Mediaboss Marketing

It will be hard to top the absolute banner year for democracy Ohio had last year, but were keeping our eyes on the prize in 2024 to wrestle even more power back into the hands of the people where it belongs.

While most folks will understandably center their attention for this years election cycle on top-of-the-ticket races, mine will be fixated on two potential constitutional ballot measures aimed at tilting the scales of power away from politicians in Ohio. Those two proposed measures are one to create a citizen-led, independent redistricting commission the third redistricting ballot measure that Ohio voters would decide on in a decade and the other an Ohio voters bill of rights that would enshrine our right to vote in the state constitution and expand access to our democracy.

To me, these reforms are two sides of the same coin one is about who we can elect and the other is about whether we can vote. Both are necessary for Ohios voters, particularly given that Republicans in my state have spent the last decade and a half undermining the power of our votes and gerrymandering our state and congressional maps to hell.

And while much attention has already rightfully been paid to the need for redistricting reform, I want to dig a little deeper into why voting rights reform is also so essential for our state.

Ohio is a state too often overlooked in conversations about voter suppression and attacks on the power of our vote despite the fact that we are home to some of the worst of each of those tactics. No matter the tactic to block people from exercising their most fundamental American right, Ohios got it. Strict voter ID rules? Weve got the strictest. Cuts to early voting? You bet. Voter purges? Ohios never met one it doesnt like. Systemic suppression? Top to bottom.

I want to be clear that Ohio is not so different from our midwestern neighbors like Michigan or Minnesota that the electoral results and, more importantly, civic engagement levels seen there are impossible here. Rampant voter suppression efforts and gerrymandering, though, lead to election outcomes and lower civic engagement rates that belie the real political nature of our state.

In just the last five years, Republican secretaries of state have purged more than 700,000 voters from the rolls, unjustly making our most fundamental American right a use it or lose it one. The most recent purge came in October of last year after the voter registration deadline had passed and early voting had begun for the November election. Again, Ohio Republicans have really never met a purge they didnt like. They even went all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court to protect their aggressive supplemental style of purges that outpaces most other states in the country.

And rather than working on bringing our election system into the 21st century to make it more accessible to all of us, like so many of our other midwestern neighbors have done especially in recent years, Ohio voters are tripped up by unnecessary, outdated procedures that create a complicated, if not entirely prohibitive, path to the ballot box.

To fight against these efforts, for nearly a decade, Black civil rights leaders, including the Ohio chapter of the NAACP, the Ohio Unity Coalition (the state chapter of the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation), the A. Philip Randolph Institute and the Ohio Organizing Collaborative, have worked to qualify a constitutional amendment for the ballot that would bring much-needed change to how we run elections in Ohio.

Their first try was in 2014 with an amendment carrying the same name as the current one the Ohio Voters Bill of Rights and another came in 2020. Both were hobbled by rampant opposition from especially in-state Republicans, but also (in the case of the 2020 effort) by the early days of the pandemic, which stymied signature collection efforts.

In the meantime, voter suppression efforts havent slowed; if anything theyve become even more urgent. The worst of those tactics came in the form of a sweeping anti-voter bill, House Bill 458, that was enacted at the start of 2023 and includes the countrys strictest voter ID law and various other provisions that further limit Ohioans access to the ballot box. And, of course, theres always our illegally gerrymandered maps that deny us the full power of our votes.

The time has come again for these same organizations to lead the righteous fight to protect our most precious freedom to vote.

As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said back in 1957, The hour is late. The clock of destiny is ticking out. We must act now, before it is too late. Its time to modernize our election system and to bring more Ohio voters into the fold by protecting the full power of their votes. And the current version of the Ohio Voters Bill of Rights offers us an important opportunity to do just that.

It eases the current photo ID rules, ensures that only eligible citizens can vote, protects military and overseas voters ability to have their votes counted and makes sure all Ohioans can vote when, how and wherever they want. It also provides the opportunity to people to vote even if they dont have access to the amendments expanded list of photo IDs, bringing Ohio in line with the vast majority of states in this country that dont exclusively require a photo ID to vote.

It empowers local boards of election to institute policies that make the most sense for their communities, like setting up more drop boxes across their counties and expanding the number of early vote centers so voting is more convenient and accessible. Rather than the current system where each county in Ohio may have just one early vote center, the amendment would allow counties to meet their voters where they are to ensure the path to the ballot box is actually accessible to everyone. If states like Georgia, North Carolina and Texas can provide dozens of early vote locations, surely Ohio can, too.

