Law & Policy

People For the American Way

Releases Year-End Statement on

Senate Judicial Nominations

WASHINGTON D.C. – 12/21/2023 – As the Senate leaves for the holiday break with a total of 166 confirmed judges, including this week’s confirmations of former Attorney General for the Cherokee Nation Sara E. Hill and former federal prosecutor John D. Russell for the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, People For the American way President Svante Myrick released the following statement:

“People For the American Way commends President Joe Biden and the Senate, under the leadership of Majority Leader Schumer and Senate Judiciary Chair Durbin, for the tremendous progress made in filling the federal bench with highly qualified and fair-minded judges, who reflect the rich diversity of this country. Biden’s appointed judges bring brilliance and credentialed experiences to the federal bench, and with strong records of commitment to protecting the civil and human rights of all of the people in America, they will ensure equality and justice for all.

“It is urgent that the Senate, when it returns in January, prioritize the confirmation of the more than 30 outstanding judicial nominees that will still be awaiting action, including Nicole Berner who will be the first openly LGBTQ+ person ever on the Fourth Circuit and Adeel Mangi who will be the nation’s first Muslim American federal appellate court judge.

“We expect the Senate to prioritize judicial nominations, to process nominees put forward by the White House, and to clear the calendar of nominees awaiting confirmations to fill court vacancies and repair our courts. Time is of the essence.”

About People For the American Way 

People For the American Way, a national progressive advocacy organization, inspires and mobilizes community and cultural leaders to advance Truth, Justice and the American Way. Learn more: http://www.pfaw.org

Economic Policy

 Leaders Discuss Implementation

of Biden's Economic 

and Climate Legislation

    Washington, D.C. — (CAP) -- 2/12/2023 - Governors and mayors from across the country joined the Center for American Progress and the Center for Innovative Policy for a summit on Feb. 8 to discuss the economic progress they are making after passage of the Biden administration’s historic economic and climate change legislation.

    The officials outlined how these measures are helping their communities transform to support new jobs and clean energy in the months and years to come.

    Maryland Gov. Wes Moore (D) said President Joe Biden’s vision has translated directly into job growth in his state and around the country.

    “We’re talking about a job growth in two years that we have not seen a president accomplish in four,” Moore said. “That’s facts, that’s numbers—that when we’re talking about brand-new record investments in infrastructure, that’s not just hyperbole. I can tell you as the chief executive of the state of Maryland, that’s real because we’ve been there, we’re putting that capital to work in the state of Maryland.”

    Moore added: “The president is moving full force into not just a reminder to this country of what’s been accomplished over these past few years, but moving full force and helping people understand that we’ve still got work to do. And we’ve got to move in partnership in order to make this happen.”

    Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) discussed how he had just signed into law a measure calling for 100 percent clean energy in the state by 2040. That legislation had both labor and utility companies in the state on board.

    “If we’re going to move to this clean energy economy, Minnesota wants to be there, to be the place where we manufacture, the place where we do the innovation, the place where we implement that,” Walz said. “We can’t be aggressive enough on this because, again, the competition is already global to a point where we’re losing our competitive advantage, especially in those spaces. Minnesota wants to lead in that.”

    Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) discussed his state’s investments in clean energy jobs and how that will bolster the economy while mitigating climate change. He said the state would transition to 80 percent renewable energy by the end of 2029 and wants to achieve 100 percent clean energy by 2040.

    “We want to be in the forefront of not only making sure that electric vehicles can access our market but also that we have the charging and infrastructure in place to make them a success and that we are able to promote affordability though tax credits and other mechanisms,” Polis said.

    Polis said he views the transition to clean energy as a change to end the state’s reliance on costly natural gas so that consumers see energy savings. And he stressed the importance of a “just transition” that would help workers from coal power plants, mining, and other legacy fuels get retraining for new jobs.

    “The jobs are different, and the skills are different,” he said. “We need to make sure that we bring people along and that we can square people’s livelihoods in the clean energy future.”

    New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) credited the Biden administration with helping to create 536,000 new jobs in her state over the past 1 1/2 years. That includes about 50,000 new manufacturing jobs in upstate New York due to passage of the CHIPS and Science Act.

    “The jobs are starting to come back from the money that we’ve been using from the federal dollars to create those jobs,” she said.

    Hochul added: “We’ve been absolutely joined at the hips with our federal partners, President Biden, our leadership, to bring the infrastructure spending, the climate money, the child care money, and money to build resiliency because of climate change,” she said. “All of it is being spent in New York state very happily by this governor.”

