Tag: paul lepage
Refusing To Back Abortion Rights Bill, Collins Shows True Colors At Last

Refusing To Back Abortion Rights Bill, Collins Shows True Colors At Last

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) is under mounting criticism for refusing to support a Democratic bill that would make access to abortion the law of the land, as the U.S. Supreme Court, experts believe, prepares to reverse its historic 1973 ruling in Roe v. Wade.

Senator Collins, who repeatedly claims to be pro-choice, is being criticized after years of supporting then-President Donald Trump's judicial nominees at every level of the federal judiciary, including two of his three Supreme Court picks.

Read NowShow less
Brutal Austerity Is Coming To A Statehouse Near You

Brutal Austerity Is Coming To A Statehouse Near You

Reprinted with permission from AlterNet.

The incoming Trump administration understandably frightens liberals, but right-wing successes at a state level would have moved forward regardless of who won the election. Only four states currently have a Democratic governor and a Democratic state legislature. What’s more, bipartisan support for policies of austerity and neoliberalism have led to vast social spending cuts across the country regardless of political affiliation.

Here are five proposed budget cuts that should have progressives up in arms.

1. Maine’s Tea Party Governor Wants to Kick Thousand of People Off Medicaid and Block a Tax Increase for the State’s Richest Citizens: Maine’s Question 2 vote was hailed by many as one of election day’s only progressive victories. Maine voters approved a ballot initiative that would tax Maine residents making more than $200,000 an extra 3% a year and put the money toward the state’s education budget.

The question was vigorously opposed by Paul LePage, Maine’s infamous right-wing governor, and his new budget looks to retroactively defeat the measure despite the fact it was approved by voters. LePage’s new budget would delay the implementation of Question 2, while working in reductions to the state’s income tax. In the end, Maine’s education funding would be financed by the state’s highest and lowest earners, a complete change from what citizens actually voted for.

LePage’s budget would also cut eligibility for MaineCare, the state’s Medicaid program for parents who are able to work and who currently earn over 40 percent than the federal poverty level. This would knock 19,000 people off of a Medicaid, in addition to the 40,000 LePage has already removed from the program.

2. Texas Is Cutting Disabled Kids’ Therapy Service: Texas’ GOP-controlled state legislature recently cut its Medicaid program by $350 million. Critics warn that the cuts could be particularly devastating for disabled children in the state, as it drastically reduces the amount of money paid toward therapists who assist vulnerable kids.

A group of citizens attempted to block the cuts through a lawsuit, but the Texas Supreme Court refused to hear the case. Stephanie Rubin, CEO of an advocacy group called Texans Care for Children, sent the Texas Tribune an email about the potential impact of the cuts:

“This is terrible news for Texas kids with disabilities and developmental delays and their families. Kids with autism, speech delays, Down syndrome, and other disabilities and delays rely on these therapies to learn to walk, communicate with their families, get ready for school, and meet other goals.”

3. Massachusetts Is Cutting $12 Million in Education: Massachusetts has a reputation as the bluest of blue states, but its governor is Republican businessman Charlie Baker. In December, Baker announced $98 million in budget cuts, with education taking a $12 million hit. Massachusetts’ legislature voted to override many of these same cuts last summer, but the Baker administration has unilaterally made them all over again. The budget for a program designed to help immigrant students learn English skills was cut in half.

4. Connecticut Is Cutting $50 Million in School and Municipal Funding: Connecticut has a Democratic governor in Dannel Malloy, but he has been taken to task by local progressives for doubling down on policies of austerity. The latest dustup revolves around $50 million in new cuts, including a $20 million reduction in education spending. Mark Boughton, the mayor of Danbury, tells the Hartford Courant: “This is really horrible timing. Education is one of the most important things we do. I was shocked to see that. I’m going to have to tell our school superintendent he’s going to have to cut $250,000 or start laying people off.”

The Courant points out that the cuts primarily impact the state’s wealthiest areas, but it also quotes Greenwich First Selectman Peter Tesei, who argues that this fact is deceptive. “What’s going on is a redistribution of the burden,” says Tesei, “The perception of Greenwich is that it’s a super-affluent community. And yes, there’s affluence, but there’s also citizens living at or below state poverty levels.”

5. New Mexico Is Cutting Take-Home Pay For State Workers and Teachers: New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez doesn’t want to raise taxes so she’s finding other ways to cut spending. The state has already cut millions of dollars from its budget over recent months, but Martinez wants to reduce the amount of money the state contributes to the retirement plans of teachers and state workers.

Democrats retake control of New Mexico’s House this year, so many expect a battle to ensue with Dems arguing for an alternative approach of raised taxes. NMPolitics.net quotes Rachel Minnaar, a teaching assistant in Albuquerque, who is deeply concerned about the proposal. “TAs get next to nothing and most have second or even third jobs,” she said, “We can’t afford to lower wages unless we want to put people out on the streets or make them completely reliant on social programs and welfare.”

Michael Arria is an associate editor at AlterNet and AlterNet’s labor editor. Follow @MichaelArria on Twitter.

