Category Archives: Libertarian

WASHINGTON In May 1987, Attorney General Edwin Meese III traveled to St. Louis and spoke before a group of clergy members opposed to abortion. Denouncing Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Courts 1973 ruling on abortion rights, he told them that he saw reason to hope that in our lifetimes it would be thrown on the ash heap of legal history.

Thirty-five years later, a leaked draft opinion suggests that the Supreme Courts conservative majority is poised to overturn Roe, permitting states to outlaw abortion. Liberals may be aghast, but for the conservative legal movement, of which Mr. Meese was a key early figure, a long-sought moment of triumph appears to be at hand.

This will feel like a tremendous vindication for the conservative legal movement, said Mary Ziegler, a Harvard Law School visiting professor and the author of several books about the anti-abortion movement and legal politics. The movement goes beyond Roe v. Wade, but overruling it has become the preoccupation for the movement and the test of its success.

If the Supreme Court does issue a final opinion that looks much like the leaked draft, one question the moment will raise is what the conservative bloc does next with its control over the judiciary. Already, for example, the court has decided to hear a case in its next term that will give it an opportunity to curtail race-based affirmative action in college admissions.

The libertarian faction within the movement wants to curb the power of the administrative state that grew up in the New Deal, limiting the authority of regulatory agencies. The cultural conservative faction is focused on religious freedom and the scope and limits of the rights of Americans who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender including lingering discontent with a 2015 ruling declaring a constitutional right to same-sex marriage.

Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts was among the Democratic lawmakers who expressed concern that the draft opinion would pave the way for other precedents to be overturned, citing the case that bars states from blocking same-sex couples from getting married, among others.

Its appalling because it doesnt just chip a little piece off Roe v. Wade, Ms. Warren said. It takes a pickax to it and in doing so, it opens up the risk of losing a whole stack of other rights that weve come to depend on.

But there is broad agreement that no issue has fueled the movement like abortion rights. Ed Whelan, a Justice Department lawyer in the George W. Bush administration and a conservative legal commentator, said a long-sought victory could signal a turning point.

If Roe is the glue that held together the conservative legal movement, what happens when it is no longer playing that role? Mr. Whelan said. What other priorities will unify the movement? I am not sure what the answer to that question is.

The conservative legal movement grew out of backlash to a series of liberal victories in Supreme Court rulings across a range of issues in the 1960s and 1970s. Conservative legal thinkers like the future appeals court judge Robert H. Bork began arguing that judges were usurping the role of legislators by interpreting the Constitution as a document whose meaning could evolve over time, and should instead strictly interpret it based on its text and original meaning.

Liberals countered that this approach was a cover for advancing conservatives own policy preferences. But the conservative legal movement began to take on political heft as the elite legal thinkers merged their mission with cultural and religious conservative voters who wanted abortion to be illegal and were outraged by Roe v. Wade.

The legal conservative movement happened for reasons that were significantly separate from abortion, but the thing that gives them power in the Republican Party is their connection to this large, highly mobilized coalition partner rank-and-file religious conservatives, said Steven M. Teles, a Johns Hopkins University political science professor and the author of The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law.

The movement took root in the 1980s. The Federalist Society a network for legal conservatives was founded on law school campuses and soon spread to chapters for working lawyers. And legal conservatives flooded into the Reagan administration working for figures like Mr. Meese, whose Justice Department became a sort of think tank for developing ideas like an originalist approach to the Constitution.

The Reagan administration began trying to vet judicial candidates more along ideological grounds than under previous Republican presidencies, nominating several starkly conservative jurists. That culminated in the battle over the failed Supreme Court nomination of Judge Bork an outspoken critic of Roe v. Wade whom Democrats and some Republicans in the Senate saw as too extreme.

During their 12 years in power, the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations had five opportunities to appoint justices to the nine-member Supreme Court, raising the possibility that they could have installed a majority willing to overturn Roe a generation ago. But in a 1992 decision, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the court instead reaffirmed a constitutional right to abortion.

The majority in that case included Reagan appointees like Sandra Day OConnor and Anthony M. Kennedy and the Bush appointee David H. Souter. They turned out not to be strictly conservative in the mold of others appointed around the same time like Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, both of whom wanted to overturn Roe.

Calvin TerBeek, a University of Chicago political science graduate student who unearthed a copy of Mr. Meeses 1987 speech in St. Louis for his dissertation, said the fallout from that case prompted the conservative legal movement to demand greater ideological vetting.

OConnor, Kennedy and Souter were Republicans first, rather than conservatives first, Mr. TerBeek said. That is why the conservative legal movement especially places like the Federalist Society have put such a premium on better predicting what a justice is going to do once they get on the court.

Another milestone came in 2005, when the conservative legal movement helped scuttle Mr. Bushs attempt to put Harriet Miers, his White House counsel and an associate from his days in Texas, on the Supreme Court. Conservatives balked because she lacked a paper trail showing engagement on issues important to the movement. The White House withdrew her and instead selected Samuel A. Alito Jr. the author of the leaked draft opinion.

During Barack Obamas presidency, the Federalist Society continued to mature, effectively credentialing a growing pool of movement conservatives awaiting the next Republican administration. Then in 2016, judicial appointments took on tremendous urgency when Justice Scalia died during a presidential campaign and Senate Republicans refused to give a hearing to Mr. Obamas nominee to fill the vacancy, Judge Merrick B. Garland, who is now the Biden administrations attorney general.

Meanwhile, Donald J. Trump was upending the Republican Party by trouncing establishment figures in its primary. A New Yorker on his third marriage who once described himself as very pro-choice, Mr. Trump was viewed with deep suspicion by many religious-minded conservatives. But he made a deal with the conservative legal movement to shore up Republican turnout.

To allay concerns that he would pick idiosyncratic judicial nominees, like celebrity lawyers he saw on television, Mr. Trump promised to make Supreme Court nominations from a list he released of conservative judges. The list was devised by his top legal adviser and future White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II a longtime Federalist Society member working with advisers like Leonard Leo, then the groups executive vice president.