    North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper (D) said he sees the Biden administration’s economic legislation and the funding it provides as an opportunity for generational change.

    “I am so excited about the investments that we’re going to be able to make,” he said. “We’re going to be laying the groundwork with these generational funds to make sure that we’re building a North Carolina, particularly based on advanced manufacturing, that’s going to provide great-paying jobs.”

    Cooper praised the Biden administration’s legislation for, among other things, capping drug prices, investing in child care so parents can get back into the workforce, and providing money to connect high-speed internet across North Carolina.

    He also praised climate change legislation that will help create jobs in the private sector to build electric vehicles, charging stations, and other infrastructure.

    “We’re so excited about the Inflation Reduction Act because it helps us to fund our EV infrastructure and to coax people into getting electric vehicles,” he said.

    Richmond, Va., Mayor Levar Stoney (D) said his top priorities are dealing with his city’s housing crisis, improving public safety, and helping better the lives of children and families. He praised the American Rescue Plan Act for helping steer federal funds directly to cities, so local leaders can target money to areas where it’s needed most.

    “It gives us the flexibility to innovate and be creative because at the end of the day, it’s cities and mayors who are the front lines,” he said. “I’m grateful that we were able to get that function into the American Rescue Plan Act, and moving forward, it’s my hope that they take a page out of President Biden’s book and empower local governments to make these decisions.”

    Stoney said about half of the $155 million the city received from the American Rescue Plan Act is being used to build new community centers in Black neighborhoods and other communities of color that were historically redlined. Other funds were used to create more than 250 new seats for early childhood education and preschool for the city’s children as well as exploring how to re-connect the historically Black neighborhood of Jackson Ward, that was literally split in half by I-95, to help revitalize the area.

    “This is the largest investment in local government since the Great Society, and I think we’re going to see great results and accomplishments for years and years to come,” Stoney said.

    Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) said her city’s biggest economic challenge post-COVID-19 is revitalizing local businesses, closing wealth gaps, and attracting more residents to the city. The economic legislation that President Biden’s administration has steered through Congress is providing a major lift for her and other city leaders to address those issues.

    “I think the president deserves a lot of credit,” she said.

    She said she also urged the administration to think about how to make it easier for cities to spend federal funds.

    “It’s great to have a lot of money,” she said. “What’s not great is not being able to spend it. As we think about policies that help us get policies out the door, we should also think about innovative procurement policy as well.”

    Bowser also praised federal funding for projects that will improve neighborhood walkability, safety, and affordable transportation access.

“These dollars will help us advance planned work on making intersections more safe,” she said.

Click here to watch the event.

Church and State

Denial of Care Rule Called

'Dangerous Policy'

Group Applauds Biden Admin. for Plan to Rescind Parts of Rule

    Washington D.C. - (AU) - 12/29/2022 - Americans United for Separation of Church and State President and CEO Rachel Laser issued the following statement on Dec. 29 in response to the Biden administration’s proposal to rescind parts of the Trump administration’s Denial of Care Rule, which invited health care workers to deny medical treatment and services to patients because of personal religious or moral beliefs:

    “We applaud the Biden administration for taking positive steps toward protecting both religious freedom and patients’ health by rescinding the Trump-era Denial of Care Rule. No one should be denied medical treatment because of someone else’s religious beliefs.

    “The Denial of Care Rule was a dangerous policy that weaponized religious freedom and put the health and lives of women, LGBTQ people, religious minorities and so many others in jeopardy. Today’s proposed rule recognizes the potential harm to patients and upholds the fundamental principle of church-state separation.”

    The Denial of Care Rule which was issued in May 2019 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under former President Donald Trump. It invited any health care worker to deny medical care to patients because of the health care worker’s personal religious or moral beliefs. Health care facilities risked losing essential federal funding unless they granted employees carte blanche to deny services. That risk could have forced many health care facilities to eliminate services such as reproductive and LGBTQ care. Federal courts had blocked the rule from going into effect.

 Americans United and allies filed two federal lawsuits challenging the Denial of Care Rule, arguing that HHS during the Trump administration exceeded its authority and arbitrarily and capriciously failed to consider the rule’s potential harm to patients and the health care system, in violation of the federal Administrative Procedure Act. We also argued that the rule was unconstitutional because it favored specific religious beliefs in violation of the First Amendment; violated patients’ rights to privacy, liberty and equal dignity as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment; and chilled patients’ speech and expression in violation of the First Amendment, all to the detriment of patients’ health and well-being.

