Wall Street Journal (subscription) | The Danger of Progressives' Inhumanity to the Humanities - WSJ Wall Street Journal (subscription) Science moves forward; literature doesn'tand when it tries, the results can be monstrous. |
Go here to see the original:
The Danger of Progressives' Inhumanity to the Humanities - WSJ - Wall Street Journal (subscription)
Over and over again, political pundits and journalists make constant reference to the Democrats progressive base. Without heavy progressive turnout, we are told, the House wont flip in 2018 and Democrats will have to endure the most painful, humiliating victory Tweetstorm from President Trump.
This is likely true, but it raises an important question: What exactly is a progressive at this point?
The group of voters currently holding Democratic leaders (and lets face it, donors) hostage has made it clear that the partys next nominee for president must adopt certain policies, such as single-payer health care and a nationwide $15 minimum wage, to secure their support. Such policies will likely be sold by the press and Democratic leaders as a Strong Progressive Agenda, or something similar.
Yet such a description is vague at best and deceptive at worst. After all, Senator Bernie Sanders mainstreamed many of these policies in last years Democratic primary campaign, not as a Democrat but as an Independent who proudly calls himself a democratic socialist. Despite his outsider status, Sanders still received over 43 percent of the votes cast in his campaign against Hillary Clinton. And according to a poll done in 2016 by American Action Network, nearly 60 percent of Democratic primary voters viewed socialism as having a positive impact on society.
So one must ask why so many insist on using an outmoded nicety like progressive. While the term was originally used to describe those who supported a more active federal government and expansive welfare state in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, old-school progressives like Presidents Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson didnt advocate for government control of the means of production, as many socialists do today. Setting aside whether or not their policies of trust busting or expanding the role of the executive branch produced desirable outcomes, neither of these men sought to fundamentally dismantle the nations market economy.
Sanders was asked in an interview with The Nation in 2015 about whether a socialist could be president. He responded that he wasnt afraid of the word and had no problem defending its core tenets. So why are so many other people?
The answer likely has to do with marketing. Progressive remains a nebulous enough term that the average voter wont make any immediate historical connections to the phrase; the historical failures of socialism, meanwhile, are well documented. The root of the word progress has generally positive connotations for voters. Thus when presented with a progressive policy, voters will think of an improved future, rather than some sort of rigid ideology. (Simple, yes. But, then, most sales pitches are.)
Of course none of this makes the efforts by Democratic-party officials and their allies in the media to shy away from the S word any less disingenuous. When so many members of the party openly celebrate socialism and support socialist candidates, using any other word to describe this political constituency is an act of absurdity.
Perhaps in an earlier time when the country was less divided politically and Americans were more suspicious of liberal welfare programs, a rebranding was necessary. Now, on the heels of a primary campaign in which Democrats nearly nominated a socialist for president, its safe to say that that moment has passed.
Its time to move on as a society and retire progressive. Socialist might seem just as outdated, but if youre worried about how people might judge you, perhaps you should reconsider your beliefs.
Joe Simonson writes about politics and culture.
View post:
'Socialist' is a more accurate description of today's Democratic base. - National Review
This is a rush transcript from "The Fox News Specialists," July 26, 2017. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
EBONI K. WILLIAMS, CO-HOST: Hey, everybody. I'm Eboni K. Williams along with and Eric Bolling and Kat Timpf. And this is "The Fox New Specialists."
Another very, very busy news day with major developments in the showdown over repealing and replacing ObamaCare in the Senate. Now, just a short time ago, the Senate rejected a repeal-only proposal that would defund many key parts of ObamaCare, the vote 55 no's to 45 yes'. There were seven Republican defections. We're also awaiting remarks from President Trump at the White House. The president is scheduled to make an announcement on jobs. We'll go straight to that as soon as he starts speaking. But in the meantime, today's log in the Senate is showcasing the uphill battle that Republican face on healthcare and getting a bill through. So Eric, we have talked about this ad nauseam. I know you had some very specific ideas yesterday about what the GOP could do at this point. Are you surprised, disappointed at the inability to even pass clean repeal?
ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: Extremely disappointed. I think I figured out what's going to go on here. So John McCain rushes back and votes against repealing. I think I figured this out. There's going to be nothing. The Senate will do whatever they can, maybe gets something so they can to throw it back to the house. There's going to be no healthcare bill. So what ends up happening, 2018, a year away, the midterm elections, one year away, the Senate is in good shape for the GOP. They could pick up five or six seats even with a failed healthcare situation going here. The house may be in a little bit of jeopardy. But if you do pick up five additional Republican seats, you can give rid of these squishes that voted against it. They were elected to go and repeal and replace ObamaCare and they can't vote to repeal it. McCain, Murkowski, Portman, Capito, Alexander, Heller and Collins, you guys should all be primaried next time you're up for election.
WILLIAMS: OK. So let's talk a little bit about some of the specific names, Kat. John McCain yesterday, many in the GOP hailing him a hero for rushing back, of course, from a critical illness that we know he's suffering with to at least vote for discussion, but then, of course, as Eric pointing out today, voting against the actual repeal.
KATHERINE TIMPF, CO-HOST: Right. As you pointed out, I think a lot of people are very concerned about the potential political implications or other implications -- real life implications, as well, of people not having healthcare when ObamaCare is just repealed. And that everything will kind of go nuts if that were to happen. It's a vote that I personally disagree with.
(CROSSTALK)
TIMPF: I said I just personally disagree with it.
WILLIAMS: You mean the perception from some people is that what's going on.
TIMPF: Sure. I think so. There could be consequences. I'm not exactly sure about that. The way I understand it, is that would be a gradual thing and wouldn't all go nuts like that. But I think that mostly as a perception type of thing. People don't want to just repeal and have nothing out there. I disagree with it. If I were somebody who's in the Senate and I had ran on repealing ObamaCare, I would have voted to repeal ObamaCare today.
WILLIAMS: Well, we'll get to more of that. Let's first meet today's specialist. She's worked at our U.S. embassies in both Baghdad and (INAUDIBLE), and she's a foreign policy national security analyst, and she's the national co-chair of the Maverick PAC, so obviously she specializes in all things foreign policy, Morgan Ortagus is here. And she's a Fox News political analyst, a recent candidate for the DNC chair position, and the former president of the women media center, and she specializes in singing Dolly Parton songs, Jehmu Greene is here. I've got to get some tunes from you a bit, Jehmu. But Morgan -- and many have said that the GOP just seems to be incredibly far apart on this. So is there any real hope around passing anything involving healthcare? We know they got the debate last night. But is there going to be a bill?
MORGAN ORTAGUS, MAVERIC PAC CO-CHAIR: Who knows, Right? I mean, I could be a billionaire if you could figure out if you're going to have a bill or not. I'm actually a little bit more hopeful than Eric. Because I do think a lot of people are frustrated with the president for calling out Senator Murkowski. I actually think, you know, this president is different from everyone else in politics, and he's going to use the leverage that he has in order to get a bill passed. The bottom line is we can't go into the 2018 elections. Republicans cannot go to the midterms saying give us five or six more seats in the Senate so that we can pass a bill that we want to pass because we weren't able to do it last year because we didn't have enough seats. We left a very convoluted message.
BOLLING: It's a better message, Morgan, we couldn't get anything together?
ORTAGUS: No.
BOLLING: Or it's a better message on top of that.
(CROSSTALK)
BOLLING: . we got something together and it's worse than ObamaCare?
ORTAGUS: Well, if the president and the Senate leadership and the house leadership have a bill that they can ultimately agree on and vote on, then.
BOLLING: You think that they are -- the Senate can't get their act together. Then they have to send that bill in conference to the house, house has to vote on it and then back to the Senate for final approval.
TIMPF: And the house had kind of a tough time getting it together as well.
BOLLING: Are we really under the impression that they're going to be able to make this process happen any time soon?
ORTAGUS: It doesn't look like it. One of the problems is that insurers have to set their 2018 rates in a couple weeks. So there's a lot of uncertainty in the insurance market. I would say that Republicans have no choice. I know it looks dire. I know this bill lives and dies and go to the Senate and the house. It's incredibly frustrating for everyone involved. But I would argue that Republicans have no choice but to stay here, don't go away for August recess until they get this right. How do ask for more seats in 2018 without pass something.