Court-focused voters helped deliver Mr. Trumps narrow Electoral College victory over Hillary Clinton, exit polls showed. And aided by the abolition of the filibuster rule in the Senate for judicial nominations, Mr. Trump fulfilled his end of the deal, putting forward a series of movement conservative nominees, including three justices Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. All appear to have given preliminary approval to overturning Roe, fulfilling the vision Mr. Meese, who is now 90, put before the clergy members in 1987.

I think that releasing that list of names made it clear that Trump and his team actually understood what the conservative legal movement was doing, said Carrie Severino, the president of the Judicial Crisis Network, which advocates on behalf of confirming conservative judges.

The judgment of a lot of conservatives that this next president will have a big impact on the direction of the courts via their nominees has been vindicated by seeing that these justices are outstanding and committed to the original understanding of the Constitution, she went on. You cant have a starker contrast with the sort of person Hillary Clinton would have been putting on the court we wouldnt be having this conversation today.

Emily Cochrane contributed reporting.

Link:

What the Leaked Draft Opinion Means For the Conservative Legal Movement - The New York Times

Arkansas primaries: What are the ballot rules?

Updated: 4:44 PM CDT May 2, 2022

Hide TranscriptShow Transcript

WHAT IS A NONPARTISAN BALLOT? YES. SO WHEN THE VOTERS COME TO VOTE ON ELECTION DAY, THEY WILL BE ASKED WHICH BALLOT STYLE, WHICH PARTIES PRIOR PRIMARY WOULD YOU WANT TO VOTE IN? ANSOD THERE ARE THREE OPTIONS FOR VOTERS. ONE IS THE DEMOCRATIC BALLOT. THAT INCLUDES ALL THE DEMOCRATIC OFFICES, THE NON-PARTISAN JUDICIAL RACES, AND THEN THE SCHOOL RACE AND SCHOOL MILLAGE IS, IF THAT IS ON THEIR BALLOT AND ANY SPECIAL ELECTIONS, THEN OF COURSE, THER'S A REPUBLICAN BALLOT, WHICH THE REPUBLICAN BALLOT CONTAINALS L THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES, THE NON-PARTISAN JUDICIAL, THE ANNUAL SCHOOL, THE SCHOOL MILLAGE AND ANY SPECIAL ELECTION. AND THEN THERE IS A BALLOT THATS CALLED A NONPARTISAN BALLOT. THIS BALLOT ONLY CONTAINS THE NPNOARTISAJUN DICIAL GENERAL ELECTION AND ANY ANNUAL SCHOOL ELECTION MILLAGE OR SPECIAL ELECTION. ITS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR VOTERS TO REALIZE TTHA NONPARTISAN IN THIS INSTANCE DOES NOT MEAN THAT IM AN INDEPENDENT, THAT I DONT CONSIDER MYSELF TO BE A REPUBLICAN OR A DEMOCRAT. AND SO IF YOU GET ATTH BALLOT, THEN THERE WONT BE ANY OF THE POLITICAL CANDIDATES ON IT THAT YOU MIGHBET LOOKING FOR. AND THEN ANOTHER THING VOTERS NEED TO BE AWARE OF, IF YOURE LOOKING FOR LIBERTARIAN CANDIDATES, GREEN PARTY CANDIDATES OR INDEPENDENT CANDIDATES, THEY WILL NOT APPEAR ON THE BALLOT UNTIL THE GENERAL ELECTION. SO BASICALLY, THIS IS A KIND, MARY, JUST WHERE THE REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC PARTIES. AND THEN, OF COURSE, WE HAVE THE ANALNU SCHOOL AND NONPARTISAN JUDICIAL. JENNIFER, WE WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT JUST BECAUSE UYO QUREEST A DEMOCRAT VOTE BALLOT AND MAY MEANS DOESNT MEAN THAT YOU HAVE TO REQUEST THAT SAME ONE IN NOVEMBER. IS THAT CORRECT? FOR THE THE MAINE ELECTIONS? YES. SO THAT' ACTUALLY 100% CORRECT. COME NOVEMR,BE THERE WILL BE ONLY ONE BALLOT SELECTION AND THAT BALLOT SELECTION WILL CONTAIN THE WINNER FROM THE PRIMARY ELECTION IN MAY. FOR THE REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC PARTIES. NOW, THERE IS A VERY GOOD CHANCE THAT WE WILL ACTUALLY HAVE A RUNOFF ELECTION FOR THE PRIMARY FOR THBO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. VSOOTERS NEED TO BE AWARE THAT IF IN Y,MA YOU TAKE A DEMOCRATIC BALLOT, THEN FOR THE JUNE RUNOFF ELECTION, YOU WILL BE REQUIRED TO TAKE A DEMOCRAT BALLOT. SAME TNGHI FOR THE REPUBLICAN. IF YOU TAKE A REPUBLICAN BALLOT IN MAY, YOU WILL VOTE A REPUBLICAN BALLOT IN JUNE. BUT NOW, IF YOU TOOK A NONPARTISAN BALLOT OR YOU DID NOT VOTE IN MAY FOR THE JUNE RUNOFF ELECTION,ND A YOU WOULD GET TO DECIDE WHICH BALLOT TO TAKE. SOOU Y CAN, IF YOU ARE REGISTERED ALREADY, VOTE IN THE RUNOFF OYNL AND NOT THE PRIMARIES ON MAY 24TH. THATS CORRECT. SO THERE ISNT A REQUIREMENT FOR YOU TO HAVE VOTED IN THE MAY ELECTION, TO VOTE IN THE RUNOFF ELECTION. BUT THERE IS WHATS CALLED CROSSOVER VOTING, WHICH IS A CRIME, WHICH MEANS THAT YOU CANT CHOOSE A DEMOCRATIC BALLOT, LETS SAY, IN MAY, AND TH G

Arkansas primaries: What are the ballot rules?

