Sen. Elizabeth Warren Tells Netroots: “Push Back And Fight Hard”

IMG_8060
Senator Elizabeth Warren took her fight against a rigged system to the Netroots Nation gathering in Detroit Friday morning, saying that she is fighting back, and if We the People “push back and fight hard, we can win.”

Outside the hall, people were passing out “Ready for Warren” hats and signs. Inside the hall, the hats and signs were everywhere.

Fighting back against a rigged system was the theme of Warren’s rousing speech to Netroots. She began by briefly telling the story of how the about Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) came to be. She had the idea for the agency, started talking about it, people told her it was a great idea and badly needed, but said to her, “Don’t do it because the biggest banks in the country will hate it and you will lose.”

She said they had that half right. “They spent more than a million dollars a day for more than a year lobbying against financial reforms. But we fought back and we won. We won because you and a zillion other people across the country got in the fight. We said we the people will have this agency and we won.”

And now we have the CFPB and it has already returned $5 billion to people that the big financial firms tried to steal, she said.

Warren’s message was that we should “never miss the central point of this story. The CFPB is proof of how democracy can work in the 21st century. It is proof that if we push back against the biggest, strongest, most ruthless lobbying effort in the country, if we push back and fight hard we can win. We can’t win every time and we are still trying to figure out how to make it all work. We don’t win every time but we’re learning to win. We will keep at it; we will fight and we will win that’s my message today.”

A Rigged System

Warren moved from there to what is happening in the country today. She said companies naturally look for profits. “But many of them have another plan – they use their money and their connections to try to capture Washington and rig the rules in their favor … That’s what we’re up against that’s what democracy is up against.”

She compared what happens to regular people with what happens to wealthy elites at the top, saying, “A kid gets caught with a few ounces of pot and goes to jail but a big bank launders drug money and no one gets arrested.”

Not Just Big Banks

Warren said, “But it’s not just the big banks.” She called on the audience to look at the choices the federal government makes, such as piling debt on students. Then she went straight after Republicans as the enablers of the rigging and corruption. “Instead of building a future, this country is bleeding tax loopholes. Billion-dollar corporations squeeze out deals with foreign countries, renounce their citizenship and pay no taxes. How does this happen? They all have lobbyists and Republican friends in Congress to protect every loophole and every privilege. The game is rigged and it isn’t right.”

Rigged Trade Deals

“Take a look at what happens with trade deals. Trade negotiations are like Christmas morning for the biggest corporations,” she said.

Warren described how corporations can bypass pollution and wage laws. “The corporations can get special gifts through trade negotiations they would never get from Congress,” she said, because trade negotiations are secret, held behind closed doors. The corporations are “all smacking their lips at the possibility of rigging the upcoming trade deals.”

“Stop and ask yourself, why are trade negotiations secret? I have had people involved in the process actually tell me, If people knew what was going on they would be opposed. My view is if people would be opposed then we shouldn’t have those trade deals.”

It’s Everywhere

Warren said the tilt in the playing field is everywhere. “When conservatives talk about opportunity, they mean opportunity for the rich to get richer and the powerful to get more powerful. They don’t mean do something about student loan debt or help someone unemployed to get back on their feet.”

The Fight

“Deep down, this is a fight over values. Conservatives and their powerful friends will continue to be guided by their internal motto ‘I got mine and the rest are on your own.’ ”

“My motto we all do better when we work together and invest in future. The country gets stronger when we invest in helping people succeed. … These are progressive values and these are the values we are willing to fight for.”

She then went into a refrain:

We believe that Wall Street needs stronger rules and tougher enforcement.
And we’re willing to fight for it.

We believe in science and that means that we have a responsibility to protect the planet.
And we will fight for it.

We believe the Internet shouldn’t be rigged to benefit big corporations.
And we will fight for it.

We believe no one should work full time and still live in poverty. That means raising the minimum wage.
And we will fight for it.

We believe that fast-food workers deserve a livable wage.
That means we will fight alongside them.

We believe students are entitled to get a good education without being crushed by debt.
And we will fight for it.

We believe after a lifetime of work people are entitled to retire with dignity. That means protect Social Security and Medicare.
And we will fight for it.

We believe – I can’t believe I have to say this in 2014 – in equal pay for equal work.
And we will fight for it.

