oregon. And she pulled out a victory. She won Multnomah County, which is where Portland is. She won Washington County, which is where the most populous suburbs of Portland are. It was called the day after the election. People thought that Kotek would lose outright or win very narrowly. She's won fairly, by a wider margin than people thought. Another example right there of - when Democrats take this stuff seriously, don't hide from it, but turn and talk about it and root it in our values, they can win. So I think looking at that victory there in Oregon with someone who has been very progressive as a Speaker of the Legislature in Oregon, who'll be a great governor, who's done a lot on housing policy, a lot on other issues as well. Tina's going to be a great leader for the West Coast - something we can learn from in Washington as we have our own governor's race coming up in two years. [00:23:49] Crystal Fincher: Now locally in Seattle, there was an issue on the ballot about how Seattle is going to vote. There was also an issue in King County on the ballot for how King County is going to vote. What is going to happen with how Seattle and King County run their elections? [00:24:06] Robert Cruickshank: We can start with the clearest outcome, which is King County. King County has very clearly - it's settled - voted to move elections for the King County Council and the King County Executive to even-numbered years - that'll start in 2026 - rather than having them in odd-numbered years. And what this will do is increase turnout. City of Los Angeles did this a few years ago - this was the first even year that their mayoral election happened and turnout is significantly higher. Higher turnout means more voters are involved in the process. Candidates have to speak to more voters. They can't just go talk to the old white folks who always vote. They got to talk to everybody. So that's good for democracy right there. In Seattle, the vote came down to a decision between approval voting and ranked choice voting. Ranked choice voting is the clear preference with 75% support. But the first question that got asked is, do you want to change anything at all? No is very narrowly leading on that. I think that's partly due to - voters are still learning about things like ranked choice voting. You also have both The Seattle Times and The Stranger recommend a No vote for different reasons. The Stranger said they support ranked choice voting, but they wanted a different process to get there. But I think coming out of this, there is a very clear mandate from Seattle voters. We want ranked choice voting. The Legislature needs to figure it out, City Hall needs to figure it out. And in next year's legislative session, they're going to need to give not just Seattle, but other jurisdictions, more freedom and leeway to do something like that. [00:25:40] Crystal Fincher: This is coming, in one way or another, to the City of Seattle, clearly. That is a very clear message sent by the voters. Now, I do think there is a fair point to be made about the process by which it happens, just having some more time to really educate and give information about it - I think that's going to be helpful. But really figuring out the how of the implementation to make sure that it's smooth, to make sure there is sufficient outreach and education for voters beforehand, and to make sure that the voters are able to vote in a way that is fair, that there is a - with the Secretary of State - that they're adequately supporting Seattle and any other jurisdiction that wants to make this change and to help make these implementations consistent and successful. So I'm looking forward to seeing how this proceeds. I'm really looking forward to even-year elections. The difference that this makes in turnout is so clear and obvious. Again, you brought up Los Angeles. We are seeing the difference that that is making - so many more people are engaged in elections down there. Even in the primary, so many more people have been engaged and it has shown. And candidates who are not engaging with the public and relying simply on the old tried and true way of just speaking to a narrow slice of special interest supporters and having a big war chest of finances are not having the time that they thought they were. They're actually struggling in this election, and those candidates who have engaged with a broader selection of the public are much more successful this cycle. So I also think this is a positive thing just in terms of not just turnout, but in how candidates need to engage with the public and need to be accountable to their constituents. I think this is a very positive development that we've seen in Los Angeles, and I am excited to see it implemented here with county races and really hope that it expands. There's a bill also to do this in the Legislature. I hope we see that the success of this, and just the very wide margin of passage and support for this, really does help this get through in the State Legislature statewide. [00:28:03] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, I think it's a pretty strong mandate from King County to the Legislature as well - that we want that bill to pass to give local jurisdictions the ability to move their elections to even years. One thing you see in some of these small cities around even King County, going into the late 2010s - you had a lot of right-wingers controlling these city councils - Tukwila, Burien, SeaTac had Trump supporters sitting on their city councils in 2017, 2018, even as late as 2019. And even-year elections help mitigate against that because you get more people involved in the process. That's good for small D democracy. I think it'll also make the outcome more progressive, which is good for those who care about that. There's no guarantee that that happens. Ultimately, candidates have to speak to more people, and that's always a good thing. [00:28:53] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And in Los Angeles, we are seeing a very, very close mayoral race. As you said, this doesn't guarantee the progressive outcome, but there are a lot more people engaged. Turnout is increased - it's taking time to count those votes, but we'll stay tuned on what's happening there. Also here, we saw across the state, legislative races in these battleground districts turn out, frankly, much better than initially anticipated. For a midterm year, it's not just in Congress where the party in power traditionally struggles. And we just did not see the outcome that many feared at the start of this cycle. There were people wondering across the board, both in political circles and outside - are Democrats going to maintain the majority in both chambers of our legislature? And the resounding answer is yes. What did you see in a number of these races? I'm thinking of the 26th Legislative District, which is a district that is absolutely a battleground district - progressive senator there with Emily Randall, but who has been constantly under attack by extreme Republicans. The 42nd Legislative District in the north part of Washington, the 47th Legislative District where - full disclosure, we did work in that race - but here in King County, in one of the most diverse areas of the county, but one which is a purple district that has elected both Republicans and Democrats. What were your takeaways and what did you see in these races? [00:30:38] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, I think we're seeing Washington become a more stable blue state. And I think the Republican Party is in a permanent downward trend - doesn't mean they'll never win again. I want to make that clear. But right now, the fundamental trends favor Democrats, especially in the entire Puget Sound region. You mentioned the 42nd District way up in Whatcom County, all the way down to the South Sound - Democrats are winning consistently, and it's not just a rejection of the far right. You saw people like Chad Magendanz, who used to be a more moderate-ish Republican State Representative in Issaquah, in the 5th District. He wanted his seat back. And so he ran against Lisa Callan, thinking there's a Democratic woman I can easily beat her. No, you can't. He's losing by 10 points. He had the Seattle Times endorsement. The Seattle Times endorsed another fairly moderate-ish Republican to take on Manka Dhingra in the Redmond area - Manka's winning by a huge margin. You mentioned the 47th District, where Claudia Kauffman is winning against a more moderate Republican. And Republicans even got bounced out of the open State House race there. Federal Way is becoming much more safe for Democrats when it wasn't that long ago - 2014, 2015, 2016 - the most expensive races in the state for Legislature were happening in Federal Way - it was that close. You look at Emily Randall, who's done a great job representing the Kitsap Peninsula and that part of Pierce County out there - Gig Harbor area - really responsive to constituents, running on an unabashedly progressive agenda and winning. It's close, but she's got a pretty strong, stable lead. I think what you're seeing here is a Democratic party that is increasingly responsive. The people who are filling these seats are increasingly younger, more diverse, more representative and inclusive. And I think it is giving Democrats a more stable majority. Republicans are having a really tough time right now - finding a path to a majority. Now, that means Democrats have to deliver. They keep getting these victories at the State Legislative level, and then they fall a little short delivering on things. They did great stuff on climate, they had some good reforms on policing in 2020, which they then stepped back from the next year, which was a big problem. But there's a lot that they need to do on housing, right? Housing legislation died in the 2022 session - that's going to have to come up. We may be entering a recession and they're going to have to solve taxes. I think honestly, one of the most important victories is Noel Frame becoming State Senator. She's a huge upgrade over Reuven Carlyle. Reuven Carlyle spent his time working behind the scenes to undermine or kill progressive priorities left and right to help corporate power. Noel Frame, on the other hand, is leading the way to fix our broken tax code. And I think 2023 is the year finally for Democrats to fix that broken tax code. Now Senator-elect Frame has been leading the Tax Structure Working Group - they're expecting a report on what a new structure for the state could look like that's more progressive and brings in a bit more money. 2023 is the year to get it done - because going into a presidential election year, Democrats are not going to have a whole lot of seats at risk if they do something big in 2023. And given the fiscal forecast, they're going to have to. We have schools that need more funding, school mental health services that need more funding, a healthcare system in crisis. The Legislature needs to step up. Democrats now have majorities where they're not going into each election worrying about whether they're going to lose those majorities. They can keep them if they deliver. And now I think it's going to be on the rest of us who aren't in the Legislature, who are advocates and representing communities, to speak up and organize and make that Democratic legislature deliver in 2023. [00:34:25] Crystal Fincher: And I think you're right on - in addition to just one, being elected and having those majorities - Democrats have a mandate. We saw to a degree that we haven't before - to your point earlier - that Democrats ran hard on their values. And those who did and talked about a holistic view of public safety and bringing comprehensive public safety, who talked about housing being a human right, who talked about the absolute need to expand healthcare coverage, to house people - not simply temporarily shelter, but get people into housing reliably, to control out-of-control housing costs across the board - that these are things that Democrats across the state in battleground districts ran on and won handily on these things. Where there was some question - I know from some consultants, from some Democrats even in leadership - whether they did have a mandate to act on that, whether the public would support those things. We heard a resounding yes from voters. We saw candidates who pledged to take action on these things succeed. And we have leaders who are ready to take on progressive revenue that's going to be necessary to address all of these other issues, particularly in the event of an economic downturn, in the event of budgets going in the other direction. And I do think that we have a helpful blueprint here in the City of Seattle, who recently did implement new progressive revenue with the JumpStart Tax - that is now being used by people who originally opposed that to bail out the City from the consequences of an economic downturn, from budget shortfalls. That is actually providing the necessary revenue, providing stability throughout this downturn period. Progressive revenue really is the key to make sure that the City can continue to deliver services, to make sure that the City can continue to provide residents with the support and assistance needed, to handle infrastructure, to really start to address homelessness in a way that solves this problem, that gets people housed and doesn't just move them from place to place like sweeps do. Progressive revenue really is the stabilizer and the responsible way to handle this. And what I was gratified to see was that opponents, prior opponents of this have now come around and are embracing the JumpStart Tax, are embracing progressive revenue, and recognizing that this is a necessary element of budgets moving forward. I think that there's a lesson to be learned here, as we look at the county budget and as we look at the state budget, that progressive revenue really is the stabilizer here. [00:37:32] Robert Cruickshank: It is. And I think we can also add in the capital gains tax, which the Legislature finally got done last year. And Republicans and their billionaire friends thought, first, that they could repeal it at the ballot box. So that fizzled out. It became really clear, both in terms of their slow going in terms of signature gathering, as well as the polling - no, the public supports taxing the rich to fund education and other priorities. The Democratic elected officials who voted for it haven't paid any price for it. Why would they? The voters want that. They support that. So now you have going into the 2023 session, where they're going to have to figure out how to fund programs and add more funding for things like public education, solve health care problems, and deal with overall budget - the public supports wealth taxes. Senator-elect Frame had a wealth tax proposal that she proposed in 2021 and 2022 - that should be a centerpiece of the discussion in 2023 and her larger Tax Structure Workgroup solution. There is no political downside to making this tax code more progressive. The public wants it. The public supports it. Democrats will face no political cost for doing it. They have no excuse for failing to act. And I think what you point out about Seattle is even people who were skeptical or opponents now understand this is a popular and useful source of revenue that can help solve some problems. [00:38:54] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And I'm definitely looking forward to this coming legislative session and seeing people take action. And I also just want to call out that we saw more diversity in all kinds this past cycle in winning candidates. There has been lots of chatter that I've heard over the years, and even in this past cycle, talking about ideal candidates and candidates who fit their district - even by Democratic consultants. And usually that has been code for - this is an older white male who is a business owner, or a veteran, or previously a police officer. And really it sounds like code for - this is someone who Republicans can like, this is someone who looks like a Republican. And really if we focus on who looks like the community, who is in the community, who reflects the full diversity of the working class, who can speak to and connect with those issues. And we saw younger candidates. We saw candidates of various ethnicities. We saw candidates of various sexualities. We saw people who can speak to the communities of today who are not stuck in some of the old paradigms that are just not fruitful or productive and haven't been for anyone. If we don't make a case on what we need to do when we're running for election, we can't then govern on that. We can't then pass that legislation. And I think we have seen in prior sessions that being a sticking point and a barrier to governing. Yeah, you can have a Democratic majority, but if it is full of people or has enough people who oppose progressive revenue, who oppose comprehensive public safety, healthcare, education funding that's adequate and appropriate - all of these issues that we're facing - then we have just as much of a barrier than if we elected people from the other party. You have to build a coalition around the action that you need to take. You have to build the case for that action in campaigns. I'm so glad that we saw that done by so many candidates who were successful across the state, and that this can then motivate action on the mandate that they've been handed. [00:41:25] Robert Cruickshank: I think that's right. And I think we may and I think we need to see a reckoning within the Democratic caucuses in Olympia on this. The Democratic caucuses have often been led by mostly older white men or older white folks, who have a lot of privilege and who spend their time telling these newly elected legislators who represent their communities more authentically and look like those communities, telling them - no, fall in line, you have to do what we say, you can't deliver on your promises. And that's been, frankly, a source of a lot of toxicity. You saw Kirsten Harris-Talley step away from being in the Legislature after only a single term and wrote a public letter in the South Seattle Emerald saying that the leadership lacked integrity. You've seen others like Jesse Johnson step away, Emily Wicks step away - but more folks keep coming in who represent