Updated: 4:44 PM CDT May 2, 2022

Arkansas voters will cast ballots in the 2022 primaries from May 9 to 24. When you go to the polling place, you'll be asked which ballot style you want to use.You'll have three choices:Nonpartisan ballotThese ballots will include the nonpartisan judicial races.If you live in an area with a school race, a school millage vote or a special election, those will also appear on the ballot.Democratic ballotThese ballots will contain everything nonpartisan ballots do, with the addition of Democratic candidates for various races. The winner of these primary races will become the Democratic nominee for the general election in November.Republican ballotThese ballots will contain everything nonpartisan ballots do, with the addition of Republican candidates for various races. The winner of these primary races will become the Republican nominee for the general election in November.You don't have to be a registered member of a party to choose that party's ballot at the primary. Using a party's ballot does not lock you into voting a certain way in November.Libertarian, independent and other candidates don't run in primary races. They will appear on the November general election ballots.Runoff elections will be held in June.If you don't vote in the May primary, you'll still be able to vote in June runoffs if you're eligible. You'll be able to choose either a Democratic or Republican runoff ballot.If you voted in May using a nonpartisan ballot, you'll still be able to vote in June runoffs. You'll be able to choose either a Democratic or Republican runoff ballot.If you voted using a Democratic or Republican ballot in May, you can vote in June runoffs, but you'll have to use the same party's ballot. Voting on one party's ballot in the primary and on a different party's ballot in the runoff is called "crossover voting" and is a crime in Arkansas.2022 PrimariesEarly voting for Arkansas' 2022 primary starts May 9. The final ballots will be cast on May 24.Arkansas voters are currently able to request an absentee ballot if they cannot make it to the polls.

Arkansas voters will cast ballots in the 2022 primaries from May 9 to 24.

When you go to the polling place, you'll be asked which ballot style you want to use.

Nonpartisan ballot

These ballots will include the nonpartisan judicial races.

If you live in an area with a school race, a school millage vote or a special election, those will also appear on the ballot.

Democratic ballot

These ballots will contain everything nonpartisan ballots do, with the addition of Democratic candidates for various races. The winner of these primary races will become the Democratic nominee for the general election in November.

Republican ballot

These ballots will contain everything nonpartisan ballots do, with the addition of Republican candidates for various races. The winner of these primary races will become the Republican nominee for the general election in November.

You don't have to be a registered member of a party to choose that party's ballot at the primary. Using a party's ballot does not lock you into voting a certain way in November.

Libertarian, independent and other candidates don't run in primary races. They will appear on the November general election ballots.

If you don't vote in the May primary, you'll still be able to vote in June runoffs if you're eligible. You'll be able to choose either a Democratic or Republican runoff ballot.

If you voted in May using a nonpartisan ballot, you'll still be able to vote in June runoffs. You'll be able to choose either a Democratic or Republican runoff ballot.

If you voted using a Democratic or Republican ballot in May, you can vote in June runoffs, but you'll have to use the same party's ballot. Voting on one party's ballot in the primary and on a different party's ballot in the runoff is called "crossover voting" and is a crime in Arkansas.

Early voting for Arkansas' 2022 primary starts May 9. The final ballots will be cast on May 24.

Arkansas voters are currently able to request an absentee ballot if they cannot make it to the polls.

View original post here:

Arkansas primaries: What are the ballot rules? - 4029tv

Earth Week inspires communities to get out and clean up. Multiple litter collection events held around north central Pa. recently helped make the area a little more beautiful in recognition of the annual observance.

Susquehanna Greenway Partnership held their second annual Greenway Cleanup week from April 16-24. Twelve towns organized events that attracted hundreds of volunteers and collectively removed thousands of pounds of trash from area parks, trails, and communities along the Susquehanna River.

Harrisburg, Lock Haven, Williamsport, Newberry, Montgomery, Bloomsburg, Danville, Lewisburg, Selinsgrove, Sunbury, Athens, and Sayre made up the group of river towns with cleanups and programs led by local groups and organizations.

Last year, the Susquehanna Greenway Partnership coordinated the inaugural Susquehanna Greenway Cleanup Week, recruiting six towns to participate in that first year, explains SGP Executive Director Corey Ellison.

This year, we were blown away to see that participation double. We are thrilled with the response of this years twelve towns and commend our partners, River Town Teams, and the many volunteers on a job well done. The united efforts of each individual town go a long way towards the bigger picture of keeping the Susquehanna Greenway clean and beautiful," Ellison said.

The NorthcentralPa.com team on clean-up day. Jerry Frear, Julye Wemple, Carrie Pauling, and Ashley Little helped Susquehanna Greenway Partnership pick up trash along the riverwalk in Williamsport.

In Williamsport, SGP staff and board members were joined by 18 area volunteersincluding those from the West Branch Valley Association of Realtors, NorthcentralPA.com, and Lycoming Collegeto clear the Williamsport River Walk of 434 pounds of trash.

In Newberry, the Newberry Community Partnership led 40 volunteers on a cleanup in the Newberry neighborhood, collecting 165 pounds of trash.

Members of the Lock Haven area clean-up crew.

In Lock Haven, Downtown Lock Haven, Inc. coordinated with the City of Lock Haven and Lock Haven University for a four-day cleanup effort from April 19-22 that attracted 50 volunteers who gathered 793 pounds of trash.

Montgomery Borough gathered a team of 38 volunteers who collected 220 pounds of litter around Montgomery Park.

In Lewisburg, the Lewisburg River Town Team & Lewisburg Neighborhoods cleaned up areas in their downtown district and also led several tree plantings.

In Athens & Sayre, Futurescapes led 18 volunteers on a cleanup along the Diahoga Trail, removing 30 pounds of litter from the trail.

In Bloomsburg, the Town of Bloomsburg recruited 10 volunteers to clean up along the shores of the North Branch that flows alongside Fort McClure Boulevard, collecting 300 pounds of litter.

In Danville, the Montour Area Recreation Commission led cleanups at the Montour Preserve, Hess Recreation Area, and DeLong Park, attracting 81 volunteers who donated 185 hours of their time to collect 52 cubic yards of trash.

In Sunbury, the Susquehanna River Cleanup Project of Sunburys Revitalization, Inc. celebrated its 10th year with 205 volunteers who cleaned up along the shores of Sunburys Riverfront Park, collecting a staggering 9,300 pounds of trash, and still counting as they continue to remove leftover debris that could not be collected on the day of the event.