IMAGE:  MattGagnon via Wikimedia Commons

Disenfranchisement Today: Don’t Gloat While Suppressing The Vote

Disenfranchisement Today: Don’t Gloat While Suppressing The Vote

Today marks the first Presidential election since the Supreme Court struck down two key elements of the Voting Rights Act in Shelby County v. Holder. The Voting Rights Act — which was developed in the 1960s to protect the sanctity of electoral privileges — included a coverage formula that subjected states and counties with a history of voter disenfranchisement to federal oversight. In addition to Section 4(b)’s coverage formula, Section 5 stipulated that states and counties under federal auspices were required to receive federal preclearance to any proposed changes.

Although the Voting Rights Act was created to protect citizens’ constitutional rights to “equal protection of the law” and from having their rights “denied or abridged,” the provisions of the Voting Rights Act were applied to states that demonstrated voter discrimination based on 1960s and 70s standards. In Shelby v. Holder, Shelby County, Alabama, argued that the historical basis for the uneven application constituted outdated oversight in violation of the 10th Amendment.

In 2013, the Supreme Court declared the coverage formula and pre-clearance requirements outdated remedies, and held that the uneven oversight was unconstitutional. Thanks to Shelby v. Holder, states are in control over their own electoral affairs, adopting legislation without justification.

Perhaps, ironically, although the Court’s decision suggested that states did the time for their crimes and that it was time to move forward, we are witnessing a dissolution of our progressive values through the implementation of vituperative voting policies.

In its report, “Why Is It So Hard to Vote in America?,” the Brennan Center parsed the ways that the Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby v. Holder could affect the 2016 presidential election, and identified the truly ostensible nature of voter disenfranchisement.

The Brennan Center study juxtaposed subjective measures of electoral freedom with current conditions to highlight the disparity. By polling 1006 Americans over the age of 18, researcher Craig Newmark  showed the dichotomy between our perception of freedom, and the movements to underpin it.

Since 2010, 21 states have adopted restrictive regulations — which can manifest in the form of Voter Identification laws, closed primaries, and limited early voting — to suppress voter turnout. The draconian developments largely affect minority populations, particularly Hispanics and African-Americans. As a result, the many successful efforts to mobilize the Latino vote in the 2016 election are mired by the fact that 8 out of 12 states with the largest Hispanic populations have adopted restrictive measures to complicate the procedures.

The Brennan Center found that, in total, 16 million American voters will be affected by voter suppression efforts; the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officers (NALEO), determined that 875,000 of disenfranchised voters will be of Latino/a descent.

Today, we are witnessing the greatest setback to voting rights in 50 years, as millions of Americans are actively deprived of their constitutional right to vote.

In GOP vice presidential nominee Mike Pence’s home state of Indiana, State Police are investigating two alleged instances of voter fraud. The first claim accuses the Democratic Party of disseminating false information about polling places in a deliberate attempt to mislead voters. Although the State Democratic Party has attributed the erroneous information to technical error, the State Police are also investigating another Democratic group for claiming that voters can cast their ballot by text.

In Virginia — which boasts lenient open carry laws — a “Trump Election Observer” was spotted standing outside a polling station with a gun. The unidentified man, who donned a Trump t-shirt and a legal gun permit, was reported for using electoral coercion to discourage votes for “Crooked Hillary.” Despite claims of voter intimidation and threat to child safety, Virginian authorities determined that the man’s actions were not “illegal” per se because his cordiality paired with his respect for both Virginia’s open carrying laws and the 40-feet-no-canvassing zone did not constitute a legal violation.

In Maine, Republican Governor, Paul LePage, stands accused of disseminating fake fliers on the Bates College Campus in an attempt at voter discouragement. The signs from the Bates Election Legal Advisory featured false information that claimed voter eligibility was contingent on driver’s license and vehicle payments. In addition to discouraging voters with the prospects of exorbitant fines for non-compliance, the Governor proclaimed that students could only vote upon establishing permanent residency in Maine. The Governor’s erroneous application of the law was compounded by threats to pursue violations with every extent of the law.

In North Carolina, GOP officials stand accused of active minority voter suppression. Although the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals  overturned parts of the HB-589 law that allowed race-based voter information requests, banned early voting, and implemented strict voter ID laws, the GOP found legal loopholes to actively suppress the minority vote. Republican controlled Board of Elections conformed to the minimum legal requirements by opening one polling place for early voting. The “one-stop-shop” for early voting resulted in long-lines, and many voters without the ability to stand in line were left behind. In addition to the HB-589 legal loophole, North Carolina legislatures in three counties invalidated thousands of ballots based on an antediluvian law that allows individual voters to challenge one another based on returned mail. It is no surprise that these areas are home to the state’s largest African-American communities, but it is quite shocking that the GOP officials have actively bragged about their successful voter suppression efforts.

In addition to individual state voter suppression efforts, the Department of Justice is currently responding to numerous claims of voter coercion and suppression from the Donald Trump campaign.

In five states — including swing states Ohio, and Pennsylvania — Presidential candidate, Donald Trump, and his supporters are facing federal lawsuits for alleged coercion and minority voter suppression. In addition to citing inflammatory statements from various “Trump rallies,” the plaintiffs corroborate their case by mentioning the campaign’s commission of the vigilante group “Trump Election Observers.”

