Daily Archives: May 17, 2022

In 2006, Howard Dean, chair of the Democratic National Committee, and Rahm Emanuel, chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, had an expletive-laden shouting match on the steps of the Democratic National Committee.

Emanuel was pleading for more money from Dean to pour into competitive congressional races. That year, Democrats had a unique opportunity to seize control of the House for the first time since 1994. President George W. Bush was unpopular, and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were descending into their respective quagmires.

But Dean had a different idea. Elected on a promise of revitalizing and rebuilding the 50 state Democratic parties, Dean invested funds into state legislative and local races in hard-to-reach red states to the delight of those state party chairs.

On Election Day, Emanuel got his wish of a Democratic-controlled House led by its first woman speaker, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). As for Dean, Barack Obama exercised his presidential prerogative and ousted him from his party chairmanship in 2009.

That long-ago shouting match, together with the release of a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito overturning Roe v. Wade, highlights an important difference between how Democrats and Republicans think. The Alito draft, if it stands, represents the culmination of a decades-long charge by Republicans to overturn Roe.

Beginning in 1980, the Republican Party adopted a pro-life plank in its platform. This was the beginning of a decades-long quest. In 1982, the Federalist Society was established. Its purpose was to return to an originalist interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, a view that had no room for rights, including abortion, not specifically enumerated in the document. Replacing the American Bar Associations gold standard endorsement by which prospective judges once were measured, the Federalist Society became an essential seal of approval that Republican presidents needed when it came to nominating federal judges. Lists of prospective candidates were drawn up by the society, and the organization achieved its goal by not only supporting the current Supreme Court justices nominated by Republican presidents but adding hundreds of its approved judges to the federal courts.

During his term as president, President Trump slavishly adhered to the lists submitted by the Federalist Societys president, Leonard Leo. Leo told others it was easy to come up with names for Trump because there were decades of conservative lawyers in the pipeline. Of the six names that Leo submitted to Trump, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett made the cut. Taking pride in his ability to confirm these judges, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)says, If you prefer America right of center, which I do, and youre looking around at what you can do to have the longest possible impact on the kind of America you want, it seems to me you look at the courts. While McConnell boasts about his judicial confirmation record, he would be the first to acknowledge that he had plenty of help.

Democrats think very differently. Instead of planning for the long term, Democrats think in the moment. Once the Alito decision was leaked, the outrage was palpable. Outside the Supreme Court, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) shouted, I am angry because we have reached the culmination of what Republicans have been fighting for, angling for, for decades now! Her colleague Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.) said she was pissed.

Demonstrations erupted outside the homes of Supreme Court justices, and spontaneous marches were held in cities around the nation. Standing in front of a Planned Parenthood office, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) captured the anger of his fellow Democrats: Wheres the Democratic Party? Why arent we standing up more firmly, more resolutely? Why arent we calling this out? This is a coordinated, concerted effort. And yes, theyre winning. They are. They have been. Lets acknowledge that. We need to stand up. Wheres the counteroffensive?

That counteroffensive is lacking because Democrats, unlike Republicans, have not built the organizations needed for long-term victories. The Federalist Society is only one example of how Republicans have constructed apparatuses designed to reshape American life in the long term, even if the immediate results were not apparent. Besides the Federalist Society, in 1992 the Susan B. Anthony List was formed. Following the victories of several female Democratic senators and Bill Clinton that year, this organization was established with the purpose of electing more pro-life Republican women into office.

Another example of long-term Republican thinking is the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Formed in 1973, ALEC describes itself as dedicated to the principles of limited government, free markets, and federalism. ALEC writes proposed bills and encourages conservative state legislators to copy their formulaic texts and push for their enactment. Should the issue of abortion be referred to the state legislatures for adjudication, expect ALEC to write bills strictly limiting abortion with the goal of having it adopted in as many states as possible.

Until Democrats start thinking long-term, they will be reduced to being a party prone to primal screams and symbolic votes, while Republicans accomplish goals they have spent decades working assiduously to achieve.

John Kenneth White is a professor of politics at the Catholic University of America. His latest book is titled What Happened to the Republican Party?

Here is the original post:

Democrats think in the moment. Republicans think in decades - The Hill

On Monday night, several left-leaning congressional candidates joined an emergency organizing call with activists reeling from a draft Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade. A somber Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, opening the discussion, acknowledged that Democrats held control in Washington but were nonetheless in an uphill battle for change.

The moment, she said, demanded leaders who know how to get in the fight and who know how to win.

Tensions over how to execute on both of those ambitions pushing effectively for change, while winning elections are now animating Democratic primaries from Pennsylvania to Texas to Oregon, as Democrats barrel into an intense new season of intraparty battles.

For the first months of 2022, Republican primaries have dominated the political landscape, emerging as key measures of former President Donald J. Trumps sway over his partys base. But the coming weeks will also offer a window into the mood of Democratic voters who are alarmed by threats to abortion rights, frustrated by gridlock in Washington and deeply worried about a challenging midterm campaign environment.