Give us the ballot and put the people of my Ohio back into the drivers seat of our democracy.

And it makes sure our elections work for all of us by requiring prepaid postage on all election mail, protecting no-excuse absentee voting, streamlining the voter registration and updating process (through automatic and same-day registration systems) and requires the state to fund all the necessary policies to make this amendment a reality.

The amendment is a sweeping reimagining of what might be possible in this heart-shaped state of mine if our state government bent over backwards to clear the path to democracy rather than working in overdrive to ensure certain voters cant access the voting booth.

To my mind, there is no other fight worth waging in Ohio than the one to enshrine the full power of our votes into the state constitution. The right to vote, after all, is our most fundamental because it is preservative of all other rights we enjoy. Without our votes, we have nothing. Republicans in this state certainly understand that; its why they work so damned hard to attack it and to kneecap our voices and our votes at every opportunity they get.

Now, to be clear, I am equally as passionate about ensuring that the redistricting reform qualifies for this years ballot and that it passes clearing the path for actually fair maps drawn without politicians, Democratic or Republican, tipping the scales in their favor rather than in favor of the people theyre sworn to represent.

But the reality is that redistricting reform will only take us so far; it alone is not enough to shift long-term power in this state. After all, what good are fair maps if all eligible Ohioans cant reach the ballot box to vote under them? Ohio needs both redistricting reform and a massive overhaul to our voting rights and election system in this state to really move the needle. We need the ability to both dictate our political futures under maps that reflect our communities and also to harness the full power of our votes to steer our state forward.

In 2023, Ohioans overwhelmingly stood up for our democracy and for the power of the people. In 2024, were going to carry that trend forward by advancing two essential ballot measures unified by a single motto: give us the ballot.

Give us the ballot and we will elect leaders who reflect our values under maps that meet the needs of our communities. Give us the ballot and we will chart a course for our beloved Ohio that aligns with the peoples vision, not that of out-of-touch extremist politicians. Give us the ballot and put the people of my Ohio back into the drivers seat of our democracy.

For so many reasons this year, democracy is again on the ballot in Ohio. If we can manage it, these two essential reforms will qualify for the November election and Ohioans will have a direct opportunity to weigh in on the full range of our voting power. I look forward to working with incredible leaders from across the state to make that a reality.

Katy Shanahan is an attorney and activist in her home state of Ohio where she continues to fight for fair maps and expansive voting laws in the Buckeye State. As a contributor to Democracy Docket, Shanahan writes about the state of voting rights in Ohio as well as redistricting both in Ohio and across the country.

Originally posted here:
Ohio's New Motto: Give Us The Ballot - Democracy Docket

Many American liberals obsess about a possible Trump dictatorship should the former President return to the White House this fall. In Europe, the mainstream media have long been haunted by the specter of right-wing politicians like Hungarys Viktor Orbn, whom they claim are undermining democracy and the rule of law. But, at present, it is in Germany where democracy is really under threat.

This is not because of the rise of the right-wing populist party Alternative fr Deutschland (AfD), as many media commentators and politicians would have you believe. It is rather because of the undemocratic reaction of Chancellor Olaf Scholzs embattled coalition, some fake conservatives, and the corporate media, to the AfDs emergence as a powerful challenge to their left-liberal consensus. Under the leadership of Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla, the party has surged to more than 20 percent in national polls, second place and well ahead of Scholzs Social Democrats with just 15 percent. In recent weeks, the establishment has moved towards hysteria. The welcome trigger was a dubious report by a left-wing organization about the AfDs alleged plans to deport millions of migrants. They are crying for drastic measures against the partymeasures that could upend German democracy.

Some politicians and media are calling for an outright ban on the AfD, whom they present as enemies of democracy. More than one and a half million people have signed a petition to strip Bjrn Hcke, one of the AfDs more hardline regional leaders, of his basic constitutional rightslike freedom of speech, the right to teach or protest, or to vote or run for office. And there are many other ways the legacy parties try to, or really do, restrict the AfDs constitutional rights.

For example, they deny them the right to nominate a vice-president position in Parliament, as any other opposition faction can do. Furthermore, the Greens, and the leader of the center-right Christian Social Union (CSU), Markus Sder, are trying to find ways to exclude the opposition party from the state system of public financing of all parties that have attained a certain level of electoral support. This would deprive the AfD of dozens of millions of euros every year, and would significantly damage electoral fairness.