those communities, who look like those communities, who aren't the older white folks of the past. And I think we who are outside of Olympia need to do everything we can to help change that dynamic, put the pressure on leadership - the old ways of standing on the tracks and saying, no, isn't going to work anymore. We've delivered the votes. We've delivered stable majorities. Now you have to deliver. We are not accepting no for an answer. [00:42:43] Crystal Fincher: Now there is another local race that we've talked about on the show before that is absolutely exciting and an example of what true grassroots organizing, true connection to the community, and what direct action and community action can do. And that's the Raise the Wage Tukwila campaign that was wildly successful. We have not seen a minimum wage initiative be this successful yet here in this state. This was something that included leaders from the business community in Tukwila, labor leaders in Tukwila, the Transit Riders Union leadership, and just a bunch of people who are really passionate about making sure that workers get paid fairly. What happened that you saw in this race? [00:43:43] Robert Cruickshank: I think what we see is that, again, King County - and it's not just Seattle - strongly supports higher wages for workers. You see worker organizing from Starbucks to Amazon is popular and people get it. Working folks are struggling. They're struggling before pandemic, struggling before inflation. And those two factors have made it only more important and more popular to raise the wage. And it's interesting that we've almost come full circle here. I think the national Raise the Wage movement took off in SeaTac in 2013, and grassroots organizations got the $15 an hour minimum wage passed there. And it was a very close vote. That was not a resounding victory by any means. And then grassroots folks led by Kshama Sawant and others in Seattle went 15 Now. And they got that done in part by gathering signatures to say - we don't have a solution that we like - we'll take you to the ballot and we'll win. Now what you're seeing - going to Tukwila - saying, 15 was a good start. It's not enough. We need to keep raising that wage. And voters are responding very, very strongly. And you can see this across the country now, even in deep red states like Arkansas, Missouri - initiatives to raise the minimum wage pass pretty easily. Voters understand that the wages are too low, that people need to be paid better for the work that they're doing, especially those in what have often been underpaid service sector jobs. The public is there. The public wants it. And again, here's another place where Democratic majorities should act. You look at the federal minimum wage, which has not budged since 2009, it's still stuck at $7.25. If Democrats hang on to the House and hang on to the Senate, one of the first things they do in 2023 should be to raise that wage. [00:45:27] Crystal Fincher: It absolutely should be. And it's something that they should move to advance, even if they don't take control of the House. Because to the point that you just made, we saw in a deep red state this year and on the ballot box, just this week, a minimum wage increase pass. We've seen these pass in deep red states. Progressive policy is actually popular with workers. It does materially improve the wages and the lives, living conditions of working people - regardless of what their political ideology is. And they recognize that and they support these things. If Republicans were smart, they would see that their voters, their constituents that they need to win, support this and they should also. And if not, then once again, they're going to be voting against the will of their constituents and something that could materially improve their lives immediately. So this is something that should be ripe for action from Democrats across the country in every state legislative house, every state legislative chamber, every - in Congress - just people from far and wide, from cities and counties on up. We need to see action on this. It's time. The federal minimum wage is pathetically and shamefully low. We can't support anything on that. It's at this point of poverty wage, and we need to do all that we can to move people out of poverty. We need to stop this exploitation at a time when we see record corporate profits with so many corporations and organizations. There is no excuse to be paying workers poverty wages at all. And communities agree. I also just want to call this one out because sometimes these efforts are kicked off and started in coalition with some really heavily moneyed interests that have positive change in mind. But sometimes they come with - it's a small group of people, the same group of people here and some individual interests doing this kind of across the board. This, to me, was really inspiring because we really saw this generate from the ground up. We really saw community activists, people with an interest in Tukwila, people who lived in Tukwila, people who worked in Tukwila deciding to do this, making sure that it worked for everyone in the community, all of the different stakeholders, really doing the work in canvassing and talking to voters. And that is critically important, and I think helped this initiative and is why we see it being so resounding - is having those one-on-one conversations with people at doors makes the biggest difference that can be made. This was a very intentional campaign. They knew that they had to do that work, planned to do that work, executed that work well, and it showed and it paid off. And so I certainly hope to see this model replicated across the state for a variety of things. My goodness, we can run initiatives to build sidewalks for people to be able to get around their communities, to advance transit, to take climate action, to address healthcare, alternative response public safety. These are all things that we can move on on the ballot box locally with initiatives. And what a great blueprint to be able to study and follow. And I really hope people do that. [00:49:19] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, I think Transit Riders Union and other folks who did a lot of that work in Tukwila really pointed the way forward for a lot of different types of organizing. Hats off to them for stepping up and getting this done. [00:49:31] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. I'm just absolutely inspired and thrilled. And again, hope people really take a look at the work that was done, the planning that was done, and how they executed it - because that's the way to get it done. Okay, so overall, we saw Democrats have just a really successful cycle here in 2022 in Washington. My goodness, Republicans are struggling. What does this mean for both parties as they move forward? [00:50:06] Robert Cruickshank: I think what we're seeing is potentially a light at the end of the tunnel out of 12 years of the Tea Party/MAGA/Trump movement - this huge backlash to progressive policy, a backlash to a Black President, a backlash to a woman presidential nominee, a backlash to social change. We may be starting to see the other side of that. Democrats picking up seats in places like Ohio is promising. There's still a lot to be done. Things didn't go well in Texas. Things went really badly in Florida for Democrats. New York was a problem, but that's also partly because of the Democratic Party structure there that's ossified and really problematic. But the United States is a center-left country, but we have a Republican Party that is trying to use the laws and the courts to undermine that through things like gerrymandering, undermining voting rights, things of that sort. And it's really a problem. And I think if we're able to have a center-left majority represented in this country - now's a good time for Democrats, especially in Congress, to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, to step up and make sure the right to vote is protected, that gerrymandering is ended. Because what you can do with that then is have a stable Democratic majority in the Congress. We can keep the Tea Party, MAGA, Trump movement at bay and finally start to make some movement on the political, social, economic challenges of this country. So I look at this election as a really hopeful moment. I know a lot of us went into it with a lot of anxiety. I know I did. Coming out of it, I think we should feel hopeful about the possibilities that exist. There's still a ton of work ahead. Maybe we turned a corner - I don't know. We'll see. Trump may announce he's running for president next week, but I feel more hopeful right now about the direction of the country than I felt in a little while. I think that's a positive outcome. [00:52:12] Crystal Fincher: I also think it's a positive outcome. I do also see cause for hope. Obviously, we can't, we don't know what's going to happen with control of the House or Senate yet. We don't know what is in store there. But we did see a sound rejection of people who are that extreme. We did see a sound rejection by voters of some of the most extreme policies there. And so let's take that as a starting point and understand that entertaining those, entertaining any of that kind of talk, painting any of that as a both-sides issue, just doesn't work and is not acceptable. I think from the media to different candidates, we don't have to treat that as valid and reasonable at all. We saw a lot of that in the lead up to this election. And I hope that one of the lessons that we learned is that it's just absolutely unacceptable. So given all of the election information that we saw, with everything that happened in these races, what does this mean for 2023 races, particularly in the City of Seattle? [00:53:31] Robert Cruickshank: There are folks out there from the mayor, to The Times, to other observers and consultants who think that 2023 is going to be a more conservative year in terms of City Council elections. I think these election results challenge that. I think you can see that - even in Seattle, where in a place like Northeast Seattle, the 46th district - Darya Farivar, the more progressive candidate, is winning and winning clearly over her more conservative opponent. You see The Stranger's endorsed candidates winning all throughout Seattle legislative races. I think that what this suggests is that voters going into 2023 are not in the same place they may have been in 2021. I think that you're going to see voters want solutions on criminal justice, on public safety, on homelessness that are responsive, holistic, that treat people as whole human beings - not law and order politics. It's not going to be a year where Ann Davison clones are going to do well. I also think there are other issues that are going to come to the fore - you see Darya, Emily Alvarado doing really well because in part, they're strong supporters of building new housing and solving the housing crisis. Someone like Alex Pedersen in District 4 is going to have a real problem - a district that overlaps the 46th - Alex Pedersen being a hardcore NIMBY, deep opponent of new housing, opponent of bike infrastructure, opponent of transit. He's going to have his hands full in 2023. You have an open seat potentially if Debora Juarez retires in District 5. I think even Dan Strauss is going to have to figure out whether he wants to be more progressive or more conservative with his new district. And you see pundits say, oh, it's going to be more conservative district. Will it? That is potentially an open question. I think that going into 2023, there's an opportunity for progressive Seattle here to lay out solutions that the public wants, that are responsive to engage on these issues - not hide from them, but tackle them all directly, and speak directly to voters' concerns, and point the way forward to building a better city that we all know we can have. Some of these races may be very close, but then Alex Pedersen very narrowly won in 2019. If I'm progressive Seattle, I'm looking at 2023 as an opportunity, not as a time to have to play defense, but a time to go on offense and show voters what we have to offer. [00:55:57] Crystal Fincher: I think that is absolutely correct. And I think you're right to point to the 46th Legislative District results as a perfect example of why. This is a district in Northeast Seattle that a lot of people considered to be one of the most moderate in the City of Seattle, to be a NIMBY stronghold, to be the place where - other places in Seattle, other districts in Seattle, other areas may elect Kshama Sawant, may elect more progressive candidates, but that doesn't work north of the Ship Canal. That doesn't work in those areas where we have more established, higher income, single-family neighborhoods, and they don't want that to be destroyed. There have been a small number of very loud voices that have come from those neighborhoods traditionally. And we have seen in this election, really, a sound rejection of the arguments that they were advancing. We saw that rejection on all levels, from legislative races to the county races to the Senate races - the types of arguments and the type of change that they have said was going to be damaging, that they directly took on in these races, just did not land with the voters. And voters sent a clear message that they want to move forward in a different way. Absolutely a message to both progressives and moderates that this is a different day. And it's not good enough to just say, you know what, I want to listen to everyone, bring everyone together. We just need not to be divisive. We don't need to do anything big or dramatic. Let's just stay the course. No one is happy with the course that we're on. No one is happy with continued inaction on housing while prices continue to just escalate and rise to levels that people can't afford. Everyone is being affected by this in one way or another. We're seeing the symptoms of inaction and I think people are recognizing that. And so people who are building a strong case for what action needs to be done and saying - I'm going to be willing to do the hard work in getting this passed and getting this through - are going to be successful. The role of progressive revenue in these races and seeing forces who fundamentally don't want taxation for extremely high income earners, whether it's landlords or people who are making money in speculative gains, to the heads of these major corporations, to the corporations themselves that have reaped windfall profits especially through the pandemic and beyond. And their workers are still struggling or they're battling unionization efforts. Seattle and these districts are on the side of the workers conclusively. They're on the side of our community. And I think there needs to be a broader recognition of that across the board - from leaders to current politicians to our media - and really get connected with what voters are saying today. It's different. And so I'm really interested to see how these 2023 races shape up. I'm frankly interested to see what even the mayor of Seattle takes away from these elections, because he had previously said in some different venues, some in some leaked commentary that he's recruiting against these candidates. He signaled that he wanted to and was aligned with a more punitive punishment approach, that he was skeptical of some of the things that passed without any kind of controversy in this past election by voters. And so is he reconsidering the direction he's taking? Is he reconsidering those candidates who he is setting up to run, perhaps with platforms and advancing policies that were just soundly rejected? And is he reconsidering how he is aligning and allocating his budget that is currently being discussed now - from the sweeps that we're talking about to asking for frontline service workers' compensation to be reduced to just a variety of different things here - is he reconsidering that? It looks like he did start to reconsider progressive revenue, because he certainly relied on that to bail out parts of his budget and to keep it from being underwater and in a deficit. So it looks like there is acknowledgement that that was the right way to go and that we're going to have to rely on that revenue for stability. Hopefully he sees that moving forward. But I'm really interested to hear what our local leaders and existing leaders' takeaways are from this also. [01:00:53] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, I think that's absolutely right. And the public wants homelessness solved - people in a tent are our neighbors - they need help, need housing, not punitive solutions. People want crime addressed, but they don't want it addressed with punitive hardcore law and order solutions. Sometimes that may be necessary here or there, but they want the root causes addressed. And I think that this is not a year, and next year will not be a year where sort of Eric Adams-style approach is going to work in Seattle. I think it's a real opportunity for progressives. If they speak directly to the issues, hear people's concerns, and show that we have better answers. And I think certainly comes down to questions of police accountability as well - SPOG contract is becoming an important issue that will come up very soon. And I think you're going to have to see candidates declare themselves. Are they going to be for tough reforms on the police department that hold them accountable? Or are they going to try let them off the hook? And I don't think voters want to see the police let off the hook in terms of them doing their jobs and doing their jobs responsibly, constitutionally, and with accountability. [01:02:06] Crystal Fincher: And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on today, Friday, November 11th, 2022. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler. Our assistant producer is Shannon Cheng, and our Production Coordinator is Bryce Cannatelli. Our insightful co-host today is chair of Sierra Club Seattle, a long time communications and political strategist, an excellent political mind, Robert Cruickshank. You can find Robert on twitter @cruickshank. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get all of our shows. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - we'll talk to you next time.  