Susquehanna University students joined SGP on a clean-up day.

In Selinsgrove, SGP joined forces with 10 SU Serve students from Susquehanna University to collect 87 pounds of litter from the streets of Selinsgrove and along Weiser Run.

In Harrisburg, Barry Isett & Associates led a cleanup of Wildwood Park.

Volunteers from the Libertarian Party of Bradford County (LPBC) completed their spring Adopt-a-Highway clean up on a recent Saturday. Members picked up litter along the two mile stretch of Route 187 North from Route 6 in Wysox to Claverack Rd.

Local business owner, Kathy Goodwin of The Hair Mill, invited the group to stage their clean up from her parking lot, near the north end of their clean up area.

I was pleased that we had twice as many volunteers today than last time, said Liz Terwilliger, Chair of the LPBC. Unfortunately, theres a lot of litter here. Having more people helped make the work go more quickly.

Chris Wioskowski, Abigail Fallenstein, Josh Fallenstein, Greg Perry, Liz Terwilliger and Donna Wioskowski (not pictured) was supported by the Adopt-a-Highway program to collect trash.

For organizations cleaning up through the Adopt-a-Highway program, PennDot provides safety training and supplies like gloves, bags, and safety vests, and the volunteers provide the labor.

The Adopt-a-Highway program requires participating organizations to conduct one clean up in the spring and another in the fall. LPBCs next road clean-up will be in September. You do not need to be a member to participate. Interested volunteers can contact Liz at lpofbc@gmail.com.

STEP AmeriCorps also compiled a volunteer team to pick up the Newberry area of Williamsport during a weekend in April, collecting 185 pounds of trash and 65 pounds of recyclables.

Want to make a difference in your community? AmeriCorps is recruiting members atwww.stepcorp.org//AmeriCorps

Success! An email has been sent to with a link to confirm list signup.

Error! There was an error processing your request.

Never miss a headline with NorthcentralPa.com newsletters.

Sign Up Today!

Access to independent, local news is important, do you agree?

We work hard to deliver timely, relevant news, for free. 100% of your contribution to NorthcentralPa.com goes directly to helping us cover news and events in the region.

Thank you for saying that local news matters!

Read more here:

Volunteers clean up thousands of pounds of trash in the area over Earth Week - NorthcentralPa.com

By Mike Cook

By Mike Cook

Las Cruces Bulletin

Early voting for New Mexicos June 7 primary election begins May 10.

Hopefully voters will see the importance of primary elections, as the candidates voters choose in the primary ultimately end up on the ballot in November, said Doa Ana County Clerk Amanda Lopez Askin. We encourage voters to review their registration status at NMVote.org to confirm that their information is up to date. For additional information on when and where to vote, they can also visit our website at DACElections.com.

Important dates:

Tuesday, May 10:

Here are secured-container locations where absentee ballots can be dropped off 24/7:

In Las Cruces: Doa Ana County Government Center, 845 N. Motel Blvd.; Las Cruces City Hall, 700 N. Main St.; Sonoma Elementary School, 4201 Northrise Drive.

Throughout the county: Mesilla Town Hall, 2231 Avenida de Mesilla; Anthony City Hall Municipal Complex, 820 Highway 478, Anthony; Sunland Park City Library, 1000 McNutt Road, Sunland Park; Delores C. Wright Educational Center, 400 E. Lisa Drive, Chaparral; and Hatch Valley High School, 170 E. Herrera Road, Hatch.

Saturday, May 21: Expanded early voting begins at alternate sites throughout Doa Ana County.

Thursday, June 2: Last day to submit applications for absentee ballots.

Saturday, June 4: Early voting ends.

Tuesday, June 7: Election day: All absentee ballots must be received by 7 p.m. Same day voter registration ends.

Early voting

Early voting locations are open 11 a.m.-7 p.m. Tuesday-Saturday. They will be closed May 30 for Memorial Day. Visit http://www.donaanacountyelections.com/locations for early voting locations.

On the ballot

Not all races have contested primaries, and some races have only a single candidate who has no primary or general election population. County clerk, county treasurer and three seats on the county commission are not on the ballot this year.

New Mexico has a closed primary system, which means you can only vote in the Democratic primary if you are a registered Democrat, in the Republican primary if you are a registered Republican and in the Libertarian primary if you are a registered Libertarian. Those are the three major parties in New Mexico.

Democrats have at least one candidate on the primary ballot in every local race. There are contested primaries for one district judgeship, sheriff, assessor and probate judge.

Republicans have a contested primary for sheriff. There are no Republican candidates for either of the district judgeships, any of the magistrate judgeships, one New Mexico House seat that includes Doa Ana County, assessor or probate judge.

There are no Libertarian candidates running for any office in Doa Ana County in 2022.

Visit https://candidateportal.servis.sos.state.nm.us/CandidateList.aspx?eid=2827&cty=99 for candidate lists. Be sure to check at the far right, as 18 of the candidates listed have withdrawn from their races and another 18 were disqualified.

On that website, you can search by county, office and party. For example, if you want to see just Doa Ana County candidates, click on the county box that has the word all in; scroll down and click on Dona Ana.

You can also visit http://www.nmlegis.gov/Publications/2022_Candidates.pdf, which will show you all the candidates for the New Mexico House of Representatives. All House districts have been redrawn, which means House District 39 no longer contains any part of Doa Ana County, but House districts 32 and 38 now include parts of the county.

Check with the county clerks office for sample ballots and additional information at 575-647-7428 and

elections@donaanacounty.org.

Here is the original post:

Early voting for primary begins May 10, and other important dates - Las Cruces Bulletin

To hear Gary Buchanan tell it, theres an eight-lane highway down the middle of Montana politics. It is the space left behind by the major political parties steering to the opposing guardrails of the political spectrum.

Buchanan, a career financial adviser and long-time public servant, is one of several candidates hoping to occupy the center lanes in Montanas newly created Eastern U.S. House District. You could say hes hitching a ride. The candidate is scrambling to gather voter signatures ahead of a May 31 deadline for non-party candidates qualifying for the November ballot.