Can a country where the ruling class attempts to ban or suppress their fiercest opposition really be called a democracy? No other European country has ever banned a large opposition party, however much it may be disliked by the ruling class. Any ban on the AfD would be an affront to freedom, and a declaration of moral bankruptcy on the part of German democracy.

AfD is the second strongest party at national level. In eastern German Lnder (states) like Saxony or Thuringia, it is by far the strongest party and has the chance of winning state elections in September. This prospect petrifies the establishment, which is trying to isolate the party and keep it behind a firewall. Millions of voters are deeply disenchanted with Scholzs Ampelkoalition (traffic light coalition, so called because of the party colors of the three parties involvedthe Social Democrats, the Greens and the Free Democrats). Around 80 percent of voters say they have lost all confidence in the government, which has consequently gone into panic mode.

Uncontrolled mass immigration, the cost of living and economic recession in Germany, also due to deeply controversial energy and climate policies, not to mention the general disdain of the condescending political class, are all fueling anger. AfDs rise is part of a larger picture in Europe, with similar parties on the rise in many countries in the run up to Junes elections to the European Parliament. The European Council on Foreign Relations, a liberal think-tank, last week published a forecast warning that right-wing and Eurosceptic parties (anti-European populists) could become the largest or dominant party in 18 of 27 of the blocs member states. In France, Marine Le Pens Rassemblement National is leading the polls, in Italy the right-wing Fratelli dItalia, in the Netherlands Geert Wilders, and in Austria the Freedom Party, to name just a fewall of them promising to end the influx of illegal aliens and proposing much tougher policies on immigration and crime.

The Ampelkoalitions utter incompetence has propelled the Christian Democrats (CDU) and their Bavarian sister party, the CSU, to a combined 30 percent in polls, but many voterstraditional conservatives, as well as blue collar workerswho still remember the CDU Chancellor Angela Merkels disastrous immigration policies, have steered increasingly towards the populist alternative. Although it was established only in 2013, the AfD has become the real rallying point of right-wing opposition. Even official accusations of extremism by the domestic spy agency Verfassungsschutz (Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution) have not dented the AfDs electoral support. People often ignore those warnings, because they understand that the agency has been politicized by the ruling parties and is used as a weapon to attack opposition groups they dislike. Meanwhile, the AfDs membership has climbed by more than a third to over 40,000, and is still growing fast.

In the last two weeks, however, the establishment has almost lost its mind completely, following the report by a left-wing investigative and activist organization named Correctiv, which spied on a private meeting that took place at Potsdam, near Berlin, in November. Among the 20 or so attendees were a handful of mid-ranking AfD functionaries, a couple of CDU members, and some wealthy entrepreneurs. At this small private conference, which Correctiv hysterically dubbed a secret meeting, a political activist from Vienna presented his ideas for a remigration plan to move migrants who have no legal right to stay in Germany or who have committed severe crimes back to their home countries. Correctivs journalist-activists, sensing the potential for a report that would make their names, cunningly likened this master plan to a notorious Nazi scheme.

Ludicrously, and tastelessly, this little meeting with its vague talk about repatriation of illegal foreigners was dubbed Wannsee Conference 2.0 (the Wannsee Lake, where Nazi officials agreed on the final solution to murder the Jews in January 1942, is a half-hour drive away). This grotesque and unhistorical equation of a small private talk among people without any real power with the 1942 event arguably downplays the monstrous crimes of the Holocaustbut it worked wonders, creating a perfect scandal for the system. (This weekend, the Correctiv deputy did declare on public TV that they have in fact never used the word deportation and this was an interpretationbut the perfect storm is underway anyway.)

The left is gleefully exploiting the affair with lies and distortions about the Potsdam gathering which mainstream media, spearheaded by the public broadcasting corporations, are happy to parrot. The last two weekends, the SPD, the Greens, die Linke (the Left, the successor party of East Germanys Socialist Unity Party), and mass organizations like trade unions, liberal churches, the Council of Muslims, migrant associations, and Antifa groups have called for public demonstrations.

Almost a million people obediently took to the streets to protest against the right. (In Germany, the right is lazily used as a synonym for right-wing extremism). Not all the marchers were peaceful or liberal; in Aachen, some protesters flew a banner reading Kill AfD. Ignoring such banners, President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, a Social Democrat, thanked the demonstrators and praised their courage. Scholz rejoiced that we are morethat in Germany democrats are more numerous than anti-democrats, which in the circumstances is an ironic reversal of reality.