Some contests are shaped by policy debates over issues like climate and crime. House primaries have been deluged with money from a constellation of groups, including those with ties to cryptocurrency and pro-Israel advocacy, sometimes resulting in backlash. And in races that could be consequential in the general election, national party leaders have openly taken sides, turning some House primaries into proxy battles over the direction of the party.

Tuesday nights Democratic House primary in the Omaha area attracted less of that national fervor, but it may lay the groundwork for a competitive general election. Representative Don Bacon, a Republican representing a district President Biden won, defeated a vocally left-leaning Democratic contender in 2018 and 2020.

Democrats hope to make inroads there this year despite a brutal national climate, and on Tuesday nominated State Senator Tony Vargas, who has emphasized his governing experience and background as the son of immigrants.

Jane Kleeb, the chairwoman of Nebraskas Democratic Party, said that recent primary contests had been shaped above all by moderate-versus-progressive divisions. This time around, she said, voters appeared focused much less on ideological labels and much more on policy proposals and electoral viability. Its a reflection of the urgent concerns held by many Democratic voters around the country who, above all else, worry that their party will lose its congressional majorities in Washington.

There is a less ideological mood I think that Democrats, especially in our state, feel like were fighting for every office we can get, she said. People want to win, but I also think the word progressive is not enough. Voters are really wanting to know what the candidate stands for and what theyre going to do when they get into office.

Beginning next Tuesday, the Democratic primary season accelerates, headlined by the marquee Senate Democratic primary in Pennsylvania. Lt. Gov. John Fetterman has consistently led sparse public polling against Representative Conor Lamb of suburban Pittsburgh and State Representative Malcolm Kenyatta of Philadelphia.

The race, in one of the few states where Democrats have a solid chance of picking up a Senate seat, has focused heavily on what it will take to win the general election. Mr. Fetterman promises to improve Democratic standing in rural Trump territory, while Mr. Lamb, a polished Marine veteran, often cites his record of winning in a challenging House district.

That theme has echoed in a handful of upcoming House primaries, highlighting fierce Democratic disagreements over what the partys candidates need to do or show to win this November.

In Oregon, Representative Kurt Schrader, the well-funded chair of the centrist Blue Dog Coalitions political arm who has Mr. Bidens endorsement, faces a challenge from Jamie McLeod-Skinner, a small-business owner and emergency response coordinator who ran unsuccessfully for Congress in 2018.

This time, Ms. McLeod-Skinner has amassed considerable support from local institutions, as well as from left-leaning groups including the Working Families Party (which convened the Monday meeting that Ms. Warren addressed).

Several county Democratic Party organizations in Oregon, ordinarily expected to back the incumbent or remain neutral, endorsed Ms. McLeod-Skinner and urged the House Democratic campaign arm, which is supporting Mr. Schrader, to stay out of the primary. Johanna Warshaw, a spokeswoman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, noted that the organizations core mission is to re-elect Democratic members.

Mr. Schraders supporters and some national Democrats believe he has a better shot in a fall election that may be robustly competitive. But Ms. McLeod-Skinners supporters argue that she can galvanize Democratic voters in a year when Republicans have been widely thought to have the edge on enthusiasm.

Democrats should want a candidate who Democrats are enthusiastic about, said Leah Greenberg, the co-founder and co-executive director of the Indivisible Project, a grass-roots group. Citing local frustration, she added, Kurt Schrader is not that candidate.

In a statement, Mr. Schraders spokeswoman, Deb Barnes, said he has a proven ability to bring everyone together rural, urban and suburban to find common ground and deliver wins that make a real difference.

Electability is playing out in a different way in South Texas, where Jessica Cisneros is challenging Representative Henry Cuellar, the most staunchly anti-abortion Democrat in the House, in a district where conservative Democrats have often thrived.

Ms. Cisneros has strong support from national left-leaning leaders, and abortion rights advocates believe that Democratic outrage around that issue will help her in the May 24 runoff and beyond.

Why are these midterms so important? This years races could tip the balance of power in Congress to Republicans, hobbling President Bidens agenda for the second half of his term. They will also test former President Donald J. Trumps role as a G.O.P. kingmaker. Heres what to know:

What are the midterm elections? Midterms take place two years after a presidential election, at the midpoint of a presidential term hence the name. This year, a lot of seats are up for grabs, including all 435 House seats, 35 of the 100 Senate seats and 36 of 50 governorships.

What do the midterms mean for Biden? With slim majorities in Congress, Democrats have struggled to pass Mr. Bidens agenda. Republican control of the House or Senate would make the presidents legislative goals a near-impossibility.

What are the races to watch? Only a handful of seats will determine if Democrats maintain control of the House over Republicans, and a single state could shift power in the 50-50 Senate. Here are 10 races to watch in the Houseand Senate, as well as several key governors contests.

When are the key races taking place? The primary gauntletis already underway. Closely watched racesin Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Georgia will be held in May, with more taking place through the summer. Primaries run until September before the general election on Nov. 8.

Go deeper. What is redistrictingand how does it affect the midterm elections? How does polling work? How do you register to vote? Weve got more answers to your pressing midterm questions here.

When we defeat the anti-choice Democrat, thats going to set the tone for the rest of the midterms, Ms. Cisneros said in a recent interview.