NYC's early voter turnout low in primary; Mayor Adams raises cash from crypto execs; New York enacts John Lewis Voting Rights Act

NY Legislature sends John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to the GovernorToday's Links:  Articles:  Bronx Times - "State Legislature passes John Lewis Voting Rights Act, awaits Hochul's approval" Legal Defense Fund - LDF Urges Governor Hochul to Immediately Sign the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York into LawNY Senate Statement:    "Senate Passes John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York"Organizations taking action:   Legal Defense Fund, Let NY Vote, League of Women Voters NYYou're listening to the American Democracy Minute, keeping YOUR government by and for the people.In November 2021, pro-voter legislators tried to pass the “John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act in the U.S. Senate.   Among several reforms, the bill which would have restored some of the protections of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.  The bill failed to get the 60 votes needed to override the anti-democracy filibuster. But the State of New York may succeed where the U.S. Senate failed.  The Bronx Times reports that the NY State Senate and General Assembly have now passed the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of New York, which would institute dozens of voter protections, including:  Increasing state oversight to root out voter discrimination; expanded language assistance to voters with less proficiency in English; protections against voter intimidation & disinformation; guidance to courts to side with encouraging voter access and having votes counted; and centralizing election data to promote transparency and improve election best practices.Civil rights advocacy organization Legal Defense Fund cheered the vote, and urged Governor Kathy Hochul to immediately sign the bill.   Legal Defense Fund director Lisa Cylar Barrett said, “It is greatly encouraging to see that lawmakers in the State of New York are responding to their own constituents by strengthening and securing every New Yorker's right to vote — no matter where they live, what they look like, or where they came from.”Granny D said, “Democracy is not something we have, it's something we DO.” For the American Democracy Minute, I'm Brian Beihl.