Theres a question about whether this opening lane in the political asphalt really exists, or is merely a heat mirage. Voters like Bob Brown believe it's real because theyre occupying it. Libertarians also think its real, said Sid Daoud, the Montana Libertarian Party chairman.

This political space might best be defined by what it isnt, Brown said, which is his truth. Eighteen years ago, Brown was the Montana Republican Partys candidate for governor. Voters preferring Republican candidates had also twice elected Brown Montanas secretary of state, and before that elected him to the Legislature for 22 years.

People are also reading

Bob Brown greets former President George H.W. Bush in 2000 in Great Falls where Bush was campaigning for his son, George W. Bush.

That started to change in 2016 with the election of President Donald Trump. Brown isnt a Trump guy. As most Republicans went all-in for the bombastic celebrity, Brown didnt follow along. The Montanan's notion of the art of a deal had always involved getting buy-in from both sides of the political aisle. That wasn't Trump's way.

I saw a poll that showed something like 80% of self-identified Republicans, maybe that figure is down closer to 70% now, were loyal to Donald Trump, Brown said. And I thought to myself, well, thats definitely not what I am. If thats what all the Republicans have become, or are, Im not a part of that. I dont know what I am, but I know thats what Im not.'

Full disclosure: Brown is a Buchanan supporter. He joined former Montana governor Marc Racicot in putting his name to Buchanan's campaign. Racicot, like Brown, had emerged from years of silence to warn the current Republican establishment that many voters are becoming disenfranchised.

As Racicot put in an open letter to RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel earlier this year, Many intensely loyal Republicans, more polite and less dangerous than those who breached the Capitol, are in larger and larger numbers, quietly but persistently looking for alternatives in the form of political movements and candidates of conscience, character, conviction and courage. Theyre not suggesting, hopelessly, a return to simpler times. Theyre calling, hopefully, for a return to simple, timeless and enduring values: presuming the best of each other, listening in good faith before acting or responding, exuding generosity and grace, self-correcting our own mistakes and being ambitious to accomplish something, not to be somebody.

The former governor backed those statements with his own credentials as a former RNC chairman and George W. Bush team leader in the recount of Florida ballots that decided the 2000 presidential election. He was Bushs campaign chairman in 2004.

The Montana Republican Party responded to all this third-partyism with a two-party response. It circulated an email pointing out all the Democrats who Buchanan has donated to over the years, plus a few he hadnt. In truth, the candidate had donated, like a businessman, to candidates of both parties. Buchanan had also hosted Greg Gianfortes campaign kickoff for governor in 2016.

A spokesperson for incumbent Rep. Matt Rosendale told the Montana Free Press that Buchanan was a Democrat. Full stop.

Third-party contenders

There are three other candidates trying to appeal to voters not locked into a major party. Theyre all Libertarian: Roger Roots, Sam Rankin and Samuel Thomas. Daoud said theres never been a better time for Libertarians to run. The politics of the pandemic, mask requirements, and for some an expectation to get vaccinated for private work or as government employee, are straight out the Libertarian playbook.

We know the reality of it is, were like a super-duper long shot, and even the Democrats are a super-duper shot if you look at the way the races have gone, Daoud said.

Daoud pauses for a minute, and then explains that Libertarians needed to communicate more to own the message about public health mandates versus personal liberties. Then he adds, The Libertarian Party at this point is a more well-greased machine than the Democrats at this point. Weve been long shots, weve been called pointless in the past, but the reality is that every cycle were increasing our percentage of the vote. Membership is up 50% in the past two years.

Sid Daoud is the Montana Libertarian Party chairman.

A few of Daouds statements are worthy of asterisks. Libertarians are strongest in Western Montana, to which Daoud concurs. Counties in the newly formed Eastern U.S. House District, have only given Libertarian candidates more than 5% of the vote in congressional races twice since 2010. The best performance was a 6% showing in the 2017 special election for U.S. House. Thats more a highway stripe than a viable center lane.

It is true that the Democratic machine in Eastern Montana could use some grease. In 21 of Montanas 56 counties, there is no local Democratic county chairperson, no committee structure, according to the Montana Democratic Party roster of county committees. All 21 of those counties are in the Eastern U.S. House District, although there are tribal committees at the Fort Peck and Fork Belknap reservations.

Election data from 2010 to present shows that in four of the last seven U.S. House races, the margin of victory for GOP candidates over Democrats in the counties that now comprise the Eastern district has been greater than 20%. Only once was the margin closer than 15%.

Montanas current at-large representative, Matt Rosendale, has all the characteristics of a dominant incumbent on the Eastern districts 2022 House ballot. He won 61% of the vote in the east as a statewide candidate running against Democrat Kathleen Williams in 2020. The only Republican to do better since 2010 was Denny Rehberg, who was an eight-year incumbent in 2010 when he won 62% of the vote in the Eastern district counties. Rehberg managed to set the bar high in an election year without a presidential race, or top ticket Senate race, to drive up voter interest.

Rosendales campaign also has $1 million cash on hand. The rest of the field has reported less than $75,000 combined.

Whats surprising is that despite those advantages for an incumbent, there are still 11 people running for office, said Jeremy Johnson, political scientist at Carroll College. The advantages for Rosendale havent discouraged the competition, including other Republicans. Theres a four-candidate Republican primary. Challengers Kyle Austin, James Boyette, and Charles Walkingchild faced off in a Miles City debate April 21. Rosendale didnt attend.

There is also a three-candidate Democratic primary. Penny Ronning, Mark Sweeney and Skylar Williams debated in Havre on April 28.

The three-candidate Libertarian primary is new ground for the party, Daoud said. It wasnt until 2020 that Montana allowed Libertarians to have a primary. One occurred earlier in a Missoula race for state Legislature.

Neither the Libertarians nor Buchanan have had a chance to share a stage with other candidates this spring. There is an all-comers forum scheduled for May 8 in Billings at Art House Cinema and Pub. The event is organized by Forward Montana.

It remains to be seen how Libertarian or independent candidates shape the outcome of the race, especially in a district where Republican candidates have voting margin to burn without losing.