But other national Democrats plainly see Mr. Cuellar as a stronger fit in a more culturally conservative district that may become a heated general-election battleground.

We ought not have a litmus test of who and what makes one a Democrat, said Representative James E. Clyburn, the third-ranking House Democrat, who campaigned with Mr. Cuellar last week.

Still, there are sharp divisions over what it means to be an effective Democrat a dynamic at the heart of high-profile primary battles in recent years, as left-wing contenders defeated several senior incumbents but also faced setbacks, as in Ohio, where Representative Shontel Brown won a rematch against former State Senator Nina Turner.

Next Tuesday kicks off a fresh series of tests concerning what kinds of candidates can excite or reassure Democratic voters at a perilous moment for their party.

In 2018 and 2020 they were rebelling against an establishment that lost to Trump, said Sean McElwee, the founding executive director of Data for Progress, a liberal policy and polling organization. Now they want people who will pass Bidens agenda and hold swing seats, and progressives need to make the case that they are the best chance to do that.

In Pennsylvania, a House primary for the seat around Pittsburgh being vacated by Representative Mike Doyle, who is retiring, will vividly test that argument. An attorney and former head of the Pennsylvania Securities Commission, Steve Irwin, has amassed the support of much of the party establishment, while Senator Bernie Sanders and Mayor Ed Gainey of Pittsburgh are expected to campaign this week with State Representative Summer Lee, who joined the Monday call with Ms. Warren. Jerry Dickinson, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh, is also among those vying for the nomination.

In North Carolina, former State Senator Erica Smith and Durham County Commissioner Nida Allam also participated in the Working Families Party call. Ms. Smith, running in the First District, is vying to succeed Representative G.K. Butterfield, who endorsed State Senator Don Davis. Ms. Allam is facing off against opponents including State Senator Valerie Foushee and Clay Aiken, the former American Idol contestant, in the Fourth District. There is also a primary in the states newly drawn 13th District, which may be competitive in the general election.

In Kentuckys primary next Tuesday, State Representative Attica Scott, a vocal leader of the police accountability movement in Louisville, is running to the left of Senate Minority Leader Morgan McGarvey in the race to succeed Representative John Yarmuth.

And in the coming weeks, several incumbent House members will face contested primary elections, while the Los Angeles mayoral primary and the recall vote against San Franciscos district attorney, both on June 7, will gauge the attitudes of typically liberal Californians on issues of crime and homelessness.

Mr. Sanders, who has endorsed in several upcoming primaries, cast the moment as a struggle about whether the Democratic Party is a party of working families or one of wealthy campaign contributors.

But he also offered a grave warning for his party that has implications well beyond primary season.

Because Democrats have so far failed to pass major pieces of their agenda, he said, There is now a great deal of demoralization among working people, whether theyre Black or white or Latino or Native American, whatever. And I fear very much that the voter turnout for Democrats will not be very high.

Go here to see the original:

In an Uphill Year, Democrats of All Stripes Worry About Electability - The New York Times

Former President Trump said in an interview published Tuesday that he has been told Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) is worse than any Democrat serving on the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

Trump told The Washington Post that he has been informed by unnamed congressmen that Cheney, one of only two GOP lawmakers serving on the Jan. 6 panel, is a crazed lunatic.

From what people tell me, from what I hear from other congressmen, shes like a crazed lunatic, shes worse than anyone else, Trump said. From what Ive heard, shes worse than any Democrat.

Trump told the Post that he perceives Cheney as a larger opponent than Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who was the lead impeachment manager during Trumps first impeachment trial and has been the target of the former presidents ire on a number of occasions.

The former president would not say if he will answer questions from the committee or agree to appear for a deposition. He did, however, assert a number of times that he requested that the military be prepared prior to the Jan. 6 riot.

Trumps comments came in an article that said Cheney, who was ousted from House GOP leadership last year for refusing to support his unproven claims that the election was stolen, has been more aggressive in wanting the panel to target the former president.

The reporting comes less than a month before the panel is set to hold the first of eight public hearings that will present the its findings after holding more than 1,000 interviews and obtaining thousands of documents.

The panel made headlines last week when it issued subpoenas to five sitting Republican members of the House, including Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (Calif.).

None of the five members have said if they will comply with the probe.

Some individuals close to the former president, however, have met with the committee, including Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner and Kimberly Guilfoyle, Trump Jr.s fiancee, who spoke at the rally in Washington that occurred just before the Capitol attack.

Read more here:

Trump says hes been told Cheney worse than any Democrat on Jan. 6 panel - The Hill

The battle lines are not always neatly ideological the biggest-spending group is Protect Our Future, a super PAC backed almost entirely by crypto billionaire Sam Bankman-Fried, which has endorsed candidates from both wings of the party. But the high-spending primaries often split Democrats between self-styled progressives and moderates.

If you want to be an effective political operation in 2022 and push your preferred goals in the party, J Street spokesperson Logan Bayroff said, you have to be looking at spending on independent expenditures jargon that describes outside spending in political races. J Street, a liberal pro-Israel advocacy group, launched its own outside spending unit for the first time this year and is backing a trio of progressive candidates in primaries.