The United States Senate has become the focus of a power struggle between, on the one hand, a minority resistant to challenge, and a bare majority seeking to respond to a watershed moment in history - the systematic effort in the states to curtail voting rights. Two bills, the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, have been passed by the House and are logjammed in the Senate due to Senate rules. But rules can be changed. We talk with Former U.S. Senator Al Franken (D-MN), host of the Al Franken Podcast, on what's happening in the Senate, what can be done about the filibuster, and what lies at risk. Because totalitarian minority rule isn't good for business.

The United States Senate has become the focus of a power struggle between, on the one hand, a minority resistant to challenge, and a bare majority seeking to respond to a watershed moment in history - the systematic effort in the states to curtail voting rights. Two bills, the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, have been passed by the House and are logjammed in the Senate due to Senate rules. But rules can be changed. We talk with Former U.S. Senator Al Franken (D-MN), host of the Al Franken Podcast, on what's happening in the Senate, what can be done about the filibuster, and what lies at risk. Because totalitarian minority rule isn't good for business.

This week we continue our Women of Influence Series with another phenomenal woman. Our guest this week is CEO and Principle Founder of TML Communications; Teresa Lundy. In addition, to being a highly sought after Marketing & Business Strategist, Teresa is also a regular panelist on the daily digital show - Roland Martin Unfiltered. Every Tuesday, you can watch Teresa on iconic and legendary broadcaster Roland Martin's news show as she discuss the week's hottest topics and most pressing issues that are happening around the country and the world. We are very excited to share her interview with you on this week's edition of the Thinking Out Loud Radio Show.   PLUS, in addition to our celebration of Women's History Month, we also commemorate the 57th Anniversary of Bloody Sunday and the March across the Edmund Pettus Bridge by those Civil Rights Leaders of whose shoulders we stand on today. This past weekend Vice-President Kamala Harris marked this anniversary in Selma and gave a pointed speech about Voting Rights and the need to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. We share an excerpt of this speech as this episodes Thought of the Week. We've got another great show this week and we hope you take the time to listen!

In this episode, Danielle and Nick discuss the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and Tucker Carlson's M&M meltdown.

Mason and Zach talk about France's recent decision to allow gay men to donate blood, plus the state of voting rights in the US: from the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. The Queer Person in History You Should Know: Christine Jorgensen. Segment Time Stamps: Intersection Interruption: ~ 2:02What's New: ~ 10:55I Don't Know Her: ~ 33:10Thank you for listening. Make sure to follow us on social media: @withagaytwist, @realMasonDixon, and @ZacharyPen48. You can also email us at WithAGayTwist@gmail.com. Make sure you give us a rating on your favorite Podcast app so other fabulous queens such as yourself can find us. And remember, being queer IS political. Links to today's news:https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/15/us/politics/voting-rights-democrats.htmlhttps://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/17/us/politics/senate-voting-rights-bill.html?referringSource=articleSharehttps://www.demos.org/blog/voting-rights-lgbtq-issuehttps://catalog.archives.gov/id/299909https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-laws-roundup-december-2021https://www.archives.gov/legislative/features/voting-rights-1965https://scholars.org/contribution/dismantling-voting-rights-acthttps://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/TE/TE10033https://history.house.gov/Exhibitions-and-Publications/Civil-Rights/VRA-Documentary/

On this episode of Xendependently Minded, I discuss the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, the federalization of elections, c*v*d treatments being blocked by the Biden administration, universal healthcare, and more! Please donate to the Child Mind Institute, an independent, nonprofit organization dedicated to transforming the lives of children and families struggling with mental health and learning disorders by giving them the help they need. https://childmind.org/donate/ Just trying to figure out life. Weekly combat sports & political/social/philosophical/commentary (satirical of course) Pronounced zen-duh-pendently. Not my real opinion. Where to find me: Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/xen-podcasts/id1476108045?uo=4 Google Podcasts: https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy9kNDU0ZTI4L3BvZGNhc3QvcnNz Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0W9iIqryRFYnGTIh8uWxS4 Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/xendependently-minded Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/xendependentpodcast Twitter:XenPods Find me on Gettr, now! --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Join this week as we discuss Race In America from three different topics that are directly related to this week's theme. We kick off this week's show ddiscussing Sen. Mitch McConnell's racist remarks suggesting that African Americans are not American and what happened when Twitter caught wind of it...#MitchPlease In addition, we are discussing the proposed legislation by Governor Ron Desantis in the State of Florida, that will ban history lessons that are offensive to white students in school, and this legislation could even spill over into the workplace as well. And, rounding out this week's slate of topics, we also plan to discuss the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, and why we believe it is very important that this bill is passed. We share some very prophetic words from Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr in 1963 about the filibuster that is very telling about where our nation was and where we are today.  PLUS, we share some powerful and poignant remarks from the venerable, intellectual luminary Dr. Freddy Haynes III entitled, "America The Ugly" as he talks about in great detail the sins of this nation and how it is time to repent and redeem the future of this country for the better. This week we are talking "Race In America" and believe me it's a discussion you don't want to miss! 

This week we're discussing the failure in the Senate of the Freedom to Vote Act & John Lewis Voting Rights Act and its implications for both federal and state actions as well as the investigations and court cases that continue to emerge and shape our politics and democracy today. Also follow along at: Onefordemocracy.org @onefordemocracy

Mitch McConnell's Verbal Separation of African Americans and Americans Sparks Outrage In light of light of the Republicans' blockage of the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, Latino Rebels reporter Pablo Manríquez asked MiSenate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell whether he had a message to people of color ahead of the midterms. Senate Minority Leader McConnell said, “Well, the concern is misplaced because, if you look at the statistics, African American voters are voting in just as high a percentage as Americans.” The comment ignited a wave of angry responses on social media. Commenters noted that it was just the latest example of how often white people in power don't see Black people and other people of color as Americans. We speak with Manríquez and professor Khalil Gibran Muhammad about McConnell's comment and the response. A Report Reveals Potential Conflicts of Interest in Sheriff Campaigns The report reveals more than $6 million in potential conflicts of interests for sheriffs in 11 different states. These Sheriffs, who are elected officials, received contributions from businesses that stood to benefit from contracts with the sheriffs' offices and jails in their control. The Takeaway speaks with Keshia Morris Desir, Census & Mass Incarceration Project Manager at Common Cause, about the report. A New Guaranteed Income Program Will Launch in Georgia This Year  In Her Hands is a partnership between the the Georgia Resilience & Opportunity (GRO) Fund and GiveDirectly who are planning to supply 650 Black women across Georgia with $850 per month over the course of two years. For more on this, The Takeaway spoke to Hope Wollensack, Executive Director of the Georgia Resilience and Opportunity Fund and co-director of the In Her Hands Initiative.  For transcripts, see individual segment pages.

Mitch McConnell's Verbal Separation of African Americans and Americans Sparks Outrage In light of light of the Republicans' blockage of the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, Latino Rebels reporter Pablo Manríquez asked MiSenate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell whether he had a message to people of color ahead of the midterms. Senate Minority Leader McConnell said, “Well, the concern is misplaced because, if you look at the statistics, African American voters are voting in just as high a percentage as Americans.” The comment ignited a wave of angry responses on social media. Commenters noted that it was just the latest example of how often white people in power don't see Black people and other people of color as Americans. We speak with Manríquez and professor Khalil Gibran Muhammad about McConnell's comment and the response. A Report Reveals Potential Conflicts of Interest in Sheriff Campaigns The report reveals more than $6 million in potential conflicts of interests for sheriffs in 11 different states. These Sheriffs, who are elected officials, received contributions from businesses that stood to benefit from contracts with the sheriffs' offices and jails in their control. The Takeaway speaks with Keshia Morris Desir, Census & Mass Incarceration Project Manager at Common Cause, about the report. A New Guaranteed Income Program Will Launch in Georgia This Year  In Her Hands is a partnership between the the Georgia Resilience & Opportunity (GRO) Fund and GiveDirectly who are planning to supply 650 Black women across Georgia with $850 per month over the course of two years. For more on this, The Takeaway spoke to Hope Wollensack, Executive Director of the Georgia Resilience and Opportunity Fund and co-director of the In Her Hands Initiative.  For transcripts, see individual segment pages.