BOLLING: You're going to get them, even if it fails -- even health care fails, you'll get tax reform on the books. You'll get four or five seats in the Senate and you get rid some of these squishy Republicans that voted against repealing. Can you believe this?
WILLIAMS: All right, Jehmu. Bolling predicting something very optimistic for the GOP. I'm going to take a gander that maybe you see it differently. We know for seven years the GOP has talk about repealing and replacing ObamaCare. Here is their grand opportunity to do so, and yet we see hysteria.
JEHMU GREENE, FOX NEWS POLITICAL ANALYST: Yeah. I don't think there's any disagreement between Democrats and Republicans that healthcare is still broken. Even the name sake of ObamaCare, President Obama, he was very clear that it needed to be fixed. And this is a real opportunity for politicians, the senators to prioritize purpose over politics. And when I ran for the DNC chair, one of the things that I really tried to focus on is prioritizing that purpose, but also the substance of it. When you think of the discussion that's going on here in this conversation and all over cable news, it's all about how the sausage is made, it's all about the numbers of what -- to get to the votes. However you think about healthcare, since ObamaCare, there are 20 million more Americans who have healthcare. We need to talk about the successes. We need to talk about.
(CROSSTALK)
BOLLING: How many of those are on new Medicare and Medicaid recipients?
GREENE: It's still healthcare. What are you going to do? What are you going to do? Say you have it today, but you're not going to have it tomorrow?
TIMPF: Also health insurance and healthcare are different. I have friends on ObamaCare, so they have health insurance, but a lot of places won't take it. If I need to go to the hospital, and use all these different hospitals, nobody takes it. So having health insurance isn't the same as healthcare.
(CROSSTALK)
WILLIAMS: Right. And I think many people are clear on that. But let's just play the semantics out here. Jehmu, I think for a lot of people -- Eric, we can talk about Medicare, Medicaid, whatever, they just know that they've got something. And so, for those people that feels if you take it away, you don't replace it with something, though, Eric, I mean -- think about what the ads are going to look like. Think about what the messaging is going to look like in 2018.
BOLLING: You replace it with something better, and you're working on something better than ObamaCare. Remember, I'll give you another number, Jehmu, zero, the number of Republicans that voted for ObamaCare. And now look at you, one of the most liberal Democrats on the planet saying ObamaCare is a failure. It's a failure.
TIMPF: On the planet. Not just the country.
BOLLING: Am I wrong? I don't think I'm even joking about this. You're one of the more progressive people I ever met in my life. I love you, but you are now admitting that ObamaCare is a failure seven years later. We were telling you that seven years ago. But you guys pushed it through.
GREENE: That's nothing new. Like I said, President Obama was saying to Republicans for years, come together with us. Let's fix this. Basically, the same thing now that Chuck Schumer is saying. The same thing.
BOLLING: Whoa, whoa.
GREENE: . the same thing that Senator McCain said.
BOLLING: No, no. McConnell is saying come over across the line, Democrats. We have the house and the Senate. You need to cross the line come work with us. And it doesn't sound like Schumer nor Pelosi want to do any of that either.
WILLIAMS: Well, Schumer did say, Eric, yesterday, he sat on the floor with his glasses on the tip of his nose that, certainly, we want to work with you. He made a plea, Morgan, to moderate Republicans to hold out on this type of bill for something that actually looks better, some type of modification.
BOLLING: No, he wants to keep ObamaCare.
WILLIAMS: He wants to fix ObamaCare.
BOLLING: That won't fly. That bird don't fly.
ORTAGUS: We're also passionate about healthcare because it affects every single one of us. And it's this important. I was talking to people on the hill before I came on air. There's still amendments that the congress is working on. And I think that the senators that are there working on this bill should continue to do it. I mean, don't just walk away from this vote and not pass something. Senator Cassidy and Senator Graham have a bill about -- that the governors really like about giving block grants to the states. We can get in lead on this, but the bottomline is.