It is hard to tell where these debates will lead. The political climate is extremely heated. Robust debates are always welcome, and the AfD is no stranger to polemics. Yet even contemplating the idea of suppressing a party with several million voters is fundamentally anti-democratic. This is why my newspaper, Junge Freiheit, has launched a petition against a ban, which so far 120,000 people have signed. Leading Social Democrats, like party leader Saskia Esken, want to start the process by submitting a request to the Constitutional Court, but cooler headseven within the SPDsuspect the move might backfire, just as the lawfare against Trump seems to be only increasing his support.

Vera Lengsfeld, a former dissident in the communist German Democratic Republic (GDR) who fought against political oppression before 1989 and later became a respected CDU Member of Parliament, has spoken passionately about how Germany is turning into a soft-totalitarian state where the ruling class tries to control and suppress dissent. In the GDR, she points out, there were also mass demonstrations organized by the government to solidify support for the regime, and stir up passions against supposed enemies of the state. An internal spy-organization infiltrated and denounced dissident groups. She writes, The state of affairs, which became clear during the demonstrations against the Right, are fatally reminiscent of the GDR. It is hard to disagree.

For now, in Germany as much as the United States, many establishment figures have a dream to rid the country of those opposition groups who threaten their positions and ideologies by turning them into moral pariahs. One can only hope that their undemocratic dreams fail.

See the original post:
Inside the German War on Democracy - The American Conservative

We are the party of democracy!

Thats the asinine campaign message Democrats are using heading into the 2024 election to convince voters that Donald Trump and his MAGA Republican supporters are an existential threat to the republic. Because as everyone knows, the political party that attempts to throw its primary political opponent off the ballot and into prison; prosecutes praying pro-lifers; targets practicing Catholics; interferes in elections to its candidates benefit; and coordinates with Big Tech to silence dissent online is the standard-bearer of democracy.

For all their disingenuous rhetoric about upholding the will of the people, Democrats are actively fighting against Americans wishes especially when it comes to the integrity of U.S. elections.

Last week, the Honest Elections Project (HEP) released a report recommending 14 policies for states to implement to ensure an electoral process thats fair and accountable to the people. Democrats are actively fighting against many of the commonsense practices outlined in the analysis despite their popularity amongst the American electorate.

Take, for instance, voter ID requirements. In July, the HEP released survey data showing that a whopping 88 percent of U.S. voters back laws requiring eligible citizens to show a form of identification in order to cast their ballot. Polling by Gallup in 2022 produced similar results, with 79 percent of respondents in favor of a photo ID requirement. But that doesnt seem to matter to Democrats, whose acolytes have spent years ignoring voters wishes and engaging in dishonest lawfare to dismantle states existing voter ID requirements.

From Ohio to New Hampshire, leftist lawyers and groups have filed frivolous lawsuits aimed at gutting voter ID statutes. Many of these suits are based on unsubstantiated claims that such laws disenfranchise nonwhite voters.

While courts across the country have repeatedly determined their voter suppression arguments to be bogus, Democrats continuous use of nonwhite voters as a crutch to smear popular voter ID laws shows how little respect they have for democracy. The aforementioned HEP poll also showed the vast majority of black (82 percent) and Hispanic (83 percent) voters support such requirements in order to vote. Gallup found that 77 percent of nonwhite respondents supported photo ID laws. If Democrats truly respected the will of the American voter, as they regularly claim to do, why are they trying to undercut a policy most of them support?

But its not just voter ID requirements. Democrats are actively waging a nationwide campaign to demolish numerous policies recommended by the HEP that ensure secure elections and are supported by the majority of U.S. voters.

While most of the electorate (89 percent) believes American elections should only be for American citizens, that hasnt stopped Democrats from attempting to authorize noncitizen voting throughout the country. Last year, for example, Rhode Island Democrats introduced legislation to authorize localities to allow illegal aliens to vote in their municipal elections. Some cities, such San Francisco, New York City, andWashington, D.C, have already passed measures permitting certain noncitizen voting.

In response to left-wing nonprofits dumping hundreds of millions of Zuckbucks into local election offices during the 2020 election to benefit Joe Biden, elected officials and voters in 27 states enacted measures restricting election offices ability to accept and use private monies to administer elections. In response, several of those same Democrat-aligned groups formalized the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence as a way of circumventing these Zuckbucks bans and therefore violating the will of the people in the aforementioned states.