We believe equal means equal and that true in the workplace and at home and everywhere.
And we will fight for it.

We believe immigration has made country strong and vibrant.
And we will fight for it.

And we believe that corporations are not people. (The crowd was on its feet making a lot of noise so I don’t know what she said next.)
And we will fight for it.

Right here in this room this is where it happens. This is 21st-century democracy. This is the future of America. This is where we decide that We the People will fight together and do that, we will fight together and we are going to win.

And the crowd went nuts.

—–

This post originally appeared at Campaign for America’s Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture. I am a Fellow with CAF. Sign up here for the CAF daily summary and/or for the Progress Breakfast.

A Different View On Cantor’s Surprising Loss

Last week Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor was defeated in a primary. He not only won’t be Majority Leader anymore, he won’t even be in Congress. This was an absolutely unexpected and shocking upset that has reversed the narrative that the Republican “establishment” has taken back momentum from the Tea Party.

The reason there as a fight over control between the Republican establishment and Tea Party was that the Tea Party uprising has threatened not only Republican electability nationally, but the domination of the Republican Party by Wall Street and the giant multinationals — the Chamber of Commerce types. The real grassroots-based core of the Tea Party is actually quite upset by the “crony capitalism” corruption that is rampant in Washington, DC and rampant in both political parties. (This is one thing the Tea Party types have in common with progressives.) The Tea Party types are anti-Wall Street and are very, very aware that the giant multinational corporations have been profiting from closing factories and moving jobs out of the country. This awareness threatens the Republican “establishment” because the Republican establishment is Wall Street and giant, multinational corporations. Hence the fight for control.

So there are lots of opinions talking about how the Republican Party establishment and the party’s Wall Street/corporate funders have “created a monster” with the Tea Party, and now the monster is turning on them. …

My Take: 12%

Here is my take on Cantor’s loss. Turnout was 12%. That’s what you need to understand about what happened.

You can’t tell anything about the electorate from a 12% turnout. You can’t learn about what the district wants. You can’t even learn what “the Republican base” wants. You can’t tell if immigration (or any other issue) is or is not a driving force and is or is not a candidate killer. You can’t really tell anything from this except that turnout was exceptionally low.

Here is the real reason this is bad for the Republican “establishment.” For decades the Republican Party has been engaged in efforts to drive down election turnout and this is the result.

Higher Turnout Favors Democrats

Here is a political truth: High turnout favors Democrats. So to elect Republicans they have to keep turnout low. Then Republicans use whatever it takes to get “their” voters to show up. For decades this has meant a combination of fundamentalist Christianity, racism, nativism, whatever.

The game is clear and cynical: Create apathy so people don’t vote. Make people hate government in general so they don’t vote. Make people feel like voting won’t change anything so people don’t vote. Use negative ads to turn people off from the process so they don’t vote. Create division and despair and so people don’t vote. Do what it takes to convince people not to bother to vote.

For the ones who will still bother to vote make it hard for them to vote — “suppression.” Make it hard to register to vote. Purge the voter roles. Enact restrictive ID laws hopefully requiring actual birth certificates. Only let the polls open for one day — a workday. Keep voting machines out of Democratic-oriented districts.

Then, after you have done everything possible to keep most people from voting stir up the activists and rubes — your activists and rubes — with distractions and fear to get them to the polls. This is why you see so many “Democrats secretly plan to ban the Bible” and “black mobs attack white women” and similar headlines at the right’s paid outlets.

Once Elected Pass Capital Gains And Corporate Tax Cuts

Once your people are elected they vote for capital gains tax cuts, corporate tax cuts and deregulation. Ignore the distractions that you used to get your activists and rubes to the polls. If you actually give them what they want you can’t offer it to them next time.

After decades of driving down turnout this is the result. Only the farthest-right talk show listeners are turning out now and the Republican establishment can’t control them. And they actually remember that they were promised something last time. Maybe it was abortion, maybe it was immigration … they remember and want it, not capital gains tax cuts and lower corporate taxes.

This bit Eric Cantor in the ass and it is finally biting the Republican Party establishment in the ass. And there is nothing Republicans can do about it, because higher turnout always favors Democrats. To keep turnout low Republicans have driven the morale of the voters down and down and down. They have driven the economy down and down and down. They have driven the process down and down and down. They have driven everything we value down and down and down.