There are more Republican-leaning voters in the Eastern district, as we know. So, how important is this or who is affected? Johnson said. Obviously, just for the demographics of the Eastern District, the expectation is all other things being equal the Republican has a big advantage. So, theres a lot of hill to climb.

Get local news delivered to your inbox!

The rest is here:

Third-party candidates are on the rise in Montana. But, will it matter? - Billings Gazette

Freedom is awaking from its coma today because of a huge, huge, huge Supreme Court decision huge, Rush Limbaugh declared in 2010. I cannot tell you how big this is.

What, pray tell, had roused freedom from its slumber?

The Supreme Courts Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision, which ruled that corporations have First Amendment rights. I thought then, like most conservatives, that the court was correct. Unlike many these days, I still do. The New York Times Co. has every right to argue for its preferred policies, and so does Koch Industries.

Its difficult to exaggerate how committed the right once was to this principle and how much it appalled the left. Masterpiece Cakeshop, we conservatives contended, had every right not to be compelled to make gay wedding cakes because of the owners religious beliefs. Hobby Lobby had a First Amendment right to defy provisions of the Affordable Care Act that violated its religious freedom. We won both arguments at the Supreme Court.

That era is now officially over.

Florida recently passed the Parental Rights in Education bill (tendentiously called the dont say gay law by detractors). The Disney Co., under Chief Executive Bob Chapek, tried to stay out of the controversy. But a pincer movement of internal and external political pressure forced the company to publicly oppose the bill.

Worse, a video of a Disney meeting at which executives boasted of their not at all secret agenda to incorporate gay and transgender themes into Disney content was leaked at the worst possible moment. The very online right was already in a full-blown moral panic about pedophilia, basically holding that anyone who opposed the bill was either a groomer or groomer friendly. (Once a term for adults who manipulate underage children for sexual abuse, groomer suddenly meant dissenters from a moral crusade.)

Against the broader backdrop of the populist fatalism of the Trump era, which holds that conservatives never win when they play by the rules, it was something of a perfect storm.

Florida Republicans, led by Gov. Ron DeSantis, voted to strip Disney World of its special status under something called the Reedy Creek Improvement District. Crafted in 1967, the improvement district deal exempted Disney World from zoning and tax laws in exchange for Disney transforming a massive amount of swampy land into the Magic Kingdom and running it without taxpayer money. Economically and politically, it was win-win for both Disney and Florida until last week, when a remarkable number of politicians suddenly embraced a purist libertarian opposition to such public-private partnerships of which there are over a thousand in Florida.

Of course, Orlando International Airport and Daytona International Speedway, with similar exemptions, will be fine, because the libertarian arguments are entirely pretextual. This was about punishing Disney. Floridas lieutenant governor even admits that if Disney simply changed its politics, everything could go back to normal. Oh, is that all?

The view on the right is that DeSantis is a courageous brawler, beating back a behemoth of woke capitalism. Its certainly true that DeSantis comes out a winner on the national stage as he contemplates a presidential run in 2024.

I will also concede that DeSantis supporters have a point. If corporations will let themselves be bullied out of their lanes by the left, they shouldnt be surprised if they invite retaliation from the right. As problematic as I find this whole spectacle, it would be a good thing if corporations thought twice about picking sides in the culture war. As Michael Jordan once said, Republicans buy sneakers too.

Subscribe to our free Stephinitely newsletter

Columnist Stephanie Hayes will share thoughts, feelings and funny business with you every Monday.

Want more of our free, weekly newslettersinyourinbox? Letsgetstarted.

But whether the costs outweigh the benefits is unknowable, particularly in a climate in which what constitutes winning is redefined on the fly by Twitter mobs. After all, as National Reviews Charlie Cooke notes, DeSantis had already won: Disney took its shot at the Florida parental rights bill, and even though all of its sponsors were recipients of Disneys political contributions, Disney lost. But the rights equivalent of Twitter-addicted woke activists wanted a pound of Mouse flesh.

Privately, some defenders say the Reedy Creek Improvement District rescission, which doesnt go into effect until next year, will never happen. Saner heads will prevail, opting not to shift massive burdens onto county governments and taxpayers (this would explain why Disney has largely stayed mum). But that theory assumes DeSantis is the mobs master, not its servant.

And even if a big if corporate America takes the right lessons here, theres no chance activists on the left or right will, at least for the foreseeable future. When you reward mobs, you get more mobs.

Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.

2022 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Read more:

The right-wing mob gets its pound of Mouse flesh from Disney or does it? | Column - Tampa Bay Times

The PRO thinks that the radicals are enlarged without justification and that they want control of Together for Change. The radicals want Mauricio Macri to step aside in the presidential race and they reject the alliance with Javier Milei. And the Civic Coalition of Elisa Carri mistrusts both.

This is the boiling state in which the main opposition force finds itself, right at the worst moment of the Front of All. Better impossible for the fight for power between Cristina Kirchner and Alberto Fernndez.

In case anyone had the slightest doubt about JxCs internal rawness, everything was exposed in the meeting of its driving table at the Hannah Arendt Institute, its subsequent repercussions.

I also read: Cristina Kirchner, Wado de Pedro, Daniel Scioli: the electoral laboratory of Kirchnerism

The meeting was full of suspicions based on the accusations of the PRO hawks about a supposed agreement between the radical Gerardo Morales and Sergio Massa, for the appointment of new members of the Judicial Council. And for Cristina Kirchners maneuver in the Senate to impose a man she trusts in the body in charge of punishing or rewarding judges.

Morales is sure that behind this information there were Mauricio Macri and Patricia Bullrich and so he let them know. She was not convinced by the denial of both.

The governor of Jujuy is determined to fight for his presidential candidacy. Whats more, the radicals dont just plan to take that jackpot in PvC, but also to challenge the PRO for the candidacy for governor of Buenos Aires and the Federal Capital.

Sure of these aspirations, in the PRO they dont know how to get out of the crack that opened between the hawks and doves.

The latter had more or less things in order weighing on the candidacies of Horacio Rodriguez Larreta for the Pink House, Diego Santilli for the province of Buenos Aires and a candidate to be defined for the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires.