BOLLING: Stay right there. And then that goes to the house. What does the freedom caucus in the house say about that?
ORTAGUS: Well, then the president needs to get the house in line. I mean, we can't have this.
BOLLING: The freedom caucus says no. We're not passing that in the house.
ORTAGUS: Well, they need to get in line and support this president somehow. The Republican Party is acting like two different parties. Whether it's the house freedom caucus or its moderates in the Senate, those sides need to come together.
WILLIAMS: Are they two different parties?
ORTAGUS: They are, and they're embarrassing the president in the process.
BOLLING: You can't say that. This is not on the president whatsoever. This is -- leadership on the house and leadership in the Senate who put these two bills together, frankly, on their own. They didn't -- the house bill was never even allowed -- senators were not even allowed to see the house bill, let alone the other constituents within the house. This isn't on the president. You can't do that. Listen, you can say the Republicans are bifurcated and they are. But the president is simply saying get me something that I can get to the American people that's better than ObamaCare. And they failed at the house. They're failing at the Senate.
TIMPF: The way that the government is set up, executive and legislative branches are different, so, of course, he's not going to be writing this bill. I agree with you, Eric, that this should be placed on congress. Blame should be placed on congress for this. But a lot of it, like I've been saying, the GOP is having an identity crisis. A lot of them are way more moderate than the GOP of the past. The point where they're actually like the Democrats of the past, and some aren't. So I don't know how you reconcile those two. I really don't, no matter if you have seven more years. I don't know if you can ever reconcile that.
BOLLING: You repeal now and you work to replace it with something better.
WILLIAMS: Eric, we just saw today, two years, that is what the idea that was put on the floor. You get two years to replace it with something better, your words. They voted it down.
(CROSSTALK)
BOLLING: Well, no, no. McCain, Murkowski, Portman, Capito, Alexander, Heller, and Collins voted it down.
GREENE: You know why they voted it down? It's because -- since that original vote when President Obama was in the White House, more and more people have started to love ObamaCare. There's no other.
BOLLING: Are you suggesting that these seven senators have constituents that are in favor of keeping ObamaCare?
GREENE: Yes.
BOLLING: If you go to the election booths in 2018.
GREENE: They've been hearing a tidal wave of calls in their districts from them. And Morgan, you said this is about the Republicans getting in line to support the president. I'm sorry. Healthcare is not about supporting the president, whoever is in the White House. It is about these members who have been elected in their districts who represent hundreds of thousands of people who have now gotten healthcare since ObamaCare passed.
BOLLING: But you can't suggest that these seven no votes are in favor of keeping ObamaCare.
GREENE: . without any alternative.
(CROSSTALK)
WILLIAMS: Didn't Donald Trump say if you vote no on this, you are saying ObamaCare is working and you are supporting ObamaCare? He said that.
BOLLING: I bet you every last penny I have that not one of these seven senators will ever run on, I want to keep ObamaCare.
TIMPF: He did say that, though.
WILLIAMS: But Trump said that.
(CROSSTALK)
BOLLING: No, the senators didn't. The senators didn't. He said effectively you're voting to keep.
WILLIAMS: Right.
BOLLING: Effectively.
WILLIAMS: Right.
BOLLING: Of course they are. But individually you want to run on I kept -- I voted against repealing ObamaCare? That's a losing proposition in the GOP.
TIMPF: They wouldn't. And I don't think they want that. They're just scared of the alternative because they don't know what.
WILLIAMS: Whose fault is that, Morgan? Let's just break this down. Whose fault is it that after seven years the GOP has this opportunity, and I agree with Jehmu. I've been very critical of ObamaCare. I don't like the mandate and I don't like the premiums. Let's bring them down. In the meantime, nothing is better -- it's really on the table. Nothing is polling better. The CBC scores are a mess. It is just not where it needs to be.
ORTAGUS: It's every single elected Republican official fault, all of them, right? And it's all of us who are involved in the process. We can try to blame Democrats. We have power in both parties of congress and the White House, and we have to come to an agreement on this. So, you know, we can say it's these seven senator's fault. It's this senator's fault. It's everybody. Because whether you're in the house freedom caucus or you're moderate.