Now they have literally hit bottom.

Good Lord, Republicans STILL Pretending There Is An “IRS Scandal”

It has become a “truth” on the right that the IRS “targets” conservative “political” groups. Here is what is going on.

Sea Of Smear Ads From Anonymous Donors

Who is providing the sea of anonymous money behind the nasty smear-campaign ads in local, state and national elections? You might (not) be surprised to find out that these ads are from “social welfare” organizations! These organizations don’t have to disclose their donors because they are tax-exempt nonprofits that, according to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), “must be operated exclusively to promote social welfare.”

That’s right, your community, state and nation elections are being flooded with nasty, political, smear-campaign ads from organizations that claim to “further the common good and general welfare of the people of the community” and have no involvement with political campaigns.

Social Welfare Organizations

Here are the technical details. A 501(c)(4) charity is a group that does not have to disclose its donors to the public. The law says these groups must operate “exclusively” as “social welfare” organizations and not political organizations. They “must operate primarily to further the common good and general welfare of the people of the community.” (Disclosure: The Campaign for America’s Future operates as a 501(c)(4) organization; its sister organization, the Institute for America’s Future, is a 501(c)(3) organization.)

But government agencies have to “interpret” laws when it comes to their own day-to-day operating rules, and there are grey areas between activities that could be seen as “social welfare” and activities that could be seen as electoral politics. Is voter-registration a general social welfare activity or a political activity? Is issuing a well-researched policy paper on the effect of a higher minimum wage on poverty a social welfare activity or a political lobbying activity?

So years ago the IRS decided that these social welfare groups could spend “up to 49%” of their efforts in politically related activity.

“Congressman Bob Bobson Eats Babies” Is Not A Political Ad?

Obviously these groups are not supposed to be running campaign ads. But a smear ad appearing a week before an election that says “your member of Congress Bob Bobson eats babies” but not “vote against Bob Bobson for eating babies” has been “interpreted” to be a social welfare activity and not a political ad.

Because of this huge, vast, gaping loophole a number of (mostly Republican) political election campaign-related organizations that wanted to hide their donors figured out they could become “social welfare” organizations to run these campaign ads. Then “the Republican majority” on the Supreme Court as E.J. Dionne calls them, allowed billionaires and corporations (even foreign-owned corporations) to put unlimited sums of money into politics. This opened the floodgates of influence-buying – the more money you put into politics, the more tax breaks, contracts, subsidies, monopoly protection, etc. you get back – and a race was on.

Keeping Campaign Donors Secret

Corporations and billionaires that wanted to keep their influence-buying secret could put money into these “social welfare” organizations (and the people running these organizations could make themselves a fortune), so there was a flood of applications to the IRS to start conservative, tax-exempt, “social welfare” nonprofit organizations.

At the same time, Senate Republicans also filibustered the DISCLOSE Act that would let the public know who was funding all of these smear ads.

The Phony IRS “Scandal”

Republicans charge that the IRS is “targeting” conservative “political” groups when they look to see if “social welfare” groups are actually illegally engaging in election-related politics. It has become a “truth” on the right that “the government” is “harassing” conservatives for their politics. They say the IRS is “intimidating” them by looking into “their political activities.”

This all feeds into the Republican/Fox News/Wall Street Journal/talk radio/blog “scandal machine.” For example, the Wall Street Journal today has this “story” today, “GOP Report on IRS: Only Tea Party Groups Received ‘Systematic Scrutiny’.” The party issues a “report” and the conservative media machine blasts the “findings” around the wingnutosphere, and the “outrage” ensues.

Republicans in the House of Representatives have been holding hearings intended to drive this idea of IRS “harassment” out to their followers. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) has his Oversight and Government Reform Committee holding televised (FOX) “hearings” that haul people before them to be yelled at by various Republicans. One person, threatened by Republicans with prosecution and jail, was advised by her attorney to assert her Fifth Amendment rights, so Republicans made her appear for hours, repeating again and again that she was “pleading the Fifth.” Now Republicans plan to vote to hold her in “contempt” for asserting her constitutional rights, and have even created a logo advertising the contempt vote:

Here’s The Thing

The IRS is required by law to look at all applicants to see if they are engaged in impermissible political activity. If they are engaged primarily in political activity, they are neither “charities” nor “social welfare” organizations and, by law, are not supposed to receive special tax status allowing them to keep their donors secret. That alone should tell you that something is fishy with the corporate/conservative accusation that the IRS is “targeting” conservative “political” groups. The IRS is required by law to see if groups are “political.”