The money is coming in really hard, really fast, Bayroff added.

The explosion in cash coincides with a redistricting year thats creating entirely new seats and wide-open primaries to fill them along with a 30-year high in retirements among sitting House Democrats. These open seats, especially deep-blue ones, offer up a shot to a candidate and interested outside groups to hold a congressional seat for decades.

At this point in the 2018 primary cycle, $5.7 million had been spent on TV ads in Democratic House primaries, and in 2020, $10.4 million was spent from early January through early May. So far this year, theres been $25.8 million spent on TV ads in Democratic House primaries, according to AdImpact, a TV ad-tracking firm.

Theres far, far more spending than weve ever seen before and thats for two reasons, said Mark Mellman, a Democratic pollster who is working with the Democratic Majority for Israel super PAC, which has dropped cash backing candidates in Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Texas. One, because the number of competitive districts has declined dramatically, most members are now selected in primaries, so primaries become more important. Second, people looked at Ohios 11th special [in 2021] and said, its possible to intervene and really make a difference.

Nina Turner speaking with supporters near the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections before casting her vote in Cleveland, July 7, 2021.|Phil Long/AP Photo

DMFI spent about $2 million in that primary to defeat Nina Turner, a Bernie Sanders-backed candidate, and boost now-Rep. Shontel Brown (D-Ohio). The group repeated that effort earlier this year, helping to reelect Brown.

Its a sea change in Democratic primaries, Mellman added.

Progressives, meanwhile, say the surge in spending is a response to their own growing influence on the party, prompting big-money moderate efforts to keep them down.

Our movement is very sophisticated, very coordinated, gaining traction, gaining momentum, and this cycle is awash with cash because theyre trying to stunt that momentum, said Maurice Mitchell, national director of the Working Families Party, which is spending money on seven House primaries so far.

Theres a very live debate inside of the Democratic Party caucus about the direction of this coalition, he continued. Were experiencing the height of that debate in House primaries.

Still, the biggest spender in these primaries doesnt come from one of the defined wings of the party at all. Protect Our Future, the Bankman-Fried-funded super PAC, is boosting a range of candidates from $1 million on Working Families Party-endorsed Jasmine Crockett in Texas to $2 million for the moderate Brown in Ohio.

The groups stated public goal is to back candidates that will focus on pandemic preparedness. But Democratic operatives of all ideological stripes have raised questions about the purpose of the cash, especially as the cryptocurrency industry faces the prospect of new federal regulations coming out of Congress.

Once everyones taken their money, its harder to oppose them, said one progressive operative, granted anonymity to speak candidly about the issue.

In a statement, Protect Our Future president Michael Sadowsky said that the group is putting its support behind a bench of lawmakers who we believe will be vocal advocates in Congress for pandemic prevention. Sadowsky said the factors the group considers in its endorsement process include voting history, policy platforms, viability as a candidate.

Its largest and most controversial expenditure is in a newly drawn seat in Oregon, where Protect Our Future is spending $13 million to boost Carrick Flynn, an academic researcher focused on pandemic preparedness. But Flynn, a white first-time candidate, is running against a Democratic field with several candidates of color, including state Rep. Andrea Salinas, who has been endorsed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. The groups intervention has enraged a number of local and national Democrats.

Another newcomer to the Democratic primary scene is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, known as AIPAC, which has waded into direct spending for candidates for the first time in this election. Through its super PAC, United Democracy Project, the group has dropped millions of dollars boosting endorsed candidates and attacking progressives in those primaries. Last week, no other super PAC spent more on congressional TV ads, according to AdImpact.

AIPAC is facing off against progressive candidates in North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Texas, who have criticized the group for spending in Democratic primaries while also as Sanders said in Pittsburgh last week endorsing over 100 Republicans, including many who even refuse to acknowledge that Joe Biden won the election. The Vermont independent charged AIPAC with hypocrisy at a rally for House candidate Summer Lee.

AIPAC spokesperson Marshall Wittmann noted the group has made contributions to 120 House Democrats and said in a statement that AIPAC backs members of both parties, as it requires bipartisan support in Congress to adopt legislation that would advance [U.S.-Israel] relationship.

Rob Bassin, CEO of United Democracy Project, cited several factors driving its spending: High rates of retirements, escalating costs of campaigns and hyper-partisanship, including a small group of members of Congress elected in the last several cycles who are out of the mainstream of the Democratic Party on the issue of U.S.-Israel relations. Bassin cited members like Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.). This is an evolution of the campaign finance environment.

In North Carolina, the AIPAC super PAC is spending at least $1.3 million on TV ads in an open seat to replace retiring Rep. David Price (D-N.C.), boosting state Sen. Valerie Foushee. Shes facing off against former American Idol singer Clay Aiken and Durham County Commissioner Nida Allam, a 28-year-old Pakistani American who has the backing from local progressive groups, the Working Families Party and Sanders.

Read the original:

Where megadonors are spending big money to shape the Democratic Party's future - POLITICO

Sign up for The Brief, our daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Rochelle Garza locked hands with her mother and marched through Dallas at a reproductive rights rally this month to let voters know she could lead the fight for abortion care.

