Archive for the ‘Democrats’ Category

Democrats’ Best Bet for House Control Is Following the Sun – New York Times


New York Times
Democrats' Best Bet for House Control Is Following the Sun
New York Times
There is no guarantee that the Democrats can put the House in play, even if Mr. Trump's approval ratings remain as low as they are now or slip further. The Republicans have so many safe seats that they could even survive a so-called wave election like ...
What are Democrats' chances for a House majority in 2018?American Enterprise Institute
How Democrats can rebuild a winning, multiracial coalitionThe Hill (blog)
Senate Democrats could hit Trump with government shutdownLA Daily News
AlterNet -Daily Kos -Fairfield Daily Republic
all 45 news articles »

See more here:
Democrats' Best Bet for House Control Is Following the Sun - New York Times

Opinion: Win or Lose, I Will Work to Unite the Democratic Party – NBCNews.com

From the start of our campaign for DNC chair, we've asked ourselves and our fellow Democrats a simple but fundamental question: How do we come together as a team to rebuild our party and fight Donald Trump?

The Democratic party is a big and diverse tent. But my mentor Ted Kennedy often said, "What divides us pales in comparison to what unites us." As Democrats, we don't just share common views on issues - we are united by common values: inclusion, opportunity, justice, equality.

But today those core values are under attack. Immigrants are being torn apart from their families. Workers' rights and women's rights are under siege. Millions are at risk of losing their health coverage.

Across the country, Donald Trump and Republicans have targeted our most vulnerable communities and threatened to turn back the clock on decades of progress.

We're the only line of defense they've got, and they're counting on us to succeed. Those struggling for opportunity want Democrats to fight for them, not against each other.

Those living in the shadows want Democrats to stand up to the Republican agenda, not splinter off into competing silos. For these families, a united Democratic party isn't a luxury - it's a necessity.

Those aren't just talking points. Over the last three months, my campaign has already begun forging that unity by bringing together people from all wings of our party. Our staff have worked for Senator Sanders, Secretary Clinton and President Obama, and we've earned support from people on all sides of last year's Democratic primary.

In shaping an inclusive vision for our party, I've also traveled the country to hear directly from folks in every corner of our big tent. Earlier this month, I embarked on a rural listening tour through Wisconsin and Kansas to hear from voters about how we can earn back the trust of their communities. And on Monday night, I met with Democrats in Seattle both supporters and non-supporters alike to talk about how our party can join with young activists to be at the forefront of some of our toughest battles - from raising wages to cracking down on police misconduct. These conversations are necessary.

RELATED: Tom Perez Unleashes Inner Pit Bull Against Trump in Bid to Lead Democrats

When it comes to building unity, this isn't my first rodeo. I decided to run my campaign the same way I've taken on challenges my whole career by listening to people, bridging divisions and bringing everyone to the table.

That's why I was President Obama's first call when he needed someone to resolve major disputes at Verizon and the West Coast Ports, and why I've worked with Democrats throughout the country to bring about progressive change. I've worked hand in hand with Elizabeth Warren to protect the retirement of millions of Americans. I've worked with Bernie Sanders to highlight companies that treat their workers fairly. And I've worked under President Obama to protect the right to vote, enforce our civil rights laws, and make economic opportunity a reality.

RELATED: DNC Race Shakeup: Ray Buckley to Exit, Endorse Keith Ellison

So no matter who wins in Atlanta, my first priority will be to help unite our party around the values of inclusion and opportunity. And if I have the privilege of being elected chair, I promise to make sure everyone's voice is heard because I believe that everyone in this race has so much to offer when rebuilding our party.

We can't afford to leave anyone on the sidelines; we need their ideas, their experience, and their energy to build the best party we can be. As chair, I'll facilitate the tough conversations we need to have about how to move our party forward, and I'll work each and every day to be a leader for all Democrats.

RELATED: Democrats Are Eager to See the End of the Race for DNC Chair

If the party chooses one of the other great Democrats in this race, I will be as ready as ever to fight alongside them. In fact, I will join the next chair on a unity tour across the country, so we can begin building our team and fighting together to protect the values we all share.

With so much at stake, there's nothing Donald Trump would love more than for Democrats to fall apart. We will not give him that satisfaction. What we will do is rally around our common values. Because a united Democratic team is both our best strategy and Donald Trump's worst nightmare.

I've often said that this is a "where were you moment," and I'm ready to work with everyone to unite the Democratic team against Donald Trump and the Republican agenda.