However, the appearance on the scene of the tandem Macri/Bullrich It greatly altered the internal climate that hatched with the intention of adding Milei.

The leader of Libertad Avanza shows a growth in the polls with his extreme speech based on JxC voters, or more precisely macrismo.

His figure is the limit of the radicals and of Lilita Carri. They are not willing to go back at all and that is very good for those who line up behind Rodrguez Larreta.

The Buenos Aires chief has already warned that he is not going to raffle off a political strategy that he has been implementing for a long time to seek the libertarian vote.

Perhaps for that reason, Macri decided to back down despite Bullrichs opposition, who did not hesitate to get sparks with Morales.

In addition, Carri seems to like the role of ensuring that the principles that gave rise to JxC are upheld and that is why he will continue to appear in the media. It is a well-known strategy. It is kept until after Easter, due to its religious beliefs, and then it reappears with its energies recharged.

I also read: The hard wing of the PRO criticized the decision of Together for Change to close the door on Javier Milei

But if something was missing in this political struggle, some of its protagonists moved to Bariloche to participate in the business summit that was a sounding board for these fights.

In that place and surrounded by the red circle, Macri was able to verify that the preferences were located between his person and that of Milei.

Horacio Rodrguez Larreta also passed through Bariloche, for whom Macri became a stone in his shoe.

In short, JxC has a manual of good practices, although sometimes it seems to forget its content.

See the article here:

The opposition of Together for Change is the best ally of Alberto Fernndez and Cristina Kirchner - Zyri

Colorado's Jared Polis might be the most libertarian governor in America, at a time when his big-state Democratic colleagues are getting exposed as hypocrites while presiding over historic population declines or getting kicked out of office for sexual harassment and sending COVID infected patients back to nursing homes and then lying about it. I'm not sure that Polis' 2014 claim in the pages of Reason that "libertarians should vote for Democratic candidates" because they're "more supportive of individual liberty and freedom" has held up, but he's certainly leading by example.

The 46-year-old governor is presiding over one of the fastest-growing states in the country and a place that has one of the lowest death rates during the pandemic. He pushed back against members of his own party to remove mask mandates, and he consistently argued that public health decisions should be made at as local a level as possible. Last fall, at a conference held by the conservative Steamboat Institute, he declared that the state income tax rate "should be zero" and has supported ballot initiatives that reduced the rate. Polis has embraced occupational licensing reform and was an outspoken defender of bitcoin back in 2014 when Sen. Joe Manchin (DW.Va.) called on then-head of the Federal Reserve Janet Yellen to ban it.

The openly gay, married father of two recently signed a free-range parenting bill that effectively relegalizes the sort of Colorado childhood he recalls as the son of two ex-hippie parents: "Just because a kid is playing alone outside, it doesn't mean they're in danger," Polis said at the signing ceremony. "It will help decrease false reports sowe can focus on the serious and the real instances of child abuse."

As conservative states pass laws strictly limiting abortions, he signed legislation guaranteeing a woman's right to choose. The founder of two charter schools, he is an outspoken advocate for school choice, saying earlier this year that "public school choice is an asset to improve all public schools." A former tech entrepreneur and five-term congressman, Polis is steadfast against limiting speech rights or treating social media platforms as utilities that can't moderate content or bounce users for transgressing terms of service.

In a wide-ranging conversation with Reason, Polis talks about trying to govern from the middle, takes shots at President Joe Biden's moves on free trade and immigration, and repeats his argument that libertarians should vote for Democrats. Up for re-election in the fall and a heavy favorite to win a second term, Polis also discusses his political ambitions as a rising star in a party that is expected to get blown out in the midterm elections.

Read the original post:

Jared Polis: The Most Libertarian Governor in America? - Reason

Jake Hoffman| Sarasota Herald-Tribune

Imagine a corporation granted power over the government to decide its own environmental policy, develop roads and buildings at itsdiscretion, build itsown public services, hire itsown police force, harness itsown energy sources andpay less taxes to do all of this.

This is the libertarian fever dream that Walt Disney World has enjoyed in Florida since 1967. Its the kind of extreme private ownership that would make Ayn Rand tell you to dial it back a bit. Yet today we find Florida Democrats and Democratsacross the country lambasting Gov. Ron DeSantis and Florida Republicans for dissolvingthe Reedy Creek District, which provides Disney with its own city and basically gives it aself-regulating government.

More: OPINION: The media missed the real story of CPAC 2022

While I generally view myself as a libertarian whoadvocates for deregulation and less government interference in private business, I can only sit back and chuckle over the fact that, first and foremost, the Disney anarcho-capitalist experiment clearly worked.

Florida gave a giant corporation free rein and Disney turned it into the happiest place on Earth; itcreated the most jobs in Florida for decades and was responsible fortens of billions of dollars in economic impact to the state each year. On top of all that, Disney's public transit system is probably the best in the country.

That said, however, Florida has not afforded every corporation the same special treatment that it has given Disney. So what we really have here is crony capitalism at its finest, and it is high time to take back the reins and stop picking winners and losers you know, the very thing that small-government Republicans should have been doing all along.

Of course, I would love to create a special district around my house so that I couldappoint myself president and self-govern my businesses.But thats not the world we live in, so until everyone gets the same autonomy that Disney enjoyed for 50-plus years, dissolving Reedy Creek is a justified move on principle alone.

Yet that reality still hasn't prevented progressives frombending over backwardto become huge advocates for Disney, a cult-like beneficiary of slave labor that has ignored Uyghur genocide in China and is no stranger to beingculturally insensitive.

In fact, there are Democrats across the country pleading for Disney to come to their state! For example, Colorado'sDemocratic Gov, Jared Polis is openly recruitingDisney to relocate to Colorado, and declaring that his state doesn't "meddle in the affairs (of private business)."

First off, that notion is a total lie, unless you adopt the anarcho-capitalist view that Disney should be its own government.But more importantly, is this going to be the hot take from Democrats? That they want to let corporations self-govern? That they want corporations to get special taxing districts and to get to decide their own environmental policies?