Our mothers fought before and won. Now, its our turn to continue the fight and win for OUR daughters and everyones access to abortion care, Garza wrote to her base on Twitter after the rally.

Reproductive care has always been central to Garzas campaign as she vies to be the Democratic nominee for the Texas attorney general race in November. But with the recent leak of a U.S. Supreme Court draft opinion suggesting that the constitutional protection on abortion established in Roe v. Wade might soon come to an end, both Garza and Joe Jaworski, her opponent for the Democratic nomination in a May 24 primary runoff, are pitching themselves as the last line of defense for access to reproductive care in Texas.

Really the last stand for reproductive rights are the attorney general of each state, Garza told The Texas Tribune in an interview. So now more than ever, having an attorney general in the state of Texas is going to be critical to protecting reproductive rights.

Garza is a former American Civil Liberties Union lawyer from Brownsville. Jaworski is the former mayor of Galveston. Early voting began Monday and ends Friday.

The winner will face the victor of the Republican primary runoff in the general election either Ken Paxton, the incumbent attorney general, or Texas Land Commissioner George P. Bush. Paxton is the frontrunner in that race, clinching twice as many votes as Bush in the primaries and the support of former President Donald Trump.

Garza emerged from the crowded March primary with 43% of the vote among Democratic voters. Jaworski came in second place with 20%. Garza has since earned the support of the candidates she beat out, civil rights attorney Lee Merritt and Michael R. Fields, a former judge in Harris County.

Primary runoff elections have historically had low voter turnout rates, and among those who usually show up to vote are progressive Democrats who will likely cast ballots for Garza, said Cal Jillson, a political scientist at Southern Methodist University.

As abortion takes center stage in the attorney general race, political analysts like Jillson say this is a chance for Garza to build off her existing momentum.

She is the frontrunner and has a number of advantages, some of which she had before the Roe v. Wade document leak and some that she now has as a result of it, Jillson said.

Although they have never faced off in the ballot, Garza and Paxton have been on opposite sides of an abortion case. Garza made a name for herself in 2017 when she sued the Trump administration, seeking access to an abortion for an undocumented teenager held in detention. After a federal appeals court ruled in Garzas favor, Paxton filed a brief in response, arguing that immigrants have no constitutional right to abortion. Garza also testified in 2018 against the Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh, who ruled against the case as an appellate court judge.

The teen was able to obtain an abortion while the case was being litigated. The case was later dismissed after the federal government adopted a new policy under which it would not interfere with immigrant minors access to abortion.

Having this nuanced understanding of what it takes to build a case like that and to fight for someone who the government believes is not powerful thats what I bring to this race and bring to this position, Garza said.

Garza was nine weeks pregnant when the states controversial ban on abortions after about six weeks into a pregnancy went into effect in September. She was worried at the time about her limited reproductive health care options.

Garza, who balanced her newborn daughter in her arms as she spoke to the Tribune, is now arguing shes the right choice to defend reproductive rights in the state.

She also stands a clear favorite among national and state abortion rights advocacy groups, garnering endorsements from EMILYs List, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Planned Parenthood Texas Votes and Avow.

Both Jaworski and Garza have stated they would defend reproductive rights as Texas next attorney general, who can play a major role in the fight over abortion law in courts. The states top lawyer also determines how an abortion ban can be regulated and enforced.

But Jaworski has presented himself as the most experienced candidate. While Garzas run for attorney general will be her first political race, Jaworski is an established local politician. He served three terms on the Galveston City Council and one term as mayor.

And while Garzas reproductive rights bona fides stand on her well-known 2017 case, Jaworski points to his experience as a trial attorney for over 31 years. Jaworski has said he would use federal and state court channels to initiate litigation to preserve reproductive rights under both the U.S. and the Texas constitutions.

Ive actually been to court and been first chair on over 250 civil lawsuits, some of which had huge political implications, Jaworski said. I really appreciate Ms. Garza, a young attorney, to be sure but that sort of practical experience and leadership will come in very handy.

Whoever wins in the runoff, the Democratic nominee will face an uphill battle to beat their Republican opponent. A Democrat has not filled the seat since 1994.

But Paxtons critics from both parties think a slew of controversies over the years have made him a vulnerable candidate and that the time is right to challenge him. He has been indicted since 2015 on felony securities fraud charges and is under FBI investigation over claims he abused his office to help a wealthy donor. Paxton has denied all wrongdoing.

An analysis from the University of Virginia Center for Politics also characterized the attorney general race in Texas as potentially competitive if Paxton is the GOP partys nominee.

Democrats are hopeful that the recent attacks on abortion access will drive Texans across party lines to vote blue in November. Most Texas voters think access to abortion should be allowed in some form, according to a University of Texas at Austin poll conducted in April. Among Republicans, 24% said abortions should never be permitted, and 42% said abortions should be allowed only in cases of rape or incest, or when a persons life is in danger. The majority of Democratic respondents 67% said Texans should be allowed to seek an abortion as a personal choice.