That's my commitment win or lose.

Tom Perez is the former Secretary of Labor under Pres. Barack Obama.

Follow NBC News Latino on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

See more here:
Opinion: Win or Lose, I Will Work to Unite the Democratic Party - NBCNews.com

Democrats persist with the slippery claim of a ’60-vote standard’ for Supreme Court nominees – Washington Post

One of things I talked with him [Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch] about is the standard which every other Supreme Court nominee has had to meet, and that is earning 60 bipartisan votes in the United States Senate. Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), interview with UpFront with Mike Gousha, Feb. 18, 2017

A reader pointed out this statement by Baldwin, noting that it appeared to be a repeat of the misleading Democratic talking point in the battle over President Trumps nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.

Time for a refresher course!

As we have noted before, there is no Senate standard that a nominee must have 60 votes for confirmation. But, under current Senate rules, it takes 60 votes (three-fifths of the Senate) to end debate on most legislation. Until Democrats changed the rules in 2013, it also took 60 votes to end debate on executive branch and most judicial nominations.

The Democratic rule change did not include Supreme Court nominations. But that would be a rare maneuver.

(A filibuster generally refers to extended debate that delays a vote on a pending matter, while cloture is a device to end debate. Filibusters are used by opponents of a nominee or legislation, while cloture is filed by supporters to end debate.)

The last Supreme Court nominee who faced a cloture vote was Samuel A. Alito Jr. in 2006. He won it handily, 72 to 25. After the cloture vote, senators voted on whether to confirm Alito. The vote was 58 to 42. (He earned the support of four Democrats, but was opposed by one Republican and one Republican-turned-Independent.)

Although the effort to filibuster Alito failed miserably, it served as a vehicle for potential White House contenders (such as Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden) to demonstrate their liberal credentials. Obama, as president, later regrettedsupporting the filibuster of Alito, what his spokesman called a symbolic vote.

There have been three other cloture votes concerning the Supreme Court, two involving William H. Rehnquist, the late chief justice. In 1971, a motion to invoke cloture for his initial appointment to the court failed by a vote of 52 to 42, but he was nevertheless confirmed later that day, 68 to 26. When Rehnquistwas nominated to become chief justice in 1986, he was confirmed 65 to 33 after cloture was also invoked by a vote of 68 to 31.

The only other cloture vote concerned Lyndon B. Johnsons 1968 nomination of Abe Fortas, at the time an associate justice, to be chief justice. The Fortas nomination eventually ran aground on ethics issues and his close relationship with Johnson, alreadya lame duck, and he eventually withdrew after his nomination failed a cloture vote. At the time, Senate rules required approval of two-thirds of the Senate to end debate and Fortas could achieve only a vote of 45 to 43.

Here are the final votes for the current members of the court. We have noted in bold the two sitting justices who did not receive 60 votes for confirmation.

Elena Kagan: 63 to 37 (2010) Sonia Sotomayor: 68 to 31 (2009) Samuel A. Alito Jr.: 58 to 42 (2006) John G. Roberts Jr.: 78 to 22 (2005) Stephen G. Breyer: 87 to 9 (1994) Ruth Bader Ginsburg: 96 to 3 (1993) Clarence Thomas: 52 to 48 (1991) Anthony M. Kennedy: 97 to 0 (1988)

John Kraus, communications director for Baldwin, said: While it wasnt explicit, she was referring to Supreme Court justices appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents, the last six of which earned 60 votes, including the most recent Obama nominees, Justices Sotomayor and Kagan.

Democrats such as Baldwin appear to be arguing that because Alito received more than 60 votes on the vote to end debate, he met the 60-vote standard, even though he did not receive 60 votes for confirmation. But Baldwin, in her interview, referred to earning 60 bipartisan votes in the United States Senate, which certainly sounds different from a mere cloture vote.

Democrats continue to be slippery with their language. Sixty votes is not a standard for Supreme Court confirmations, as two of the current justices on the court did not meet that supposed standard to get on the court.

Baldwin earns Two Pinocchios.

(About our rating scale)

Send us facts to check by filling out this form

Keep tabs on Trumps promises with our Trump Promise Tracker

Sign up for The Fact Checker weekly newsletter

How would you rate this claim? (The check mark means you think the statement is true, not that you agree with the rating.)

We need to verify that you are an actual person.

This is a non-scientific user poll. Results are not statistically valid and cannot be assumed to reflect the views of Washington Post users as a group or the general population.