This is really about Republicans trying to stop the IRS from policing the big right-wing political groups that are using special tax status to mask their donors. This is an intimidation tactic; it’s an attempt to keep the IRS from seeing if these groups are engaged in political campaign activity and shut down the ones that are, all in an effort to mask their billionaire/corporate and foreign corporate donors.

See also:

The Latest Lie: IRS Targeted Conservatives

The Latest Lie: “IRS Targeting Was Broader Than Thought”

The IRS “Scandal” Was A Set-Up

—–

This post originally appeared at Campaign for America’s Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture. I am a Fellow with CAF. Sign up here for the CAF daily summary

FL-13 – Did Dems Have A Reason To Show Up And Vote?

Republicans won in Florida’s 13th district special congressional election on Tuesday. What does this mean?

Here is the key point about why the Republican candidate: More Republican voters went to the polls and voted than Democrat voters. The Republican won by about 3,400 votes out of about 183,000 votes cast. Turnout was 58 percent in precincts Romney won in 2012, and 48.5 percent in precincts Obama won in 2012. There were 49,000 fewer people who voted in this election than in the 2010 general mid-term election (down 21 percent), and 158,500 fewer than in the 2012 Presidential (down 46 percent). So it was the failure to get Democratic voters to show up that lost them the election.

The obvious conclusion is that the Democratic candidate did not give Democratic voters sufficient reason and motivation to show up and vote. If just a few more Democrats – 3,400 – had decided to show up and vote the election would have gone the other way.

Factors and Non-Factors

Obamacare? Maybe not. According to David Weigel at Slate, “both rejected the national “narrative” that the race was a clear referendum on Obamacare.”

It wasn’t spending. Outside groups showed up and helped the Democrat, balancing out the usually enormous Republican spending advantage.

Medicare counted. Republicans accused Democrats of “$716 in Medicare Cuts.” This was the same theme that shifted the 2010 election to Republicans, and it helped again.

)

The Democrats fell short in getting their absentee voters to mail in their ballots. According to Sean Sullivan at The Washington Post, the Democratic candidate “did not build a big enough lead in absentee voting to prevail on election day.”

It’s The Base

Republican strategy is to feed red meat to “the base” to whip them up and get them to show up, (and do what they can to suppress Democratic turnout). In this race the Republican candidate ran to the right. Kartik Krishnaiyer of The Florida Squeeze, in a great analysis of the election, wrote that “this is the furthest right a GOP candidate had run in the area” in 60 years.

The Republican appeared on and was promoted by FOX News.

Apparently the Democratic candidate tried to “appeal to the middle,” thinking this would bring in “moderate” and “independent” voters who are thought to be “between” the left and the right. Her website emphasized “breaking the gridlock in Congress,” and offers, “I’ve proven again and again that Republicans and Democrats can work together to get things done.”

The website also emphasizes “cutting wasteful government spending” and “introducing performance metrics to hold government accountable for waste and abuse and creating the right fiscal environment for businesses to create jobs.”

So the Democratic candidate decided not to appeal to base Democratic voters, instead hoping to “reach across the aisle” to bring in “centrist” and “moderate” voters instead. One way or another this “appeal to the middle” failed to bring enough “moderate” voters to the polls to overcome the left-leaning voters it repelled.

Democrats Let It Happen

Thomas Frank summed up the problem in “The matter with Kansas now: The Tea Party, the 1 percent and delusional Democrats” at Salon. The subhead is “Democrats believe demographics alone will defeat the Tea Party. It’s a smug fantasy: Economic populism’s the answer.”