Fresh from a week away in Mexico, we'll hear about some of the shenanigans we Belmontes were up to. Is the John Lewis Voting Rights Act dead? We'll hear what Congressman McGovern has to say. One of the most well decorated children's book author/illustators Northampton's Mo Willems gives us a guided tour of his new abstract art exhibit called Gravity. Are you suss or are you sussybaka? Find out what THAT means with the Word Nerd. And can we make the Yankee Sippah appreciate the grape Chenin Blan with the Wine Snobs.

Following President Biden's fiery Atlanta voting rights speech last week, it seems that the administration is keen to bring the issue of voting reform to the forefront of its legislative agenda with an accompanying change in the Senate filibuster rules. With debate over two voting rights bills—the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act—expected to begin in the Senate this week, Democratic Senators Manchin and Sinema have made clear the filibuster is here to stay, dooming the federalization of election law for this term. National Journal's Josh Kraushaar joined Marc and Dany to discuss Biden's voting rights push, the president's inflammatory speech last week in Georgia, the left's determination to abolish the filibuster, and the Biden administration's struggling agenda. Josh Kraushaar is National Journal Daily's Senior National Political Columnist, and pens the weekly "Against the Grain" column. Prior to working at National Journal, he was a political correspondent for Politico, where he reported on congressional campaigns and managed the "Scorecard" blog devoted to up-to-the-minute coverage of elections. Kraushaar has appeared as a political analyst on television and radio, including FOX News, MSNBC, CNN, National Public Radio, and C-SPAN. https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/FINAL-WTH-134-Transcript.pdf (Download the transcript here.)

Dr,. Neal is back discussing various topics of the day including Pastor Todd's poor sermon illustration and why the Senate is stalling on the John Lewis Voting Rights Act of 2021. Also get your copy of Dr. Neal's latest book "He Was Clean" now available on Amazon-https:/www.amzn.com/B09M4TF7FG and become a Patron-www.patreon.com/LorenzoTNeal

This week we discuss the obstacles faced by the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, namely Republicans along with frequent disappointments Sinema and Manchin, as well as their apparent love for MLK in spite of this. Also plenty of wild dumbassery going on, as always. Join us!

Happy MLK day. As we remember the great man we tackle a couple of things he may have worked for or experienced in his celebrity. We are a week away from joining NspireU on Air and Ferg can't wait. Razi got Covid and now he thinks he understands confinement as he binged BMF and facetimed his kids. Buff had a long weekend and gives some reviews on the shows he watched over the time. He is tired of the 90s east coast/west coast hip hop beef commentary. Happy Founders Day to DST, AKA, and Z phi B. Ferg gets first question and wants to our thoughts on accusations of Drakes attempted hot sauce assault. This one is spicy (get it huh huh). Razi goes political and asks should the Democrats blow up the filibuster to get the John Lewis Voting Rights Act through Congress. Byron rounds out the convo asking will white people keep the same energy with Karens that they try to dismiss racism with. Shout out to the Port City Secondliners and the pray that everyone gets tested for Covid after the event. Ferg leaves us with a great quote to remember that everyone is an individual and to treat them as such. We dedicate this episode to Razi's uncle Marcello that passed last week. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/threebrothersnosense/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/threebrothersnosense/support

The United States Senate has become the focus of a power struggle between, on the one hand, a minority resistant to challenge, and a bare majority seeking to respond to a watershed moment in history - the systematic effort in the states to curtail voting rights. Two bills, the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, have been passed by the House and are logjammed in the Senate due to Senate rules. But rules can be changed. We talk with Former U.S. Senator Al Franken (D-MN), host of the Al Franken Podcast, on what's happening in the Senate, what can be done about the filibuster, and what lies at risk. Because totalitarian minority rule isn't good for business.

The United States Senate has become the focus of a power struggle between, on the one hand, a minority resistant to challenge, and a bare majority seeking to respond to a watershed moment in history - the systematic effort in the states to curtail voting rights. Two bills, the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, have been passed by the House and are logjammed in the Senate due to Senate rules. But rules can be changed. We talk with Former U.S. Senator Al Franken (D-MN), host of the Al Franken Podcast, on what's happening in the Senate, what can be done about the filibuster, and what lies at risk. Because totalitarian minority rule isn't good for business.

As a Quinnipiac poll reveals another rock bottom polling approval number for Joe Biden at just 33%, the President suffers two big losses on Thursday with the Supreme Court striking down his vaccine mandate for private businesses with 100 or more employees and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) refusing to budge despite his pressure to blow up the filibuster in order to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act.

This week on “The Tent,” Daniella is joined by Ted Johnson, senior fellow and director of the Fellows Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law. They discuss his new book, When the Stars Begin to Fall: Overcoming Racism and Renewing the Promise of America, and the existential threat that structural racism poses to the country. Ted also explains why passing both the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act is critical to protect our democracy.

Many healthcare workers are out with COVID, and state officials are now considering an order for hospitals across California to suspend some elective surgeries. Plus, the Senate is preparing to vote on two long-awaited voting rights bills: the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. Meanwhile, San Diego company TuSimple, announced late last month, that they made the world's first semi-truck run on public roads without a driver or human intervention. Later, KPCC's Robert Garrova explores how the pandemic has shaken the mental health of the undocumented community. Afterwards, Bryce Miller joins KPBS on how the SDSU Men's basketball team was forced to put its season on pause after their win over Colorado State. Finally, KPBS speaks to T. Jefferson Parker about his new novel: “A Thousand Steps.”

Thursday on Political Rewind: Gov. Kemp prepares his State of the State address. Meanwhile, Atlanta Mayor Andre Dickens seeks to improve the relationship between city and state government. And Sen. Warnock puts pressure on big businesses to step in the fight on voting rights. The Panel: Kevin Riley — Editor, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution Rep. Chuck Efstration — State representative (R-Dacula) Sen. Sonya Halpern —  State senator (D-Atlanta) Stephen Fowler — Politics reporter, Georgia Public Broadcasting Timestamps: :00 - Introductions 5:10 - Preview of The State of the State address 11:39 - The state budget and Medicaid 24:43 - Atlanta Mayor Andre Dickens looks to smooth over city-state relations 34:18 - John Lewis Voting Rights Act 45:29 - Civility in federal, state government Please sign up for our team's newsletter: https://www.gpb.org/newsletters. And be sure to like, follow and rate our show wherever podcasts are found.

Yesterday, a member of our group named Emmet Bondurant, a distinguished constitutional lawyer from Georgia, commented on this page about the filibuster: The biggest lie of all is the Senate's claim that it “is the greatest deliberative body in the world.” The filibuster makes the Senate the least deliberative legislative and least democratic legislative body by allowing a minority of Senators to prevent the Senate from debating, much less voting on, any legislation that is opposed by the minority party.A decade ago, when Emmet and I served on the board of Common Cause, he brought a case before federal courts, arguing that the filibuster is unconstitutional. He didn't get very far. (The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia decided against Common Cause on dubious grounds, and the Supreme Court refused to hear the case.) But this was before the high court became crammed with so-called “originalists” who believe the Constitution should be interpreted to mean what the Framers thought when they drafted it. Originalism is an absurd position, of course. American society is so different today from what it was in the eighteenth century that any attempt to apply precepts from that time to this time is doomed to failure. But why not test the sincerity of the originalists sitting on today's Supreme Court with an issue that the Framers would find a no-brainer? All evidence suggests they would agree with Emmet that the filibuster violates the Constitution. The Framers went to great lengths to ensure that a minority of senators could not thwart the wishes of the majority. After all, a major reason they convened the Constitutional Convention in 1787 was because the Articles of Confederation (the precursor to the Constitution) required a super-majority vote of nine of the thirteen states, making the government weak and ineffective. This led James Madison to argue against any super-majority requirement in the Constitution the Framers were then designing, writing that otherwise “the fundamental principle of free government would be reversed,“ and “It would be no longer the majority that would rule: the power would be transferred to the minority.” And it led Alexander Hamilton to note “how much good may be prevented, and how much ill may be produced” if a minority in either house of Congress had “the power of hindering the doing what may be necessary.”This is why the Framers required no more than a simple majority in both houses of Congress to pass legislation. They carved out only five specific exceptions requiring a super-majority vote only in rare, high-stakes decisions: (1) impeachments, (2) expulsion of members, (3) overriding a presidential veto, (4) ratification of treaties, and (5) amendments to the Constitution. By being explicit about these five exceptions to majority rule, the Framers underscored their commitment to majority rule for the normal business of the nation. They would have rejected the filibuster, through which a minority of senators continually obstructs the majority.So where did the filibuster come from? The Senate needed a mechanism to end debate on proposed laws and move to a vote. The Framers didn't anticipate this problem. But in 1841, a small group of senators took advantage of this oversight to stage the first filibuster. They hoped to force their opponents to give in by prolonging debate and delaying a vote. This was what became known as the “talking filibuster” — as popularized in Frank Capra's other great film, “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” (a perfect compliment to his “It's a Wonderful Life”). But contrary to the admirable character Jimmy Stewart plays in that film, the result was hardly admirable.After the Civil War, the filibuster was used by Southern politicians to defeat Reconstruction legislation, including bills to protect the voting rights of Black Americans. Finally, in 1917, as a result of pressure from President Woodrow Wilson and the public, the Senate adopted a procedure for limiting debate and ending filibusters with a two-thirds vote of the Senate (67 votes). In the 1970s, the Senate reduced the number of votes required to end debate down to 60, and no longer required constant talking to delay a vote. 41 votes would do it.Throughout much of the 20th century, filibusters remained rare. (Southern senators mainly used them to block anti-lynching, fair employment, voting rights, and other critical civil rights bills.) But that changed in 2007, after Democrats took over the Senate. Senate Republicans, now in the minority, used the 60-vote requirement with unprecedented frequency. After Barack Obama moved into the Oval Office in 2009, the Republican minority — led by Mitch McConnell — blocked virtually every significant piece of legislation. Nothing could move without 60 votes. A record 67 filibusters occurred during the first half of the 111th Congress — double the entire 20-year period between 1950 and 1969. By the time Congress adjourned in December 2010, the filibuster count had ballooned to 137. Between 2010 and 2020, there were as many cloture motions (959) as during the entire 60-year period from 1947 to 2006 (960). Now we have a total mockery of majority rule. McConnell and his Republicans are stopping almost everything in its tracks. Just 41 Senate Republicans, representing only 21 percent of the country, are now blocking laws supported by the vast majority of Americans. This is exactly the opposite of what the Framers of the Constitution intended. To repeat: They unequivocally rejected the notion that a minority of Senators could obstruct the majority. My humble suggestion, therefore: Senators whose votes have been blocked by the senate minority should themselves take the issue to the Supreme Court. If anyone has standing to make this argument, they surely do. If the conservative majority on the Court stands by its “originalist” principles, they'll abolish the filibuster as violating the Constitution. (At the very least, the filibuster should not be allowed to block laws that are required to preserve democratic rules and norms. It must be lifted to enact voting rights legislation, such as the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act.)If you like my argument — which is essentially Emmet's — please suggest it to your favorite Senator.What do you think? This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit robertreich.substack.com/subscribe