Share the Facts

2

5

There "is the standard which every other Supreme Court nominee has had to meet, and that is earning 60 bipartisan votes in the United States Senate.

Tammy Baldwin

Senator (D-Wisc.)

in an interview on "Upfront with Mike Gousha"

Saturday, February 18, 2017

02/18/2017

View post:
Democrats persist with the slippery claim of a '60-vote standard' for Supreme Court nominees - Washington Post

Allow expansion of family leave, Democrats urge Gov. Greitens – Kansas City Star


Kansas City Star
Allow expansion of family leave, Democrats urge Gov. Greitens
Kansas City Star
Democrats are urging Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens to allow rules to go into effect that would expand family leave options for state executive branch employees. State Auditor Nicole Galloway, a Democrat, sent a letter to Greitens Tuesday in support of ...
Democrats ask Greitens to allow expanded family leavefox2now.com

all 3 news articles »

Read more from the original source:
Allow expansion of family leave, Democrats urge Gov. Greitens - Kansas City Star

Top NC Democrats want Supreme Court to drop voting law review – CBS News

North Carolina Governor-elect Roy Cooper speaks to supporters at a victory rally the day after his Republican opponent, incumbent Pat McCrory, conceded in Raleigh, North Carolina, on December 6, 2016

REUTERS

RALEIGH, N.C. -- North Carolinas new Democratic governor and attorney general say theyre ending state efforts to persuade the U.S. Supreme Court to revive a GOP-backed voter ID law that was struck down by a lower court, but Republican lawmakers say they will continue pushing for the high courts review.

Gov. Roy Cooper and Attorney General Josh Stein said Tuesday theyre withdrawing from the states petition for a high court review. The Supreme Court next must decide if it will take up the case anyway.

Play Video

North Carolina's law requiring voters to show photo ID was overturned Friday by a federal appeals court. The court cited discriminatory requireme...

This morning, the Governors General Counsel and Chief Deputy Attorney General jointly sent a letter discharging outside counsel in the case on behalf of the State, said a statement announcing the action on Tuesday. Also today, the Governors Office and the N.C.Department of Justice formally withdrew the State and Governors request for the U.S. Supreme Court to review the Fourth Circuits decision.

Last year Pat McCrory, then the states Republican governor, asked the Supreme Court to review a lower appeals court ruling. The July opinion by the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals determined tougher ballot access rules adopted in 2013 were written with almost surgical precision to discourage black voters who tended to support Democrats.

In a statement on Tuesday, Cooper said, We need to make it easier for people to exercise their right to vote, not harder, and I will not continue to waste time and money appealing this unconstitutional law.

Its time for North Carolina to stop fighting for this unfair, unconstitutional law and work instead to improve equal access for voters, Cooper said.

The law, passed two years after Republicans took control of the state legislature for the first time in a century, sought to entrench GOP politicians in power by targeting voters who, based on race, were unlikely to vote for the majority party, the opinion by a three-judge panel of the court stated.

We can only conclude that the North Carolina General Assembly enacted the challenged provisions of the law with discriminatory intent, the judges said.

The Supreme Court in August divided 4-4 on overturning the appeals court ruling for last falls elections. That meant North Carolinas voter identification requirement couldnt be enforced and allowed an extra seven days of early voting and same-day voter registration.

Play Video

Voters in North Carolina now need to present a photo ID in order to vote. An estimated 225,000 N.C. voters don't have that. Critics call the law ...

The states Republican legislative leaders decried Tuesdays desperate and politically-motivated effort to scuttle Supreme Court review and allow the ruling by the three-judge panel of partisan Democrats to stand. Outside attorneys hired by the General Assembly to defend the law will continue on the case, Senate Leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, and House Speaker Tim Moore, R-Cleveland, said in a statement.

The state elections board also could opt to press the Supreme Court request, but the panel itself may be revamped as part of the ongoing partisan warfare between entrenched Republican legislative leaders and the newly elected Democratic governor. The elections board meets Wednesday.

McCrory and Republican legislative leaders said last year the laws voter ID provision, which came into effect during the 2016 primaries, improved the integrity of elections. Appeals court judges said the state provided no evidence of the kind of in-person voter fraud the ID mandate would address. The law was amended last year to include a method for people unable to get a photo ID to still vote.

North Carolina voters last November backed Republican Donald Trump for president, re-elected fellow Republican U.S. Sen. Richard Burr and expanded the number of statewide GOP office-holders.

2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Go here to read the rest:
Top NC Democrats want Supreme Court to drop voting law review - CBS News