The same dynamic can also be seen regarding mail-in voting. Most voters (66 percent) support terminating no-excuse mail voting as long as states offer two weeks of early in-person voting, including weekends. Meanwhile, Democrats who used the Covid lockdowns as a pretext forexpandingthe use of vote-by-mail and other insecure election practices have continued to push unsupervised mail balloting across the country. Some states, such as Nevada, automatically mail individuals listed on the states voter rolls a ballot ahead of elections.

Whether its banning foreign money in elections, ensuring transparency in the elections process, or backing election audits, the story remains the same: Democrats actively oppose policies supported by voters that bring accountability and security to the U.S. elections system. Their screeds about being the party of democracy are a dishonest talking point designed to obfuscate their contradictory actions and smear their political opponents as extremists.

Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

Follow this link:
If Dems Love 'Democracy,' Why Do They Attack Election Laws Voters Want? - The Federalist

The Council decided today to imposerestrictive measures against five individualsfor actions that undermine democracy, the rule of law or the peaceful transfer of power in Guatemala.

The listings include theAttorney General of Guatemala, Mara Consuelo Porras Argueta De Porres andthree other officials at the Guatemalan Public Prosecutors Office Secretary General ngel Arnoldo Pineda vila, Head of the Special Prosecution Office Against Impunity Jos Rafael Curruchiche Cucul and prosecutor Leonor Eugenia Morales Lazo De Snchez as well as judge Fredy Ral Orellana Letona.

Those targeted are responsible for undermining democracy, the rule of law and the peaceful transfer of power in Guatemala.

The listed individuals are subject to anasset freeze, and EU citizens and companies areforbidden from making funds available to them. The individuals are also subject to atravel restriction, which prevents them from entering or transiting through EU territories.

Todays decision follows the adoption, on 12 January 2024, of adedicated framework for restrictive measuresin support of democracy and a peaceful and orderly transfer of power in Guatemala. The framework was adopted ahead of the inauguration of democratically elected President Bernardo Arvalo on 14 January 2024, attended by the High Representative Josep Borrell.

"When I travelled to Guatemala City, I did so knowing that the presence of numerous international guests would not only send a strong message of support to democracy in Guatemala, but also a strong signal to obstructionists that circumventing democratic processes would not be tolerated by the international community. The EU stands ready to take further steps to hold those responsible accountable." Josep Borrell, High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy

TheEU remains fully committed to support democracy in Guatemalaand stands ready to work closely together with the new government of President Bernardo Arvalo on key issues of mutual interest such as to strengthen the rule of law, enhance sustainable and inclusive economic development and promote social justice to the benefit of the Guatemalan population.

The sanctions regime in respect of Guatemala was established on12 January 2024, to hold accountable those obstructing a democratic transition following the 2023 general elections, which resulted in a clear victory of President Bernardo Arvalo, as attested by the EU Election Observation Mission (EOM) to Guatemala.

The EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell attended the inauguration of President Bernardo Arvalo in January 2024.

Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/455 of 2 February 2024 implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/287 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Guatemala (including the list of the sanctioned individuals)

Council Decision (CFSP) 2024/457 of 2 February 2024 amending Decision (CFSP) 2024/254 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Guatemala (including the list of the sanctioned individuals)

Guatemala: Council establishes dedicated framework of restrictive measures in support of democracy, press release 12 January 2024

EU Delegation to Guatemala

Share this article:

More:
Guatemala: European Council sanctions an additional five individuals for undermining democracy and the rule of law - EU Reporter

El Salvadors government has jailed thousands of innocent people, suspended key civil liberties indefinitely and flooded the streets with soldiers. Now the president overseeing it all, Nayib Bukele, is being accused of violating the constitution by seeking re-election.

And even his vice-presidential running mate admits their goal is eliminating what he sees as the broken democracy of the past.

But polls show most Salvadorans support Mr. Bukele, often not in spite of his strongman tactics but because of them.

In elections on Sunday, voters are expected to hand Mr. Bukele and his New Ideas party a resounding victory, cementing the millennial presidents control over every branch of government.

The biggest reason, analysts say, is that the 42-year-old leader has achieved a seemingly impossible feat: decimating the vicious gangs that had turned El Salvador into one of the worlds most violent places.

Some people call it a dictatorship, said Sebastin Morales Rivera, a fisherman living in a former gang stronghold. But I would prefer to live under the dictatorship of a man with a sound mind than under the dictatorship of a bunch of psychopathic maniacs.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in.

Want all of The Times?Subscribe.

See the original post here:
He Cracked Down on Gangs and Rights. Now He's Set to Win a Landslide. - The New York Times