The reality is the left is just engaging in its usual virtue-signaling, but this time its not even making an attempt to beideologically consistent. Or maybe its just that in theliberal hierarchy of needs, teaching kindergartners about sexuality, gender identityand personal pronouns is now at the top of the pyramid instead of loudly demandingmore corporate taxation and more central government control.

Ihave so many questions that I'dlove for liberalsto answer, and here are some of them:

What would Disney need to do to lose itsspecial privileges?

What happens if Disney starts to teach Christianity in its childrens programming?

Do you have any idea how many bills Disney has lobbied for or against over the years and how much power it holdsin Tallahassee?

If youre a politician whowants to enable Disney by incentivizing it to come to your state, are you ready to cede power to Disney's CEO and the woke mob that now runs thecompany's public policy decisions?

If youre able todo all of themental gymnastics it takes to genuinely support Disney for getting involved in a culturewar piece of legislation while simultaneously condemning Republicans for removing Disney's special district, then youreally need to get your political philosophy straightened out.

Ifor one think that the more you remove corporate influences on our lawmakers, the better outcomes we will get overall. I believe that we should deregulate businesses as much as possible. Ibelieve thatthe state has a responsibility toprotect people and property. And I believe that our public schools should not be reassigning the genders of first-graders behind the backs of their parents.

All of these beliefs are beliefs I held before this Disney fiasco, and they are beliefs I will continue to hold when this controversy finally fades away.So atleast I know where I stand on the political spectrum, unlike the overly emotional progressives who are now rushing to defend Disney while abandoning any sense of intellectual integrity.

Then again, I suspect that many on the outraged left are actuallyjust coming downwith a new variant of Trump Derangement Syndrome the virulent strain that's also known as DeSantis Derangement Syndrome.

Dont worry: I have no desire to force those who are stricken with DeSantis Derangement Syndrometo take a vaccine shot to treat it. But at the very least, the liberals now feelingtheeffects of this condition should be actively exploring alternative sources of information to counter all of the sickeningmisinformation they'regetting on the Reedy Creek issue.

Jake Hoffmanis executive director of the Tampa Bay Young Republicans. He is a Republican Party candidate in Hillsborough County for a seat in the Florida House of Representatives.

Follow this link:

OPINION: Progressives are hypocritical in defending Disney - Sarasota Herald-Tribune

Steve Brawner| Special to the Times Record

Give credit to Attorney General Leslie Rutledge where credit is due: She showed up.

Rutledge participated in one of a series of debates held April 21 by the Arkansas Press Association for four of the states contested constitutional offices. Hers, for lieutenant governor, was the most meaningful of the debates because she, the frontrunner, was there.

Rutledge is the frontrunner because of her statewide office and name recognition, her Rutledge Report and other public service announcements, and her overwhelming fundraising advantage stemming from her aborted run for governor.

A candidate in her position might find a reason to skip the lieutenant governor debate, which was not broadcast.

Two of the other clear frontrunners skipped their debates: Sarah Huckabee Sanders in the governors race and Lt. Gov. Tim Griffin in the attorney generals race. Sanders, the overwhelming favorite, is not making herself available to reporters much, so its not surprising she wouldnt appear in a room full of them. Shes raised more than $14 million, so she doesnt need any media coverage. Sen. John Boozman also recently said he would not debate his three Republican primary opponents.

In the 2020 elections, Sen. Tom Cotton skipped the debates sponsored by Arkansas PBS. These are tame, controlled affairs where the candidates dont question each other, but Cotton didnt think it was worth his time and/or the risk. His libertarian opponent, Ricky Harrington, had the stage to himself. Harrington is running for governor this year.

But there was Rutledge sitting shoulder-to-shoulder with her seven opponents. The Republicans are Surgeon General Greg Bledsoe; former Republican Party Chairman Doyle Webb; state Sen. Jason Rapert, R-Conway; Washington County Judge Joseph Wood; and Attorney Chris Bequette. The non-Republicans are Democrat Kelly Krout and Libertarian Frank Gilbert.

The eight are vying for an office that does little. The lieutenant governor presides over the Senate when its in session and becomes governor when the elected governor dies, leaves office or cant serve. Thats pretty much it.

These days, campaigns are based largely on party labels, ads, and endorsements by ideological interest groups and politicians. Theyre highly scripted affairs where candidates relentlessly try to stay on message.

In a debate, its just them on a stage, where they might go off message. They might say something embarrassing. They might say what they really think and get in trouble with their base or with what few undecided voters are left.

Debates are political theater, and they probably dont tell us much about how a candidate would actually govern. But they do give candidates a chance to state their case why they should be elected in a less scripted environment. They also let them say why an opponent shouldnt be elected, and to do it like a real man or real woman: Face-to-face instead of hiding behind an anonymous narrator in a 30-second attack ad funded by other people.

Its unclear what debates will look like in the future. Recently, the Republican National Committee voted to withdraw from the Commission on Presidential Debates, the bipartisan entity that organizes the ones featuring Republicans and Democrats (and Ross Perot in 1992). The RNC says the CPD is biased.

Were a long way from the fall of 2024, so who knows what will happen between now and then. Regardless, its an unfortunate decision because it further chips away trust in our elections.

And that trust has been eroded a lot lately. Between denying election results, claiming the whole system is rigged, and impeaching presidents regularly, were less and less willing to accept the will of the voters and less inclined to believe in the democratic process if our side doesnt win.

And thats kind of scary. If you say the whole process is illegitimate, it makes it easier to justify trying to overturn an election. It could happen. There was an attempt to do it a year-and-a-half ago. Soon someone might actually succeed. Eventually wed stop having real elections at all, like a lot of countries.

I guess Ive strayed a bit from the lieutenant governors debate, so lets return to it. Kudos to Rutledge, and also to Bledsoe, Webb, Rapert, Wood, Bequette, Krout and Gilbert, along with the participants in the other debates.

They showed up.

Steve Brawner is a freelance journalist and syndicated columnist. Email him at brawnersteve@mac.com or follow him on Twitter at @stevebrawner.

Here is the original post:

At least Rutledge and her opponents showed up | Steve Brawner - SWTImes