Even more alarming for Democrats were the stark implications of “Kansas” for their grand strategy of “centrism.” As I tried to make plain back in 2004, the big political change of the last 40 years didn’t happen solely because conservatives invented catchy conspiracy theories, but also because Democrats let it happen. Democrats essentially did nothing while their pals in organized labor were clubbed to the ground; they leaped enthusiastically into action, however, when it was time to pass NAFTA and repeal Glass-Steagall. Working-class voters had nowhere else to go, they seem to have calculated, and — whoops! — they were wrong. The Kansas story represented all their decades of moderating and capitulating and triangulating coming back to haunt them.

If Democrats don’t give regular, working people – the Democratic base – a reason to vote, then they won’t. In Florida’s 13th District, 3,400 of them decided there was not enough reason to bother.

—–

This post originally appeared at Campaign for America’s Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture. I am a Fellow with CAF. Sign up here for the CAF daily summary

Will Social Security Cuts Be The Democratic Party’s “New Coke?”

All the smartest people in the executive suites just knew that the taste of Coca-Cola needed “reform.” Rival Pepsi was advertising to the “New Generation” and Coke’s executives came to believe their product wasn’t what the “cool” people wanted to drink. Everyone they talked to at the executive-level strategery seminars, and all the other executive-level geniuses they spoke with daily agreed. They were the elites, and they all knew better than their old-fashioned, uncool customers what the company needed. So they all drank the Kool-Aid and came up with “New Coke.” We all know what happened next. (Hint: it was bad.)

It couldn’t have gone better for Pepsi if Pepsi had placed those executives there themselves.

Continue reading

Taxes Aren’t Theft, Tax Cuts For The Wealthy Are Theft

m4s0n501

The Speaker of the House last week said that taxing people to pay for government is theft. Let’s look at just where actual theft is occurring.

Michael McAuliff and Sabrina Siddiqui covered the story at the Huffington Post, in John Boehner Compares Tax Proposals Of White House To Stealing,

We don’t have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem,” Boehner added. “How much more money do we want to steal from the American people to fund more government? I’m for no more.”

Yes, the old “taxes are theft” argument again. This is the line of reasoning that says government is bad, that decision-making by We, the People is bad, that people are “takers” and the wealthy are “producers” and “job creators,” and that the people are lazy and “don’t want to work” and if you let them assemble together and vote they become a mob that will steal everything from the rich who are rich by Divine Right, etc…

Keep in mind that in a democracy We, the People make decisions and government spending by definition is We, the People deciding to do things that make our lives better.

In honor of Speaker Boehner’s argument that taxes are theft, this is from August 2010: (even though the post will say June 12, 2012…)

Tax Cuts Are Theft

Conservatives like to say that taxes are theft. In fact it is tax cuts that are theft because they break a long-standing contract.

The American Social Contract: We, the People built our democracy and the empowerment and protections it bestows. We built the infrastructure, schools and all of the public structures, laws, courts, monetary system, etc. that enable enterprise to prosper. That prosperity is the bounty of our democracy and by contract it is supposed to be shared and reinvested. That is the contract. Our system enables some people to become wealthy but all of us are supposed to benefit from this system. Why else would We, the People have set up this system, if not for the benefit of We, the People?

The American Social Contract is supposed to work like this:

virtual_cycle

A beneficial cycle: We invest in infrastructure and public structures that create the conditions for enterprise to form and prosper. We prepare the ground for business to thrive. When enterprise prospers we share the bounty, with good wages and benefits for the people who work in the businesses and taxes that provide for the general welfare and for reinvestment in the infrastructure and public structures that keep the system going.

We fought hard to develop this system and it worked for us. We, the People fought and built our government to empower and protect us providing social services for the general welfare. We, through our government built up infrastructure and public structures like courts, laws, schools, roads, bridges. That investment creates the conditions that enable commerce to prosper – the bounty of democracy. In return we ask those who benefit most from the enterprise we enabled to share the return on our investment with all of us – through good wages, benefits and taxes.

But the “Reagan Revolution” broke the contract. Since Reagan the system is working like this:

virtual_cycle_diverted

Since the Reagan Revolution with its tax cuts for the rich, its anti-government policies, and its deregulation of the big corporations our democracy is increasingly defunded (and that was the plan), infrastructure is crumbling, our schools are falling behind, factories and supply chains are being dismantled, those still at work are working longer hours for fewer benefits and falling wages, our pensions are gone, wealth and income are increasing concentrating at the very top, our country is declining.