(CROSSTALK)
BOLLING: They passed this. They passed this same bill in 2015. They got it to the president's desk who vetoed this bill. Now seven of them say I'm no longer on board? It's the same thing.
ORTAGUS: Right. But the debate isn't over, Eric. I mean, they're still in the Senate tonight voting on this.
BOLLING: No, it failed. It failed. They got 45 votes. It failed. It went down.
ORTAGUS: So no matter what else happens, you think it's a failure?
BOLLING: The straight repeal they passed in 2015, 18 months ago, everyone was on board. They got it to the president's desk. He had to veto it otherwise it was going to become the law of the land. Where are those seven senators who voted in favor -- I'm sorry, six of the seven who voted in favor of it in 2015, why are they against it now? Why? One reason why.
(CROSSTALK)
ORTAGUS: I don't know.
(CROSSTALK)
TIMPF: Because now there's no one to veto it and be responsible for something bad happening. It's about not wanting to be responsible. It's about wanting to run and just using these as talking points.
BOLLING: Agree.
TIMPF: . blah, blah, blah. But not having any real answers.
ORTAGUS: Don't forget.
(CROSSTALK)
ORTAGUS: . what happened to the military? We have evidence before that we've done these sorts of measures in congress and we still have sequestration, right now, because the congress was never able to come together. So I think, I would to guess that's some of the fears of the people that voted against it today. I'm not defending it. I think that they have to get a bill together or they do not deserve to win.
BOLLING: I'll tell you what, there will be primaries.
GREENE: It's all about talk when the reality sets in and they'll realize at stake, that's why they voted against it.
(CROSSTALK)
WILLIAMS: We need more political will. We're going to take a quick break. But we are keeping an eye on that jobs announcement from President Trump. And when it begins, we'll go straight to it. But up next, will an unexpected -- of criminal leak investigation be enough for A.G. Jeff Sessions to keep his job? Stay tuned.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TIMPF: President Trump is supposed to deliver a jobs announcement at the White House any moment now. Eric, this is a big thing. This is one of the big reasons why a lot of people voted for President Trump. Jobs and the economy.
BOLLING: Yeah. And as the mainstream media focuses on Russia, this is what really going on. Jobs numbers have been fantastic. This is some news that we've found out -- we've been hearing about that Apple uses an outside vendor to make this LCD screen for the iPhone. Foxcom is one of the vendors -- probably the biggest vendor. They're going to open up some manufacturing plants I believe in Wisconsin. I think this is what it's all about. But that's great news. Starting out, supposed to like, 3,000 high-paying American jobs. Now these things have been built in China through Foxcom in other countries, but bringing them back to America, 3,000 jobs I understand now, maybe up to 13,000 going forward. This is just what it's about for Donald Trump.
WILLIAMS: This is where President Trump looks strong, right? I agree, Kat, this is why most people that voted for President Trump voted for him -- absent political experience because he's a business guy. He's the guy that knows how to make a deal and get things done. So I think when he first got elected, there's a couple of automobile manufacturers that either kept plants here or came back to their manufacturing home bases here in the United States, and this is the type of thing that he absolutely should be talking about, holding rallies about, doing everything he can to energize base, get more political capitol. To my view, Morgan, I think he spent some political capitol in all of these healthcare losses. But, you know, Eric, ultimately, I think this is a good thing for President Trump to be doing at this point.
BOLLING: Very good thing. Very good thing. Morgan, we're watching -- I think we're looking at the president. He's about to hit the podium. Again, let's remind everyone, this plant is likely going to be in Wisconsin. Paul Ryan comes from Wisconsin. Reince Priebus is from Wisconsin. Scott Walker, also from Wisconsin. Also been a supporter, I guess, recent supporter of Donald Trump. We see Vice President Pence there as well. Jehmu, this is hard to argue with when you look at the economic numbers of President Trump.