• In the County of Santa Clara v. HHS, Americans United joined the Center for Reproductive Rights, Lambda Legal, the law firm Mayer Brown LLP and Santa Clara County, Calif., which runs an extensive public health and hospital system that serves as a safety-net provider for the county’s 1.9 million Bay Area residents. Other plaintiffs in the case include providers across the country that focus on reproductive and LGBTQ care, plus five doctors and three medical associations. In Nov. 2019, the district court granted summary judgment in our favor on our Administrative Procedure Act claims, vacating the rule in its entirety.
• In Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. Azar, Americans United joined the Baltimore City Solicitor and the law firm Susman Godfrey LLP to represent the Baltimore City Health Department, which has strived to ensure that vulnerable and historically marginalized people can seek medical care without fear of stigmatization or discrimination. After other federal district courts blocked the Denial of Care Rule, the district court held this case in abeyance pending the government’s appeals.

    More information about those lawsuits is available here.

Illinois Politics

 Politics, Prejudice,

and Party Realignments

in Southern Illinois

A Look at 52 Downstate Counties and How They Voted in 2020

By Steve Rensberry
Opinion / Analysis

_________________

EDWARDSVILLE, Ill., - 12/1/2020 - Look at a map of how Southern Illinois residents have voted since the late 1990s and you won't see much competition, nor much blue. This year's colossal presidential election was a perfect example, with Republican candidates -- the president included -- receiving support from roughly 70 percent of voters in nearly every county at-or-below the Springfield line.

Results per county (pg 1). See citations for data sources.

   How deep does the red run in Southern Illinois, and how long will its love affair with the GOP continue? If the two main political parties stay as they are, with Democrats leaning liberal and Republicans leaning conservative, probably for a good while yet. But there are no guarantees.

This particular analysis, compiled from the most recent election data available, looks specifically at 52 of the state's 102 counties, the most southern, with statistics on how each county voted in the 2016 and 2020 elections, and a select number of other demographics. Believe it or not, as of this past week not all votes in every county had yet been finalized or completely counted. I chose to use percentages for comparison rather than vote totals for this reason. The declared winners are not expected to change.

Results per county (pg 2). See citations for data sources.

   In one sense, given the region's history, the latest expression of political sentiment shouldn't come as much of a surprise. Historically, the region has always leaned conservative, the experts say, sharing cultural values with the South in general as well as with neighboring Missouri and Upper Southern states such as Tennessee and Kentucky. For decades it was a more conservative Democratic Party that captured their votes, dominating elections from before the American Civil War, through Reconstruction, up until the 1960s. Then things began to change. "Beginning as recently as the presidential election of 2000, Democrats have under-performed in Southern Illinois despite winning Illinois consecutively," this online description about the region states.

What is surprising to me is the depth of Republican allegiance and loyalty to such a polarizing president, apparently oblivious to the integrity they've sacrificed in the process -- a question more than a few people have asked since Nov. 4

  One estimate is that nationwide Trump won approximately 92 percent of the vote that he had in 2016. By comparison, of the 52 Southern Illinois counties considered in this study, Trump captured 98.7 percent of the vote he received that year.

   In the aggregate, pro-Trump voters in these 52 counties represented 69.6 percent of the region's vote totals in 2016, and 71.73 percent in 2020. Approximately 2.437 million votes were cast for Trump by Illinois voters in the 2020 General Election, compared to 2.135 million in 2016. See: 2020 Election Results.

"According to the national exit poll, Trump won 92% of the voters who cast a ballot for him in 2016. He also took 85% of self-described conservatives and 94% of self-described Republicans. Trump won only 81% of conservatives and 88% of Republicans back in 2016," writes Harry Enten in a 2018 article for CNN, How Biden won: He built on Clinton's successes. "Biden emerged victorious by winning an even larger share of the Democratic base than Clinton in 2016 and picking off voters in the middle of the electorate."

Southern Illinois has become a sea of red.

   Having been a resident of five southern counties since 1988, specifically the counties of Bond, Effingham, Madison, St. Clair and Clinton, I can tell you first-hand a good deal of the animosity toward the northern, more Democratic half of the state has been here for at least that long. The kind of intense devotion to a presidential candidate, like we've seen with Trump, is different however -- and a bit difficult to process. Where are the guard rails? Does might make right? I haven't seen a satisfying answer from Illinois Republicans to either of these questions, despite a platform in previous years that touted principles, ethics and fiscal conservatism. Have they changed that much, or was it all a ruse to begin with? You tell me.