This is the Reagan Revolution home to roost: the social contract is broken. Instead of providing good wages and benefits and paying taxes to provide for the general welfare and reinvestment in infrastructure and public structures, the bounty of our democracy is being diverted to a wealthy few.

… read the rest of Tax Cuts Are Theft

Also see see Tax Cuts Are Theft: An Amplification by Sara Robinson.

And while you are at it here are some other posts in the Reagan Revolution Home To Roost series:

Reagan Revolution Home To Roost — In Charts
Reagan Revolution Home To Roost: America Drowning In Debt
Reagan Revolution Home To Roost: America Is Crumbling
Finance, Mine, Oil & Debt Disasters: THIS Is Deregulation

See the Reagan Revolution Home To Roost series.

This post originally appeared at Campaign for America’s Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture. I am a Fellow with CAF. Sign up here for the CAF daily summary

A Million On The Mall: Our President’s Progressive Pivot-Point?

Before the election reporters and pundits were saying that not so many people would turn out this time, that it would be close at best. But on election day it turned out that it wasn’t even close. The people did turn out, some waiting in lines four, five, six hours to vote, many using provisional ballots because their states were trying to stop them. We, the People had a clear choice in front of us and We, the People made a clear choice.

Then, immediately after the election the “Very Serious People” tried to force through continued tax breaks for the wealthy paid for by cuts in the things the American people do to make each other’s lives better. People got involved and organized and it didn’t work out quite the way the one-percenters and their Very Serious spokespeople wanted it to work out.

For President Obama’s second inaugural the reporters were saying that not so many people would show up on the Mall this time. (“Assignment editor” Drudge had that up so that’s what much of the career media were repeating.) But from the inauguration stage at the Capitol Barack Obama looked out and saw as many as a million people on the National Mall cheering him on. People did show up.

Continue reading

Stopping People From Voting? Seriously, Why Do We Put Up With This For One Minute?

More than 50 years since the Civil Rights Movement and conservatives are still fighting to keep “the wrong kind of people” from voting. A 97-year-old in Georgia — who has voted in every single election since she was old enough to vote — is denied her right to vote. Florida is making citizens stand in line 4,5,6 hours to vote. Why are we putting up with this for one minute? Why isn’t our government sending the US Army into these states that are trying to stop “the wrong kind of people” from voting?

This Was Settled!

This country already settled this: you can’t keep people from voting! In the 1950s and 1960s conservatives tried to keep “the wrong kind of people” from voting and going to school. As a country we did something about it. We stopped putting up with it and ordered the army to push the conservatives aside and let people into the schools and voting booths.
In 1957 a Republican president sent the US Army into Little Rock to escort nine of “the wrong kind of” students into a school:

President Kennedy federalized the Alabama National Guard after George Wallace blocked the schoolhouse door to prevent “the wrong kind of people” from entering:

Once again conservatives are trying to keep “the wrong kind of people” from fully participating in the rights and privileges that we are all entitled to as citizens. (They really hate the idea that as citizens We, the People are “entitled” to certain things. We all are ENTITLED to share in the fruits of democracy — that is what an “entitlement” is!)

Georgia Blocking Voters

Georgia is one of those states that has found a way to keep lots of “the wrong kind of people” from voting. They have imposed “Voter-ID” laws that are designed to keep lots of the elderly, minorities and students from being able to vote.
For just one example of how this has made it difficult for “the wrong kind of people” to vote, read Peggy’s story: The cruel cynicism of the voter ID crusade

Which brings us to the story of 97-year-old Peggy Cobb of Sandy Springs … Peggy has voted in every presidential election since she was eligible, and most if not all others, too. …
She has a Fulton County voter registration card and has voted in every election when she’s been here. Her expired Indiana driver’s license used to be enough ID at the polling booth. No more.

The story describes the obstacles she encountered trying to get the right ID to vote… most people would be forced to give up — which is exactly the intent because she is “the wrong kind of person.”