Continued here:
Are progressives ready to admit that ObamaCare has failed? - Fox News
The Labour leadership could be rationalised as reflecting the politics of leave-dominated constituencies. But it has taken principled positions in other areas. Photograph: Stefan Wermuth/AFP/Getty Images
It is a paradox not lost on many Labour MPs that while their leader is to the left even of Michael Foot, he has collaborated with the right more than any Labour leader since Ramsay MacDonald. Jeremy Corbyns insistence that Brexit means leaving the single market and customs union unpicking Keir Starmers carefully woven tapestry of ambiguity now puts him in the same place as Theresa May and Liam Fox. That place is to the hard right of British politics.
The similarities with MacDonald, accused by a large swath of his party of propping up a Conservative-dominated government committed to austerity, are striking. The Labour leadership is supporting the Conservatives on the biggest issue of the day, despite the economic harm that leaving the worlds largest single market is likely to cause by reducing tax receipts and increasing austerity.
Will the parliamentary Labour party put up with it? Many Labour MPs seek to oppose the first government since the second world war to no longer regard economic competence and performance as central to its programme. The Conservative proposition at the general election was extraordinary for its comically innumerate manifesto, and its treatment of business as an embarrassing relative best kept out of sight. The party has been consumed by English nationalism and the politics of identity: the economic consequences of policy are secondary to taking back control.
The far left has long viewed the EU as a capitalist project that good socialists should steer well clear of
I am genuinely puzzled by the position of Labours leadership. It could be rationalised as reflecting the politics of leave-dominated constituencies. But the leadership has taken principled positions in other areas. Moreover, it is seriously at odds with voters in London and Scotland, and the trade unionmovement.
I suspect that at the heart of it is a lingering attachment to the negative views about Europe incubated in the 1970s. The far left has long viewed the EU as deeply inimical to its values: a capitalist project that good socialists should steer well clear of. Somehow, that view of the world has survived like a mammoth preserved in the Siberian permafrost. The Guardians economics editor, Larry Elliott, breathes new life into it; and, as it appears to be the stance of Corbyn, we must engage with it, however removed it might be from todays reality.
Elliot and others argue that single market freedoms prevent sensible interventionism. They dont. State aid rules are sensibly designed to prevent ruinous bidding by national governments for internationally mobile capital. But they do not inhibit intelligent state intervention. As business secretary I had to seek state aid approval for several projects, including the publicly owned green investment bank. There was delay, but all were agreed.
The rules around public procurement have been over-interpreted by zealous British officialdom as outlawing support for community and national businesses. But this misguided literalism is not the European way: Germany and France interpret the rules more flexibly. The European commissions aggressive competition policy stems from a healthy distrust of monopoly.
Surely the Labour leadership has noticed that the European commission is the only organisation willing and able to challenge the new global internet platforms that treat national governments with contempt. European competition rules are, however, too permissive in relation to takeovers as is our own legislation which leave our science-based companies wide open to predatory acquisition. But other European countries are open to reform in this area.
More generally, outside the time warp of the British far-left, European progressive parties have recognised that the liberalising forces of the single market are balanced by strong environmentalism, consumer protection and labour standards: precisely that which the Conservative right is determined to get rid of once we take back control.
There is however one area where the left critique of the European project has real force, though it has limited impact on Britain. The asymmetrical demand management policies that have been pursued within the eurozone, at the behest of rigid advocates of German fiscal orthodoxy, have been very damaging to countries such as Greece and Italy. But they arent just an offence against the ideas of the left; they are bad economics. Leaders like Macron who understand that the need for a European Germany rather than a German Europe could (especially with help from the UK) change direction. Those who speak most eloquently against these policies, like Yanis Varoufakis, have argued for Britain to remainin the EU.
Tribalism gets in the way of sensible collaboration in British politics. But I want to reach out to Labour MPs privately angry that they are being ordered into the division lobbies to vote for Theresa Mays extreme Brexit. It is time we were more grown-up in politics and worked together where there is common ground. There are also sensible Conservative MPs who understand that Britain is stronger in the single market and customs union.
Leaving Europe has the potential to smash open the British party system. This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for pro-European progressives to fight the forces of nationalism and reaction including on the reactionary left.
See more here:
Corbyn wants a hard-right Brexit. Progressives must fight back, not follow - The Guardian
Progressive Voice is a weekly opinion column. The views and opinions expressed in the column are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of their organizations or ARLnow.com.