In his two terms as attorney general, Paxton has aggressively fought to restrict abortion access in the state. Paxton fended off challenges to Texas abortion ban, which prohibits the medical procedure after about six weeks into a pregnancy. He has also advocated against using state funds to cover abortions and worked to defund Planned Parenthood.

This issue will be a major headache for AG Paxton, Emily Trifone, a spokesperson for national group Democratic Attorneys General Association, wrote in a statement. Were confident that volunteers and voters are going to work extremely hard this year to beat AG Paxton and his anti-abortion regime.

Disclosure: Planned Parenthood, Southern Methodist University and the University of Texas at Austin have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribunes journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

Tickets are on sale now for the 2022 Texas Tribune Festival, happening in downtown Austin on Sept. 22-24. Get your TribFest tickets by May 31 and save big!

See original here:

With renewed attention on abortion, Democrats in attorney general runoff vow to defend reproductive rights - The Texas Tribune

The vital mission of the Republican-Rightin November 2022 and 24 should be to demolish the Democratic Party and relegate it to the Smithsonian, amid the Whig and Know Nothing parties.

The Democratic Party of JFK, LBJ and even Bill WelfareReform Clinton is long gone.The Democratic Party of JoeBiden, Nancy Pelosi and GavinNewsomhas nothingpositiveto offer and deserves to be voted overwhelmingly into oblivion.

The Democratic Left has become purveyors of poverty, chaos, danger and death.

Nominal wages advanced5.5% year-on-year in April, but last months8.3% inflation (a near 40-year-high) shriveled real wages to negative 2.8%.

Bloomberg reportsthat, compared to 2021, inflation will cost the average US household $5,200 this year, or$100 per week,for the same basket of goods. Bidens five-steps-forward, eight-steps-back economy is making Americans poor again.

Bidens figure does not includean estimated 620,000 got-aways who invaded America withouteven greetingthe Border Patrol.Also,42 foreigners on the terrorist watch list tried to enter the United States during the Biden-Democratic Era, including 23 at the southern border.

Democrats alsosackedcash bail. Criminals rejoiced. Jewayne Price was arrested last month for shooting nine people ina Columbia, SC, shopping mall. He was out on $25,000 bond in mere hours.

As Democratsunleash political violence, Leftist thugs repeatedly have given black eyes and bloody noses to Trump supporters in MAGA hats.

After George Floyds murder, Black Lives Matter and Antifarioters toppledstatues and torched police precincts andhundreds of other buildingsacross America. Democratsrejoiced. Then-Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) raised money tospringthesehoodlumsfromjail. Attorney General Maura Healy (D-Mass.) said,America in on fire, but thats how forests grow.

Democratic lawmakers have rejected bills that would protect babies who, somehow, survive abortions.According to todays Democratic ghouls, mothers should be free tokill their babiesuntil the moment of birth. Republicans and Libertarianshenceforth should composeAmericas two-party system.The Democrats deadly Wokistani socialism should be deported to Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela where it belongs.

Until that happy day, the Republican-Right must perform a priceless public service: Banish the Democratic Party to theNational Museum of American History, where it no longercouldterrorize theAmerican people.Tourists then could marvel at it neutralized, behind glassandbetween Dorothy Gales ruby slippers and Archie Bunkers easy chair.

Deroy Murdock is aManhattan-basedFox News contributor.

Read this article:

Send the Democratic Party into history it's got nothing left to offer America - New York Post

U.S. Supreme Court police stand outside the home of Justice Samuel Alito on Thursday, May 5, 2022, in Alexandria, Va. (AP Photo/Kevin Wolf)

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Jeffrey C. McKay, a Democrat from Virginia on the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, argued in a Washington Post opinion piece on Monday that protesting outside private homes "will almost certainly have the opposite effect" of what the protesters want.

The local Virginia Democrat argued that "the most appropriate venue for this to happen" is "at the public institution where policies are introduced, debated and ultimately agreed to or rejected. This is where we listen and where we act."

PRO-ABORTION PROTESTERS MARCH TO HOMES OF JUSTICES KAVANAUGH AND ROBERTS IN 'VIGIL' FOR ROE V. WADE

Protesters outside Justice Samuel Alito's home (Fox News)

He also noted that public officials know they're public figures who are often in the spotlight and "recognize the responsibilities that come with that."

McKay said that while public officials often make themselves available to their constituents, their private homes are where they spend time with family and recharge.

"I understand the idea that protesters want to bring literally to our doorsteps their anger and frustrations, but I can also tell you from personal and professional experience that will almost certainly have the opposite effect of what they may be seeking," he wrote.

He also looked at the legality of whether the protests outside homes and "whether it is an appropriate or effective tactic."

Pro-choice protesters led marches outside the homes of Justices Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh and Chief Justice Roberts following the leak of a Supreme Court draft opinion, which signaled the court was getting ready to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Pro-abortion protesters outside home of Justice Amy Coney Barrett (Fox News Digital)

He said that it was determined that the Virginia governor's request to establish a "security perimeter" around the houses of the justices was a violation of the fourth amendment after consulting with an attorney and the police department.