Doug Pagitt and Dan Deitrich talk with Shari Draayer on the 46th day of her hunger strike for voting rights legislation. Shari is calling on the Senate to get rid of the filibuster and pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the Freedom to Vote Act. You can find Shari on Facebook here or drop her an email of encouragement at shari.draayer@eastern.edu   Doug Pagitt is the Executive Director and one of the founders of Vote Common Good. He is also a pastor, author, and social activist.  @pagitt   The Common Good Podcast is produced and edited by Daniel Deitrich. @danieldeitrich Our theme music is composed by Ben Grace. @bengracemusic   votecommongood.com votecommongood.com/podcast facebook.com/votecommongood twitter.com/votecommon  

President Biden will go to Georgia tomorrow to give a speech on voting rights. It's expected to be as hard-hitting as his speech last Thursday about Trump and the attack on the Capitol. Biden will push for reform of the senate filibuster to carve out voting rights from its 60-vote requirement, thereby opening the way for senate Democrats to enact the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Amendment Act. As you probably know, the Freedom to Vote Act would preempt state efforts to suppress votes and take over election machinery. The John Lewis Voting Rights Amendment Act would restore the “pre-clearance” requirement of the 1965 Voting Rights Act (before the Supreme Court gutted it in 2013) which forced states with a history of discrimination – including Georgia -- to get Justice Department approval before they changed their voting rules.But Biden will need more than a hard-hitting speech to reform the filibuster and open the door for these two critical pieces of legislation. And his most important audience isn't in Georgia, which already has two Democratic senators who will support him. It's in West Virginia, whose senior Democratic senator is signaling he will not. Georgia is, however, strategically important to voting rights in other ways. It has several major races this year, including Senator Raphael Warnock's bid for reelection and Stacy Abrams' campaign for governor against Republican incumbent Brian Kemp. (The only reason Democrats have a Senate majority right now is because they prevailed in both of Georgia's runoff elections on January 5 of last year, electing Warnock and Senator Jon Ossoff.)Thanks for subscribing to my letter. If you'd like to support this effort (and be part of the conversation) please consider a paid or gift subscription. Georgia also typifies what's happening in several other southern states, such as North Carolina, Texas, and Arizona. Atlanta is becoming a major global economic hub, inhabited by upwardly-mobile and well-educated professionals who tend to vote for Democrats. Rural Georgia is a challenged economic backwater inhabited by less-educated voters who have been on a downward slide for years, making them highly susceptible to Trumpian racism and xenophobia, and Fox News's conspiracy theories. The shift toward cosmopolitan Atlanta hasn't yet changed the composition of Georgia's legislature, which is still dominated by Republicans. Shortly after Biden's victory, it passed laws requiring additional ID for absentee voting, removing early voting sites, and allowing state takeovers of county elections. Georgia's GOP lawmakers are now readying bills to nix voting touchscreen machines and expand probes into voter fraud, among other anti-democracy initiatives. Hence the importance of national voting rights legislation, and of the Democrats' move to reform the filibuster. Senate Democrats have given up on “Build Back Better” for now and are pivoting to voting rights, and a filibuster carveout for voting rights. But Manchin, the Holdout-in-Chief, is standing in the way, just as he did on “Build Back Better.” He says the only way he'll support a carveout from the filibuster for voting rights is if it's “bipartisan.”This is a bizarre argument, for several reasons. First, there's no precedent requiring that changes in the filibuster rule be bipartisan. In recent decades the rule has been changed several times -- most recently by McConnell and the Republicans, to confirm Supreme Court nominees with a bare majority – without bipartisan support.It's also bizarre because of America's history of racism, which has not been fought through bipartisanship. Representative Jim Clyburn from South Carolina, the third-ranking House Democrat, whose endorsement of Biden during the Democratic primaries put Biden over the top, put it bluntly:“I am, as you know, a Black person, descended of people who were given the vote by the 15th Amendment to the United States Constitution. The 15th amendment was not a bipartisan vote, it was a single party vote that gave Black people the right to vote. Manchin and others need to stop saying that because that gives me great pain for somebody to imply that the 15th Amendment of the United States Constitution is not legitimate because it did not have bipartisan buy-in.”Third, American democracy cannot be saved with “bipartisanship” when one party is out to destroy it. The filibuster is becoming less democratic by the day. As of now, just 41 Senate Republicans, representing only 21 percent of the country, are blocking laws supported by the vast majority.Manchin (and Kyrsten Sinema, who isn't even trying to explain her position on the filibuster or much of anything else) -- now the darlings of Republican donors -- apparently have more allegiance to the filibuster than to democracy. (By contrast, Senator Angus King, the Maine Independent who caucuses with the Democrats and had earlier rejected calls to reform the filibuster, says he has “concluded that democracy itself is more important than any Senate rule.”)Meanwhile, Senate Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell, are making noises about changing the Electoral Count Act of 1887 – an arcane law that establishes the process for certifying presidential elections. (Manchin and Sinema are in talks with Republicans about this.) Make no mistake: This is nothing more than an attempt to give cover to Senate Republicans (and perhaps Manchin and Sinema), who want to be seen as doing something to reform elections but don't want to protect voting rights. The Electoral Count Act of 1887 could stand some more clarity, to be sure. Its ambiguities about which parts of state governments are authorized to confirm voting tallies and appoint electors were exploited by Trump in 2020, and could lead to a Constitutional crisis if he runs again in 2024. But if you think McConnell wants to prevent Republican state legislatures from substituting their views about who won a presidential election for the views of independent election officials and county boards, I've got a bridge to sell you.Biden can't rely on Manchin for anything, and it's impossible to knows what Sinema is up to. So to get his fiftieth vote to carve out voting rights from the filibuster, Biden may need the support of one or two of the few Republican senators who have shown a shred of interest in, or integrity on, voting rights.My short list would include Susan Collins, who in 2015 joined John Lewis and other national leaders in Selma for the 50th Anniversary of Bloody Sunday; and Lisa Murkowski, the only Republican who voted to bring the John Lewis Voting Rights Act to a vote last fall. I'd also reach out to Mitt Romney, who voted to convict Donald Trump in the first impeachment trial. (Not incidentally, Romney's father, George Romney, was such a strong supporter of the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 that when the Republican's presidential nominee that year, Barry Goldwater, opposed it, Romney refused to support Goldwater's candidacy.)The purpose of trying to get one or two of these Republicans on board is not to get “bipartisan” support for carving out voting rights from the filibuster. It is to get a bare majority of the Senate to support American democracy. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit robertreich.substack.com/subscribe