ByLarry Roberts
This is the final installment in a series of columns about how Arlington progressives and 8thCongressional District (Arlington, Alexandria, Falls Church and parts of Fairfax) Democrats responded from a policy perspective to the 2016 Presidential election.
I am providing again without editorial comment the progressive agenda as defined by resolutions adopted by the 8thCongressional District Democratic Convention delegates. This is a window into the views of progressive voters entering a gubernatorial election year with an outcome that will have a dramatic effect on progressives, Arlington County and the Commonwealths future.
Support for Local Moderate Income Down Payment Assistance Programs. We support Virginia developing local down payment assistance programs for well qualified first-time homebuyers; income limits for those who can qualify should consider multiple independent income earners in conjunction with or rather than total household size; and adding minimum annual student loan payments to the formula for determining income limits.
Thanking Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) for His Service to Virginia. McAuliffe has served as Virginias Governor with distinction. He restored public trust and confidence in the office in the wake of conflict of interest scandals surrounding his predecessor. On his first day in office, the Governor signed an executive order imposing a $100 gift ban on himself, his family and members of his administration and their families.
Under his leadership, Virginia has announced 926 projects, created 189,200 new jobs and attracted $15.86 billion in new capital investment. McAuliffe has worked to prepare the Commonwealth for the effects of climate changes and to reduce Virginias contribution to its causes. To promote Virginias State Park System, he will visit every state park.
In addition to positive leadership on important policy issues, the Governor has been an essential bulwark against the mean-spirited attempts of the Republican-controlled General Assembly to take Virginia backwards on many social and economic issues. He has vetoed 91 bills and has amended many additional ones. Absent his actions, Virginia would be far less welcoming to many of its residents.
Therefore, the Convention congratulates McAuliffe on a job well done and urges voters to elect a Democratic successor to continue his efforts to curb the excesses of the Republican-controlled General Assembly.
Title IX. Protections for transgender students should be reinstated and guidance issued, and investigations commenced by the Office of Civil Rights in the Department of Education should be continued per the current standards. Additionally, the OCR should be fully funded to ensure that all students in Virginia are protected so that they can attend public schools and universities safely and free of discrimination. All K-12 and Virginia higher education institutions should advance and enforce the principles and legal standards of equality promulgated under Title IX.
Title X. Title X of the Population Research and Voluntary Family Planning Program provides significant and critical health and economic benefits for individuals, families and society. Millions of low income men and women in the United States rely on publicly funded services through Title X, family planning services, and other health care services including early detection and treatment of STIs and cervical cancer.
Without adequate funding to Title X to pay for these services, many men and women in Virginia will have no access to these lifesaving and family planning services. Sufficient funding should be provided to adequately meet the needs of the residents of Virginia who rely on services funded through Title X. The Federal government should prohibit discrimination against Title X providers that perform abortions with non-federal funds.
Voting Rights. We condemn any measure that seeks to gain political advantage by hindering citizens from exercising their fundamental right to vote; urge Congress to act promptly to fix Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act so that states with a recent history of discrimination will once again be subject to pre-clearance review by the Department of Justice; urge the General Assembly to enact a no-excuse in-person early (absentee) voting procedures, repeal the recently-enacted voter ID laws, and streamline voter registration procedures; and commend McAuliffes actions to restore voting rights to convicted felons who have served their time without the unnecessary and time consuming application process previously imposed.
The General Assembly must amend Article II, Section I of the State Constitution to remove Jim Crow-era felon disenfranchisement provisions. The Virginia Parole Board and other government organizations should actively educate Virginians on their restored voting rights and assist them in registering to vote.
Larry Roberts is an attorney in private practice who has previously served in the state Cabinet as Counselor to Governor Tim Kaine and as Arlington County Democratic Committee Chair. He has been Chair for three successful statewide political campaigns, including Justin Fairfaxs campaign to be the Democratic nominee for Lt. Governor in 2017.
Continued here:
Progressive Voice: A Progressive Agenda Part 5 | ARLnow.com - ARL now