We are, it's been noted, at a point where the pressure to rally around one political party and unite to defeat a common political enemy is everything. It's all hands on deck. Conservative Southern Illinoisans, however, were in the polarized camp long before Trumpism came along.

Again, from first-hand experience, if you're talking politics with a typical resident in small-town Southern Illinois, it's automatically assumed that you: 1) Hate Michael Madigan. 2) Know without question that Democrats are to blame for the state's economic problems. 3) Hate Chicago, and the people who live there. 4) Despise taxes from the depths of your soul, especially property taxes used to fund public schools. 5) Know that everyone north of Springfield is out to rob you of your hard-earned tax dollars, in order to fund a Democratic-led spending spree that benefits only those who live in-or-around Chicago. 6) Believe that everyone who leaves Illinois does so because of high taxation and the state's Democratic leadership.

There is no middle ground in the debate, and if you don't share these assumptions or insist on more proof or evidence, expect to be scoffed at.

Madigan, of course, does have some serious corruption issues on his hands, but thankfully for the Republicans they now have Gov. JB Pritzker, who conveniently fills the need for a downstate nemesis. Evidence of corruption or rural bias? Who needs it. He's a Democrat. Thus we see "Pritzker Sucks" signs on display, even when he's not on the ballot.

I've seen at least three types of analysis with respect to Southern Illinois and its political alliances.

One involves economics. Though both parties share blame for the state's fiscal woes, Democratic Party critics have successfully hammered their case home, painting Democrats as spendthrifts, out of touch, and the source of all that's wrong with the state's economy. One of the more neutral articles I've read on the subject was written by Daniel Vock in 2018: Who Ruined Illinois? 

Edward McClelland, writing for ChicagoMag in a 2018 article Why It's So Hard for Republicans to Win in Illinois, quotes Southern Illinois University Professor of Political Science John Jackson who cites the loss of unions and their influence in the region as a major factor in the loss of Democratic Party strength. "The same thing that’s happened to the South has happened here, though ours came more recently," Jackson said.

George W. Smith, 1824. Wikipedia Commons License

 

     Another type of analysis involves culture and the very early days of the state. Go back far enough and the most southern counties were clearly more aligned with pro-slavery attitudes and less progressive policies than those to the north.

Consider this description of the state's southern-most county, Alexander County: "Settled largely by white migrants from the Upland South, southern Illinois had many racial attitudes of the South. As African Americans settled in Cairo to seek jobs on steamboats, ferries, in shipping and railroads, there were tensions between the racial groups. White residents sometimes used violence and terrorism, as well as discrimination, to keep black residents in second-class positions. They excluded them from the city government and the police and fire departments, and relatively few African Americans were hired to work in the local stores . . . There were three lynchings of blacks in Alexander County in the years between Reconstruction and the early 20th century. The county had the second-highest number of lynchings of African Americans in all of Illinois."

Mary Bohlten, writing for Illinois Times about touring the National Memorial for Peace and Justice in Montgomery, Alabama, states: "When I toured the museum and memorial last spring, I was disheartened to realize Illinois had 56 documented lynchings from 1877 to 1950. St. Clair County had the most with 40, but Sangamon County had two, associated with the 1908 race riots. Deep southern Illinois counties had lynchings but so did Cook, Macon, Marshall and Vermillion. So did such states as Oregon, California, North Dakota, Michigan and Trump’s native New York."

Increased mobility across the nation has been cited as another factor in increased polarization, and in the concentration of residents of like mind. Speaking in 2014, NPR Correspondent Shankar Vedantam had this to say about the relationship between geography and ideology:

"There's new research now that links the red state/blue state phenomenon with the fact that 40 to 50 million Americans move every year. So we are an increasingly mobile society," Vedantam explained, citing research by University of Virginia Psychologist Brian Nosek showing that liberals and conservatives tend to migrate to areas that are more aligned with their own ideology. "The downside is that if this mobility phenomenon is real, it means that the more mobile we get as a society, the more polarized we're going to become. Red states are going to get redder. Blue states are going to get bluer. The United States is going to get less united."