Chuck Schumer is threatening to call a vote to eliminate the filibuster rule in the Senate. This would allow Democrats to pass any law they want with just 50 votes, instead of 60. So we need to get in the ear of moderate Democrats and tell them to vote NO on ending the filibuster. As always, be polite. Remind them: When Republicans had control, they chose not to end the filibuster in order to maintain the integrity of the Senate. Tell them that they will be deconstructing fundamental pillars of democracy if they vote with Schumer. Here's who you should contact:Senator Joe Manchinhttps://www.manchin.senate.gov/contact-joe/email-joeSenator Kyrsten Sinemahttps://www.sinema.senate.gov/contact-kyrstenSenator Mark Kellyhttps://www.kelly.senate.govHere is more info:Schumer threatens to change Senate filibuster rules by Jan 17 if Republicans keep blocking voting-rights legislation* Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer delivered an ultimatum in a letter to party colleagues. * He said if the GOP blocks voter-rights bills, he will try to get round them by changing Senate rules.* The filibuster means that the majority party must find 60 or more votes to pass most bills.Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said he will seek to change Senate rules if Republicans continue to block the passage of legislation designed to protect voting rights. In a letter to party colleagues Monday, Schumer said the Senate must adapt to respond to moves to restrict access to voting by Republican-led state legislatures across the US.He set his targets on the filibuster — the trademark feature of the Senate which means that most legislation requires the votes of at least 60 of the 100 senators to pass."The Senate was designed to evolve and has evolved many times in our history," wrote Schumer, linking the Republican voting rights restrictions to the January 6 Capitol attack, whose first anniversary is two days away"The fight for the ballot is as old as the Republic. Over the coming weeks, the Senate will once again consider how to perfect this union and confront the historic challenges facing our democracy," Schumer continued."We hope our Republican colleagues change course and work with us. But if they do not, the Senate will debate and consider changes to Senate rules on or before January 17, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, to protect the foundation of our democracy: free and fair elections."Passing a federal bill to defend voting rights is among the top domestic priorities of the President Joe Biden's administration.But Republicans have blocked two such bills, the most recent being the John Lewis Voting Rights Act in November. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell argued that the bills are a bid by Democrats to secure an unfair advantage in elections, and violate state rights. Democrats face a Republican filibuster on all such efforts, since the party's caucus has only 50 votes and the tie-breaker from Vice President Kamala Harris.Changing Senate rules would require the unanimous support of Democratic senators, and so far two — Krysten Sinema of Arizona and Joe Manchin of West Virginia — have opposed any potential changes. In comments to NPR, a Democratic source said that discussions were focused on two possibilities. The first, per the source, was insisting on a "talking filibuster", whereby the GOP would have to block legislation by talking indefinitely to stop its passage.At present, senators can filibuster simply by making their opposition clear without actually speaking for hours on end.The second idea was a legislative to temporarily suspend the filibuster to pass the voting-rights bill, and then to restore it.Source:https://www.businessinsider.com/schumer-senate-change-filibuster-january-17-republicans-voting-rights-2022-1Chuck Schumer is threatening to call a vote to eliminate the filibuster rule in the Senatehttps://gorightnews.com/chuck-schumer-is-threatening-to-call-a-vote-to-eliminate-the-filibuster-rule-in-the-senate/https://www.spreaker.com/user/9922149/chuck-schumer-is-threatening-to-call-a-vhttps://rumble.com/vs8yyt-chuck-schumer-is-threatening-to-call-a-vote-to-eliminate-the-filibuster-rul.htmlShared by #GoRightNews GoRightNews.com

Is Omicron the kinder and gentler Covid we've been waiting for? Less lethal, and more like the flu? Mike Davis comments on the pandemic—and the age of pandemics we are now living in.Also: On the first anniversary of the insurrection of January 6, John Nichols argues that, to defend democracy, we need the Senate to pass the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act—which requires changing the filibuster rules in the Senate. Also: proposals to expel members of congress who aided or abetted the insurrectionists.Subscribe to The Nation to support all of our podcasts: thenation.com/podcastsubscribe.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Arun and Patricia discuss: Happy Easter To Everyone! Mehdi Hasan: "The Republican Party, American politics today, is defined not by right vs left or liberal vs conservative... it's the dumb and the not-dumb.” What's In H.R 4 (the John Lewis Voting Rights Act)? March 31st The Day Mario Died. Trailer: Space Jam: A New Legacy. 20 Years Since Sega Left The Console Business. More Spongebob Squarepants Pulled Over Storyline Concerns. Reggie Retiring From GameStop Board. Metroid Prime 2D Demo released. RECAP: In Search of the Crystal Skull Hidden Gems Month. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/old-school-lane/support

During the Civil Rights Movement, not only did African-Americans fight for equal protection under the law, but White Americans were also risking their lives in the name of social justice. Some were even murdered for participating in marches and protests aimed at ending segregation and racial discrimination. But in today's political climate and divisiveness, how come more White Americans prefer to remain silent on measures that support systemic change to end racism? Host Eddie Robinson returns from paternity leave and chats candidly with Joan Mulholland, the first White member of the historically Black organization, Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated. Her son, Loki Mulholland, who's an acclaimed film director and human rights activist, Mac Hulslander—the father of I SEE U's Technical Director, Todd Hulslander—offer up their own perspectives in this very provocative episode.

Yesterday, we joined the National Council of Negro Women, Black Women's Roundtable, NAACP and Georgia StandUp in Washington to demand Voting Rights Protection. Justicefighter Podcast highlights the push for the John Lewis Voting Rights Act in Congress. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/justice-media/support

Yesterday, we joined the National Council of Negro Women, Black Women's Roundtable, NAACP and Georgia StandUp in Washington to demand Voting Rights Protection. Justicefighter Podcast highlights the push for the John Lewis Voting Rights Act in Congress. 

Senate Republicans blocked the John Lewis Voting Rights Act from advancing on Wednesday when the Senate took a procedural vote on whether to open debate on the legislation. The John Lewis voting bill that the Senate considered is aimed at fighting voter suppression and restoring and updating key parts of the landmark Voting Rights Act, originally passed in 1965. The measure is named in honor of the civil rights icon and late Congressman John Lewis of Georgia. At least 10 Republicans would have needed to join with all 50 members of the Senate Democratic caucus for the legislation to advance. That was not expected to happen as most Republicans have decried any Democratic attempts to enact new voting legislation in the current Congress as partisan and unnecessary.To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

States' rights is one of the arguments we hear today to justify the G.O.P.‘s sweep in passing restrictive voting laws. But what does states' rights actually mean? Where does the idea come from? And why is it that something the Democratic Party of the 1800's argued for is now argued by the Republican Party of today? Join host Ty Wycoff as he explores equality as a zero-sum game, the dark history behind states' rights, and what one President did to take on the Ku Klux Klan.Written, produced, and hosted by Ty WycoffEpisode music and theme music by Ty WycoffFollow the show on Instagram @thishistoric for political updates in between episodes.Check out some of Ty's articles on MediumA huge thanks to all of my Patrons for making this show happen! Derek Lichtner, Joshua Covill, Brandon Suthard, Rebecca Wycoff, Dale Wycoff, Chris Krager, Stevie Covill, Jamie Cody-Ferguson, Aurora Darling, Ásta Bowen, Chelsea O'Hara, Steve Hermes, Spencer Harris, Larissa Wycoff, Ally Nagel, Natali Kragh, Kailey Adams, Yosef SmidHave a topic idea you want covered? Found something I said that is incorrect? Shoot an email to: ty@thishistoric.comSupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/thishistoric)

Comprehensive coverage of the day's news with a focus on war and peace; social, environmental and economic justice. Los Angeles City Council enacts nation's strictest vaccine mandate to enter business establishments. Republicans to agree lifting debt ceiling into December to avoid default on debt, criticized for “kicking can down the road.” Assistant Attorney General Kirsten Clark testifies voting discrimination “alive and well” at senate hearing on John Lewis Voting Rights Act.  Huntington Beach oil spill leaks 126,000 gallons into southern California beaches, ignites renewed calls for offshore oil and gas drilling ban. Arizona's Democratic Party threatens to pull support for Senator Kirsten Synema for stonewalling President Biden's $3 trillion Build Back Better plan. Collage of Huntington Beach oil spill from Unified Command. Birds by Petty Officer 1st Class Richard Brahm. Oil in water by Orange County drone. The post Los Angeles enacts nation's strictest vaccine mandate to enter businesses; Assistant Attorney General says voting discrimination “alive and well” urges passage of John Lewis Voting Rights Act; Huntington Beach oil spill renews calls for offshore oil and gas drilling ban appeared first on KPFA.

In this episode we talk about the FDA approving the Pfizer Vaccine, Herschel Walker announcing his run for office in the Senate seat in Georgia, Andrew Cuomo leaving his dog at the governor's mansion, Kathy Hochul becoming the 57th Governor of New York, John Lewis Voting Rights Act, 3.5 Trillion Budget Resolution, Trump getting bored at Alabama Rally for telling people to get the vaccine, Mo Brooks telling that same crowd to move past the 2020 election, Peter Meijer and Seth Moulton going to Afghanistan, the Bombing at the Kabul Airport, Biden admitting to giving list of Afghans who helped America to the Taliban, Adam Kinzigner potentially losing his seat in redistricting.

Joining the crew this week, our good friend and Planned Parenthood Texas Votes Executive Director Dyana Limon-Mercado, who's the perfect authority at a moment when Senate Bill 8 is set to essentially outlaw most abortions in the state as of September 1. What's in the new law, what's still legal, what's not, and what's next? Also - Texas House Democrats score at least a partial walkout victory as the U.S. House passes the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. How might it upend the plans of the Texas GOP to disenfranchise thousands of Texas voters, and what stands in the way of the Act becoming law? We discuss all this and more, including how YOU can join the fight, on this week's Progress Texas Happy Hour. https://progresstexas.org/blog/what-sets-texas%E2%80%99-abortion-ban-apart-rest-abortion-bounty-hunters https://needabortion.org/

In Need to Know, Bianca and Isaiah recap a tumultuous week in the fight to secure voting rights, and ponder whether Democrats may have found an answer to their filibuster problem. In All the Feels, the co-host get campy by revealing a list of their all-time favorite campy/b-movies. In Gotta Do, Isaiah previews The Zodiac Episode and tells listeners what they need to do to prepare themselves. 