Florida Blocking Voters

Florida is one state making “the wrong kind of people” wait 4,5,6 hours in line to vote. People who work, the elderly and the simply fed up can’t or won’t do that so they don’t, and that is the intent. Florida cut early voting time in half — because 2008 showed that it made it too easy for “the wrong kind of people to vote” — for the wrong kind of people. The effect is that minorities, students and elderly people find it difficult or impossible to vote. Amanda Terkel at Huffington Post reports, in Florida Early Voting Fiasco: Voters Wait For Hours At Polls As Rick Scott Refuses To Budge.

While many Democrats viewed it as a victory when a few offices opened absentee balloting on Sunday, the process is not the same as early voting — and could result in more individuals not having their votes counted.
“Absentee ballots have a much higher rejection rate for minorities and young people, if you look at the Aug. 14 primary,” said Smith.
A major reason there are so many problems at the polls is that last year, Florida’s GOP-controlled legislature shortened the number of early voting days from 14 to eight, meaning all early voters are trying to cast their ballots in a shorter window. …
… Smith said that he and Dartmouth professor Michael Herron found that in 2008, voters 65 or older were much more likely to cast ballots in the first five days of early voting than members of other age groups, alleviating some of the pressure at the polls in the remaining days. Those extra days, however, are gone this year, leading to a compression that the system has been unable to handle.

Other States Blocking Voters

Conservatives in state after state have set up barriers to keep “the wrong kind of people” from voting. Pennsylvania conservatives tried to implement a restrictive voter-ID law to keep “the wrwong kind of people” from voting. Several other states have implemented them. Ohio — already famous for putting lots of voting machines in conservative areas and few in the areas where “the wrong kind of people” vote — threw up barrier after barrier to voting including attempts to cut early voting hours.
Now Ohio will even throw out your provisional ballot if you write down that a drivers license was your ID when it was really some other valid ID!!! And the provisional ballot is set up to trick voters into doing that! Groups file emergency motion over last-minute move that could toss Ohio provisional ballots,

Husted’s order requires poll workers to not count provisional ballots where voters make any errors in filling out their provisional ballot and affirmation, including the part of the form detailing what forms of identification they are presenting in order to vote. The problem: Ohio law states that filling out the ID portion of the form is the responsibility of poll workers, not voters.
… Husted changed the voter affirmation form, moving the portion where the ID information is entered above the signature line, despite the fact that by Ohio statute, it is supposed to be below the voter’s signature, in the section of the form to be filled out by a poll worker.

This is just blatantly trying to keep citizens from voting because they are “the wrong kind of people.” We just should not put up with this for even one minute. Why isn’t Husted in jail?

Where Is Our Government?

Conservatives who run several states are trying to keep “the wrong kind of people” from voting for “the wrong kind of people.” Where is our Federal government? Why are they allowing this? Why are they not sending the Justice Department to force those states to let people vote? Why are they not sending the US Army into those states that are trying to keep people from voting, so American citizens can vote?
I am getting fed up with accommodating these bigoted conservatives, just because they are backed by billionaires and giant corporations this time around. We are theoretically a country of laws. I mean, unless you’re a banker.
This post originally appeared at Campaign for America’s Future (CAF) at their Blog for OurFuture. I am a Fellow with CAF.
Sign up here for the CAF daily summary

Debate – Obama Won

Obama clearly won. Clearly.
Romney got of several lies that were not refuted, but several that did get refuted. After a while Romney was left just repeating his memorized script — 4 times? Am I right that it was 4 times?
I wonder, is that ALL Romney has – just lying?
I saw Van Jones on CNN holding up an Etch-a-Sketch.
FYI – Obama never said that unemployment would be 5.4% by now. Romney repeated that lie … how many time?

Gas Price Rise Not Due To Election

We are assured by very serious people that the incredible rise in gas prices just before an election in which the oil companies hate one candidate, whose prospects are diminished by high gas prices, and love the other candidate,, whose prospects are improved by high gas prices, has absolutely nothing to do with the election. Nothing at all. Hey look over there.

It’s A Winner!

#1 Seeing the Forest: Election Prediction,

Here is my election prediction.
In November we are all going to be in shock that the Republicans would do that, go that far, do such things, let it get to that point. We simply aren’t going to believe that that could have happened in this country, this world, this day and age. All of us.

#1 And another,

Gasoline prices are about to start climbing, and will continue to climb through the summer, and well into the fall. No one will be able to pin down exactly why.

Heh.