PRO-CHOICE GROUP TO TARGET ALL 6 GOP-APPOINTED SCOTUS JUSTICES' HOMES FOR WALK-BY-WEDNESDAY PROTESTS

"Additionally, though a federal statute indicates protests are not legal if the intent is to influence a judiciary decision, a federal law is only enforceable by federal authorities, and they would presumably do so it if they saw fit, yet, to our knowledge, have not," he wrote.

He also said that enforcement of Virginia's law prohibiting picketing at a private residence "would not hold up in court and is likely unconstitutional."

Protesters at the home of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito (Fox News)

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Politico first reported the draft opinion, written by Justice Alito, who signaled the court was getting ready to overturn Roe v. Wade in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization case.

"We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Alito wrote in the draft. "It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the peoples elected representatives."

Read more from the original source:

Virginia Democrat says protests outside of justices' homes 'will almost certainly have the opposite effect' - Fox News

The crew that would come to take over the Democratic Party organized themselves, in the 1980s, around the idea that the party had become discredited among the public because it was in thrall to its more liberal elements. These New Democrats gravitated toward Gary Hart, who unsuccessfully ran for the Democratic Party nomination in 1984, positioned as the candidate of new ideas against Walter Mondale, ostensibly the embodiment of stale Great Society liberalism. Hart, along with allies like Representative Tim Wirth, articulated what Geismer calls larger generational skepticism with large institutions and bureaucracy. In practice, large institutions tended to mean unions and government agencies. The New Democrats were similarly allergic to transactional politics and special interest groups, which Geismer helpfully defines as African Americans, women, white farmers, and, especially, organized labor.

Even by the mid-1980s, Jesse Jackson could correctly note that this definition of special interests happened to define them as the Democratic Partys actual base of support, or, as he put it, members of our family. Hart was notably more popular with white pundits than with Black primary voters. But what the New Democrats truly wanted, and truly believed their policy agenda would win, was the white suburban vote. In the wake of Ronald Reagans reelection, in 1985, the political strategist Al From founded the Democratic Leadership Council, with an inaugural membership of 41 people, including 14 senators and 17 representatives. Of that group, two members were nonwhite, and none were women. The philosophy of the DLC, shaped by early members like From, the political consultant David Osborne, and Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton, was to go after the aspiring middle electorate in suburbia rather than the working class and dispossessed, and to appeal to it with an agenda that stressed economic dynamism, free trade, embrace of the tech industry, andvitallythe destruction of the welfare state.

This gets to a central tension in New Democrat thought. Seemingly at no point can anyone conclusively decide if their policy agenda is meant to be politically effectiveto win over white suburbanitesor to implement successful policy, which in this case would mean reforming welfare in a way that would leave poor people better off. Once Bill Clinton was in power, actual welfare reform, the destruction of the New Dealera Aid to Families with Dependent Children assistance program, was passed largely because end welfare as we know it was a Clinton campaign trail promise, and Bruce Reed, of the White House Domestic Policy Council, had come to believe that phrasewhich he had taped up in his officehad been vital to Clintons 1992 victory. Clinton, then running for reelection, was comfortably ahead in the polls when he signed the welfare reform bill. His political adviser Dick Morris had urged him to sign it as insurance.

Visit link:

The Disastrous Legacy of the New Democrats - The New Republic

The population of the United States is much younger than that of most European countries, but its political establishment is much older. The 2020 presidential election was fought between 74-year-old Donald Trump and 77-year-old Joe Biden compare that to 53-year-old Marine Le Pen and 44-year-old Emmanuel Macron in last months French presidential election. The Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, is 71, while minority leader Mitch McConnell is 80. In the generally younger House of Representatives, the majority leader, Nancy Pelosi, is 82, making minority leader Kevin McCarthy look like a spring chicken at a mere 57. This is not just a problem for the functioning of the democratic system; it endangers the survival of it.

While the majority of political leaders in the US are over 65, only a small minority of the population 16.9% is. This is a serious problem for the representativeness of the political system. Not only are previous generations much less diverse in terms of ethnicity and race, they have very different ideological and partisan profiles. Obviously, there is nothing new to this rule by the elderly, but it is increasingly threatening not just satisfaction with the democratic system but the system itself.

Although political socialization is a lifelong process, the impressionable or formative years are between childhood and adulthood. Similarly, professionally, we are often heavily shaped by the early years of our careers, only partly updating our views later. For the Democratic leaders, this means that they were politically socialized in the 1960s and their professional socialization was in the 1980s for Biden it even started in the 1970s. All have served in Congress for at least 35 years, starting when Ronald Reagan was president in Bidens case it was Richard Nixon presidents, and Republicans, that most voters know only from the history books.

In itself, this huge age gap between elites and masses does not have to create a problem of representation. Politicians like Bernie Sanders (80) and Jeremy Corbyn (72) have become the political heroes of a new generation of voters in recent years. And in terms of political priorities and values even Biden and Pelosi might be relatively close to the people they represent. The real problem is in their dated understanding of politics and the contemporary Republican party, and its political leadership, which has gotten stuck in the 1980s.