Reform and change is good, but what are we supposed to make of the kind of radical, norm-breaking presidency we've just lived through, apparently supported by a large number of residents in Southern Illinois? I suppose we should continue to expect the unexpected. The irony is that while the Republicans in downstate Illinois fixate on what they see as "corrupt and irresponsible Democrats," they've all but climbed in bed with one of the most corrupt and irresponsible Republican presidents in our nation's history. Who their next reactionary leader will be, and how extreme they'll be, is anybody's guess.

Graph Data Sources
Statistical Atlas (educational/income/ethnicity data)
Politico (2020 election results per county)
Politico (2016 election results per county)
Wikipedia (county population data)
270towin (national and state election results)

 

Election Analysis

  Counties That Voted for Biden

Account For 70 Percent of US GDP

By Steve Rensberry
RP News

_________ 

Graphic courtesy of statista.

 EDWARDSVILLE, Ill. - (RP NEWS) - 11/20/2020 - A recent report by the Brookings Institute shines a light on the growing economic divide in the country, made even more apparent from the results of the latest General Election, with president-elect Joe Biden winning just 477 counties to Donald Trump's 2,497.

The big difference: Residents and businesses in the 477 counties that Biden carried accounted for an aggregate share of U.S. GDP of 70 percent, compared to just 29 percent for counties carried by Trump. The difference was somewhat smaller in 2016 when Trump ran against Hillary Clinton, but was still very large, with Clinton carrying 472 counties with a US GDP of 64 percent, to 2,584 counties carried by Trump accounting for 36 percent of US GDP.

GDP figures used for comparison, pertaining to the 2020 election, are from 2018.

As noted in this summary by statista data journalist Niall McCarthy: "The 2020 presidential election was notable for considerable political and geographic divides but it also highlighted a huge economic divide. . . . The political outcome of this year' contest is different and the country's economic voting chasm has widened. Biden won virtually all of the U.S. counties with the biggest economies including Los Angeles (CA), New York (NY), Cook (IL), Harris (TX) and Santa Clara (CA) while Trump was the candidate of choice in small towns and rural communities with correspondingly smaller economies," McCarthy writes. "The most economically powerful counties won by Trump in 2020 were Nassau (NY), Suffolk (NY), Collins (TX) and Oklahoma (OK)."

The Brooking Institute's report notes the often-cited differences between the two demographics of metropolitan vs rural or small-town America.

"Biden’s counties tended to be far more diverse, educated, and white-collar professional, with their aggregate nonwhite and college-educated shares of the economy running to 35 percent and 36 percent, respectively, compared to 16 percent and 25 percent in counties that voted for Trump," the Institute states, "In short, 2020’s map continues to reflect a striking split between the large, dense, metropolitan counties that voted Democratic and the mostly exurban, small-town, or rural counties that voted Republican. Blue and red America reflect two very different economies: one oriented to diverse, often college-educated workers in professional and digital services occupations, and the other whiter, less-educated, and more dependent on 'traditional' industries."

The report forecasts coming gridlock in Congress and between the White House and Senate because of the country's deep economic divide. "The problem . . . is not only that Democrats and Republicans disagree on issues of culture, identity, and power, but that they represent radically different swaths of the economy," it states. "Democrats represent voters who overwhelmingly reside in the nation’s diverse economic centers, and thus tend to prioritize housing affordability, an improved social safety net, transportation infrastructure, and racial justice. Jobs in blue America also disproportionately rely on national R&D investment, technology leadership, and services exports."

The possibility of significant serious economic harm to just about everyone in the country is a concern, especially if the divisive pattern made apparent in the last few election cycles continues, they said.

"Specifically, Trump’s anti-establishment appeal suggests that a sizable portion of the country continues to feel little connection to the nation’s core economic enterprises, and chose to channel that animosity into a candidate who promised not to build up all parts of the country, but rather to vilify groups who didn’t resemble his base," the report states, noting the special needs posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, making it "a particularly unsustainable situation."

See: Brookings Institute Report

Election 2020

Conventions Reveal Stark

Difference Between 

Candidates, Parties

Voters Asked To Choose Between Competition Visions

 

By James Grandone 
Commentary

______________ 

   There is a difference between political parties and if you think there is not, you have not been paying attention.

Jim Grandone

    We once had a two-party system in the U.S.A. I know because I studied it at the University of Illinois Springfield where I graduated with a B.A. in political science. Grand theories were expounded about how people chose one party or the other. It was, however, fairly predictable how the result of one or the other party would govern, but both were moderately liberal or conservative. Until Reagan, that is. Reagan said government is the problem and from then on, one party ran against government and its regulations on business and perceived assaults on personal freedom.