The role of reality warpers in comics has been as heroes and villains'. Beings with the power to bend the very cosmos to their will are a constant threat to all we know. While those that seek to bend reality in the real world wield microphones and gavels and not Infinity Gauntlets, they are no less able to make us doubt all that we know. In this episode we will take on the blatant attempts to remake our history, alter our present and control the future of our democracy as we know it. In my heart, I knew you still cared. But one ever knows for sure. Reality is often disappointing .That is, it was. Now, reality can be whatever I want."― ThanosWell known reality warpers: Mr. Mxyzptlk (Character) - Comic Vine (gamespot.com)Max Faraday (Character) - Comic Vine (gamespot.com)Mad Jim Jaspers (Character) - Comic Vine (gamespot.com)Jenny Quantum (Character) - Comic Vine (gamespot.com)Franklin Richards (Character) - Comic Vine (gamespot.com)X-Man (Character) - Comic Vine (gamespot.com)Critical Race TheoryThe 1619 Project: The 1619 Project - WikipediaNikole Hannah Jones: Nikole Hannah JonesNikole Hannah-Jones Won't Join UNC-Chapel Hill Faculty Without Tenure (msn.com)LegislationFor the People Act: Text - H.R.1 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): For the People Act of 2021 | Congress.gov | Library of CongressGeorge Floyd Justice and Policing Act: H.R.1280 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2021 | Congress.gov | Library of CongressEmmett Till Anti Lynching Act: H.R.35 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Emmett Till Antilynching Act | Congress.gov | Library of CongressJohn Lewis Voting Rights Act: How is the John Lewis Voting Rights Act different from H.R. 1? - The Washington PostComicsStatic Shock: Static: Season One creators discuss the character's revamp at DC Comics - Polygon Support the showSubscribe on our new website! Share and leave a review! https://superhero-politics-podcast.onpodium.com/

6.9.21 #RolandMartinUnfiltered: Mitch McConnell opposes John Lewis Voting Right Act; Rep. Val Demings runs for Senate; White fear runs amok on Fox News; Former Atlanta Mayor Kasim has filed the necessary papers to run for Mayor again; What's the difference between HR1 and HR4? Georgia's Black Pastors will head to DC next week to persuade senators to support the John Lewis Voting Rights Act; Stacey Abrams group Fair Fight Action is launching Hot Call Summer + Tech Talk: Meet the creator of the app Healthy Hip Hop Support #RolandMartinUnfiltered via the Cash App ☛ https://cash.app/$rmunfiltered or via PayPal ☛ https://www.paypal.me/rmartinunfiltered #RolandMartinUnfiltered is a news reporting platform covered under Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

My friend Paul Teller keeps a running (and depressing) list of the destructive actions taken by Joe Biden's Administration. Joe Biden has been in office for just a few months and already the list is a mile long.   Paul, who was a top aide to VP Mike Pence and is now his chief of staff, calls his list “The Horribles” The TBWS Team agrees that the name is apt. In yet another free association roundtable, we kick off with how grateful we are for lunch bucket Joe's letter  - in an IRS envelope -  reminding us to thank him personally for our pandemic relief checks.  Then we move on to wokeness, equity and Biden's sowing more racial divisions, cancel culture, Biden's proposed “Section 8” tax plan, the assault on religious liberty, whether a  Federal government promoting “wokeness” violates the Establishment Clause, the attempted Federal takeover of elections with the “John Lewis Voting Rights Act”, and the HR5 “Equality Act” which would do anything but bring about equality.  “It's a Five Alarm Fire,” says Brian McNicol.  Who is really driving the Biden agenda?  Greg Corombos puts it, “Joe Biden is getting shoved to the front of the parade and has no idea where it's going.”  But whoever's in command, “what they're doing is really damaging," says Brian. “They really think that they can control the weather, our ability to get and distribute energy, that they can just control it. They can just say, It won't be that anymore. It'll now be this.  And it will magically happen."   “They are operating on some very dangerous assumptions and we need to watch. It's a very dangerous time in the world.”   True, yet I think you'll find this show an interesting take on the madness.

Whether it's gun-control, infrastructure, or the outrageous voter suppression law passed in Georgia and is threatening to roll all over the country - at some point the logjam in the Senate has to give way so that bills like the John Lewis Voting Rights Act can get voted on. The only way for that to happen is for the filibuster to either disappear or revert back to the talking filibuster of yesteryear.Robin Biro and David Katzner set the table for all these issues and then invite Professor Wendy Schiller, Ph.D. of Brown University to explain what this arcane procedural maneuver is all about. The centerpiece of Mitch McConnell's obstructionist ways must be tackled head-on, one way or the other. As it is, you can be sure that the era of a do-nothing, deadlocked Senate will continue during these days when that is the last thing we can afford.The country is on the road to recovery, it seems as if everyone is excited and on-board, well everyone except the Republicans in Congress.  It certainly doesn't appear as if they are doing the bidding of their constituents, only bowing to the demands of the big-money donors who allow them to walk the halls of power. It's shameful, it's loathsome and it must stop.Robin Biro and David Katzner set the table for all these issues and then invite Professor Wendy Schiller, Ph.D. of Brown University to explain what this arcane procedural maneuver is all about. The centerpiece of Mitch McConnell's obstructionist ways must be tackled head-on, one way or the other. As it is, you can be sure that the era of a do-nothing, deadlocked Senate will continue during these days when that is the last thing we can afford.The country is on the road to recovery, it seems as if everyone is excited and on-board, well everyone except the Republicans in Congress.  It certainly doesn't appear as if they are doing the bidding of their constituents, only bowing to the demands of the big-money donors who allow them to walk the halls of power. It's shameful, it's loathsome and it must stop.

This week we continue the discussion about voting rights. Specifically, we talk about the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the “For the People Act,” otherwise known as H.R.1. It's easy to confuse these two because they serve the same purpose, but they are very different bills. The John Lewis Voting Rights Act seeks to update the original Voting Rights Act of 1965 and addresses the 2013 Supreme Court decision (Shelby County v Holder) that struck down some of its key provisions. The “For the People” act goes much further and addresses the mechanics of voting and, to a large degree, removes local state control over voting rights. There are good arguments to be had on both sides of the “For the People Act,” and we discuss a few of them here. Republicans accuse the Democrats of using this act to force the Republican Party out of winning any future elections, but reality is often much more nuanced. It will affect both parties, and though the final outcome will benefit all voters, the parties themselves will need to implement some fundamental changes if this act becomes law.

Independent investigative journalism, broadcasting, trouble-making and muckraking with Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com

Photo Credit: Getty Images There is no Negro problem. There is no Southern problem. There is no Northern problem. There is only an American problem. And we're here tonight, as Americans, not as Democrats or Republicans were met here as Americans to solve that problem. -Lyndon B. Johnson EPISODE SUMMARY In this episode, the hosts discuss the imperative to move quickly on the proposed John Lewis Voting Rights Act. Those dedicated to limiting the number of eligible voters and devising obstacles to voting have historically found effective ways to press their agenda whenever legal restraints are not in place. A FEW KEY TAKEAWAYS FROM THIS EPISODE We need to push our representatives to pass voting rights legislation at the national level.  At a local level, we must vote for candidates that push to protect and expand voting rights. (0:21) The significant changes to voting rights in 2011. (20:45) Weighing the pros and cons of voter IDs and the last minute changes that happen in elections (26:36) Report by Leadership Conference Education Fund on Polling place closures. Report of Committee on House Administration, Subcommittee on Elections, about justification and scope of 2019 bill passed by House. “Hours after Shelby County, Texas revived a previously blocked voter ID law. Within days, Alabama announced it would move to enforce a photo ID law it had previously refused to submit to the Department of Justice for preclearance.” https://cha.house.gov/sites/democrats.cha.house.gov/files/documents/Voting%20Rights%20and%20Election%20Administration%20in%20America_ONLINE_11-18-2019.pdf Lyndon address to joint session of Congress re 1965 VRA following “Bloody Sunday.” Includes video of address plus text. One of Johnson's finest moments. “So it was at Lexington and Concord. So it was a century ago at Appomattox. So it was last week in Selma, Alabama.” NY Times article re extension of VRA July 2006. “Despite the progress these states have made in upholding the right to vote, it is clear the problems still exist,” said Senator Barack Obama, Democrat of Illinois. “South Carolinians, you have come a long way,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican from that state, which is among those covered by the law. “But we, just like every other part of this country, still have a long way to go.” To download the transcript, CLICK HERE LINKS IN THIS EPISODE CLICK HERE TO LEAVE FEEDBACK Follow Ellis Conversations on Twitter Follow Judge Ronald Ellis on Twitter Follow Jamil Ellis on Twitter Follow Jamil Ellis on LinkedIn OTHER EPISODES OF INTEREST The Voting Rights Act Voting Rights Before the VRA