For instance, President Biden regularly reminisces about the days when he could have lunch with segregationists, when he and politicians he disagreed with could still respect each other. (Incidentally, the segregationists were in his own party at that time.) And Pelosi recently said, I want the Republican party to take back the party to where you were when you cared about a womans right to choose, you cared about the environment. Now, I only moved to this country in 2008, but I am almost 55 and have been following US politics for quite a while, and I cannot remember that Republican party.

What Biden and Pelosi still cannot come to grips with is that the Republican party is a far-right party. A recent poll showed that nearly half of all Republicans agree with the so-called great replacement theory, a racist conspiracy theory mainly propagated by the Fox News host Tucker Carlson, but with a decades-long past in far-right Europe. And while the theory might be new (to the US), the racist sentiments are not. Scholars like Christopher Parker and Matt Barreto showed a decade ago that the Tea Party mobilization was fueled by racial resentment and, as Rachel Blum more recently showed, the Tea Party has since captured the GOP (thereby enabling Trumps takeover and further radicalization).

Like many other older members of the liberal media and political establishment, Biden and Pelosi seem to think that media figures like Carlson and politicians like Ted Cruz do not really mean what they say and simply try to mobilize a crowd with their endorsement of Trumps stolen election lie, their whitewashing of the storming of the Capitol, or their racist conspiracy theories about a great replacement. Leaving aside whether that actually matters, and whether it is morally less reprehensible or politically less dangerous I actually think it is both more reprehensible and dangerous it is politically irrelevant. The genie is out of the bottle!

Not only are Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy not in control of the Republican party, even Donald Trump is not. When he spoke out in support of Covid-19 vaccines, for example, few if any of his base changed their position. And people like Cruz and Josh Hawley have always run after the radicalized base, rather than led it. The point is, even if there were still people left in the Republican party with the courage and conviction to take back the party, they lack the power to do so. In fact, it hasnt been their party for decades now.

It is high time that both Democrats and Democrats understand this. It is high time that Democratic leaders as well as liberal journalists stop listening to Republican politicians who say in private that they disagree with Trump, the insurrection, or stop the steal. They dont matter! What the Democratic party is facing, as the rest of the country, is a political party that openly undermines the democratic system in word and deed. That is the only Republican party that exists, at least for now. And if they dont act very quickly, that party will have full control of all major institutions of the country: the presidency, Senate, House and supreme court. To prevent this, we need leaders who live in the here and now, not in some (imagined) past.

This article was amended on 13 May 2022 because the caption to the picture of Emmanuel Macron gave his age as 53; as the piece itself says, he is 44.

The rest is here:

The Democratic party needs new, younger leadership before its too late - The Guardian

This is a guest opinion column

Believe it or not, there are Democrats running for statewide offices in Alabama. Democrats are running for governor and U.S. Senate, as well as congressional seats and other down ballot offices.

But you would not know that based on much of the media coverage. Lets take the front page of a recent edition of The Huntsville Times as an example. It featured a package of stories about the top three Republican candidates for U.S. Senate. And there was no mention of any of the Democrats who also are running.

This was a stunning omission. Especially to me, since Im one of the Democrats who is on the ballot.

Many in the media have bought into the anti-democratic idea note the small d that we are a one-party state. They are treating Republican candidates as presumptive nominees, not candidates who may be representing their party in a general election.

It almost looks like the media is anointing Alabamas next leaders.

Because Ive been watching the Alabama media closely for several years, I know that its a bit more complicated than that. Editors, news reporters and talk show hosts are heavily influenced by voting trends, polls and other media reports. They rely on these sources of information to determine news coverage and show rundowns.

When the shift in partisan power in Alabama began nearly 20 years ago, the media gatekeepers have been shifting with it. And now when they look across the political landscape, they see red, not blue.

First, former Republican Gov. Bob Riley was voted into office in 2003. Next came the Republican takeover of the statehouse in 2010. This made Alabamas transition from blue or maybe blue-ish to blood red complete.

Complete but not necessarily permanent. After all, the Democratic Party was king in Alabama for many years. The possibility for political change always exists.

The recent election of former U.S. Sen. Doug Jones proves that. All it took was the right combination of circumstances which included the right Democratic candidate, the wrong Republican one, a surge in the black female vote and the courage of a respected Republican senator to give his constituents cover to abandon their flawed nominee.

And lets not forget that the concentrations of blue in various parts of the state that have survived the red wave that swept over Alabama. Jefferson County and huge sections of the Black Belt have remained reliably blue. And Madison County, while not yet blue, is trending toward a pretty solid purple.

Am I predicting a Nov. 8th miracle for the Democratic Party? Not necessarily. But maybe. Maybe some of us Democratic candidates will surprise you. Time will tell.

Meanwhile, what all Alabamians need is complete information so they can make informed choices. When the media ignore one entire side of the political spectrum, they arent helping them to do that.

The Huntsville Times and AL.com can do better. Other media in the state can, too. Lets hope they do.

Will Boyd is a candidate for the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate from Hoover, Ala.

View original post here:

Guest opinion: Democrats are running for office this year despite lack of media coverage - AL.com