In the wake of Shelby v. Holder, the Department of Justice was left virtually powerless to condemn state judicial decisions that ruled in Trump’s favor. Acknowledging the complaints, however, the Department of Justice responded to accusations against the Trump campaign by deploying over 500 election monitors to protect polling places in 28 states.

The Department of Justice deployment constitutes an interesting compromise between the “outdated” provisions of the Voting Rights Act, and the current demand for oversight. The Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby v. Holder suggested that the states had reached an equalizing point, which justified the judicial drawback.

In Shelby v. Holder, the states claimed that the unnecessary compromised the delicate balance between federal and state powers in the 10th Amendment. Given the Court’s decision in Shelby County, it appears that the federal intervention constitutes a violation of federal and state separation; however, the state’s vituperation and flagrant violation of the 14th and 15th Amendments constitutes federal involvement vis-a-vis the Necessary and Proper Clause.

The federal intervention and growing demand for national voting laws creates an interesting legal question for Congress, which must adjudicate on the balance between federal and state. The outcome, however, is dependent on the results of today’s election, which features elections for 469 congressional seats.

If the states-rights Republicans win, it is very unlikely that federal pre-clearance will pass; however, if the Democrats win, we could be on the brink of federal action.

IMAGE: Reed Saxon/Associated Press

Maine Governor Mulls Political Future Amid Racism Flap

Maine Governor Mulls Political Future Amid Racism Flap

Combative Maine Governor Paul LePage told a radio host on Tuesday that he was considering not finishing his term in office, amid a wave of criticism after he left a lawmaker a profanity-filled voicemail.

But the two-term, Tea Party-backed Republican governor subsequently appeared to backtrack on the idea, paraphrasing Mark Twain in a tweet that read in part: “The reports of my political demise are greatly exaggerated.”

That message came hours after he told an interviewer on Maine’s WVOM-FM radio that he was “looking at all options,” when asked if he would finish his term, which extends through 2018.

LePage’s latest outburst came in response to a report that state Representative Drew Gattine had described him as racist for focusing on black people as bearing primary responsibility for the drug trade in the state. LePage responded to Gattine with a blistering, profanity-laced voicemail that has been widely circulated.

“I’m not going to say that I’m not going to finish it; I’m not saying that I am going to finish it,” LePage said on Tuesday in the radio interview, in reference to his term in office. “What I’m going to do right now is I’m taking one step at a time. I want to meet with Mr. Gattine and then I want to meet with my team at my office and we’re going to look at what the proper steps are to move the state forward.”

In last week’s voicemail, LePage called Gattine a “little son-of-a-bitch, socialist cocksucker” and encouraged him to share the message publicly “because I am after you.”

A LePage spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request to clarify the governor’s Twain tweet. A spokeswoman for Gattine said he would not comment until after he met LePage on Wednesday.

LePage has repeatedly described himself as a less-than-polished, plain-speaking politician.

“It’s possible it was a screw-up,” said Michael Franz, chairman of the government department at Maine’s Bowdoin College, referring to the radio interview.

“My first inclination is that this is not serious and that he’s just attempting to establish his regret.”

APOLOGY TO MAINE, FAMILIES

LePage, 67, said he had lost his temper when he was told that Gattine had described his views as racist. He told reporters he would like to engage in a duel with Gattine, a remark he later described as metaphoric.

“I just want to apologize to the Maine people, to Gattine’s family and most of all to my family,” LePage said in the 15-minute interview. “And we will take action.”

Some Democratic lawmakers have called for a special session of the legislature to censure LePage, who earlier this year fought off an impeachment effort.

“A half-hearted, partial apology on a radio show does not get remotely close to addressing the core issue: Maine faces serious issues and its government is not functioning,” the state’s Democratic House leadership said in a statement on Tuesday.

State Senate President Michael Thibodeau and other Republican legislative leaders convened a closed-door meeting with LePage late on Monday to discuss his future.

The governor told the group he was going to talk to friends and family about what he would do next and respond to them on Tuesday, said Jim Cyr, a spokesman for Thibodeau.

Controversial outbursts have marked LePage’s six years in office. Earlier this year, he said he did not mean to sound racist when he said drug dealers “with the name D-Money, Smoothie, Shifty” were coming to the state to impregnate “white girls.”

Last week at a news conference LePage compared Maine’s efforts to thwart heroin dealers to war.

“Look, the bad guy is the bad guy,” he said. “I don’t care what color he is … You try to identify the enemy and the enemy right now, the overwhelming majority of people coming in, are people of color or people of Hispanic origin.”

In 2013, he told a television interviewer that a political rival “claims to be for the people but he’s the first one to give it to the people without providing Vaseline.”

(Reporting by Scott Malone; Editing by Bill Trott and Dan Grebler)

 Photo: Maine Governor Paul LePage speaks at the 23rd Annual Energy Trade and Technology Conference in Boston, Massachusetts November 13, 2015. REUTERS/Gretchen Ertl/File Photo