   In August, we had two political party conventions, or rather one political party convention and a four-day Trump rally. The Democrats adopted a party platform, while the Republicans adopted an oath of loyalty to Trump. A party platform is designed to tell voters how a party plans to govern for the next four years.

   The Democrats adopted a 92-page comprehensive document that addresses healthcare, climate change, racial injustice and falls short of endorsing the Green New Deal and Medicare for all.

   The Republicans adopted a one-page resolution. The Trump campaign announced a 50-bullet-point document titled “Fighting for You.” As part of the pledges in the document, the campaign included holding China accountable for allowing the novel coronavirus to spread around the world, a manned mission to Mars and “Getting Allies to Pay their Fair Share.”

   The contrast is stark. Democrats are looking to a future of ideas that will improve individual lives while Republicans are recycling their 2016 platform.

   But the most important change is that the Republican Party is now the Trump Party. It stands for whatever the president says it does. This is not a positive development for the republic or the Republican Party. It is the stuff of “Cult of Personality,” not representative democracy.

Trump has shown himself to be light on intellectual discourse and heavy on impulse. It is an authoritarian style of governance that he has exhibited and the GOP has adopted whole.

   In contrast, the Democratic Party has taken on the difficult issues that affect working men and women. Issues like the minimum wage increase, healthcare access and the environment. Broad initiatives that represent real ideas. As President Kennedy said 60 years ago, Democrats are choosing to do these things “not because they are easy, but because they are hard …”

   We see in the Democratic Platform a road map for the next four years in terms of domestic policy and international relations. It is a contract between a party and a people, rather than a resolution to support the policies of one man, whatever he chooses them to be at the moment.

   America has suffered in its reputation internationally because we are not perceived as dependable by our allies and our adversaries. This presidency has alienated our allies around the world and our global leadership has been lost because of it. Domestically, we have suffered not only because COVID-19 has ravaged our people but because it could have turned out differently with better leadership. The same is true with racial injustice and the immigrant situation on the southern border.

   So, it is clear that one party wants to forge ahead into the future with a plan that is transparent and clearly understandable, while another party is comfortable with government by impulse with no clear idea of what it stands for.

   This year, we are being asked to decide between those conflicting visions. Choose wisely.

Jim Grandone is a long-time resident of Edwardsville, Ill. He was the architect of the 'East County...If You Only Knew' marketing campaign promoting the Metro East to businesses in St. Louis in the 1990s. Grandone holds a BA in political science from the University of Illinois at Springfield and was a Coro Fellow and serves on a variety of boards. He lives in Leclaire with his wife, Mary.

Reprinted with permission. This article originally ran in the Edwardsville Intelligencer

Posted on RP News, Sept 15, 2020

Politics in America

 

Be Careful What You Wish For

Some Thoughts on the Upcoming Election

 

By James Grandone
Guest Columnist

________________

   I’ve spent many years being involved in campaign management and have managed, created campaign strategies or been press secretary for 13 campaigns ranging from presidential and congressional to local tax referendums with an 85 percent win rate. So, I think I would share some thoughts on the upcoming election. And while I am proscribed from endorsing any candidates in this newspaper’s column, I can present facts from which you can derive your own opinion.

Jim Grandone

   This year, the presidential campaign seems to focus on likeability, that elusive term that can only be measured by approval ratings.

   As far as likability, neither Trump nor Clinton were exactly loved in 2016. According to the Washington Post in 2016, Trump’s 61 percent unfavorable score was the worst in presidential polling history, while Clinton’s 52 percent unfavorable was the second worst.

   In this year’s election, according to Gallup’s July survey, Trump’s approval rating is 41 percent. In the most recent Gallup poll in May, Biden’s approval rating stood at 53 percent.

   In terms of qualifications, you have Trump who has been President for more than three years and Biden who served in Congress and as Vice President for many more years. One could conclude Biden has the advantage and he may well win the popular vote in a landslide. But that may not be enough to become the 46th President of the United States.

   In fact, a handful of states this year including, Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida and Pennsylvania, hold the fate of both candidates, according to Dan Balz with the Washington Post. The Electoral College, a relic from the 18th Century, will decide who will be president and the race is close. Some would call that a Tyranny of the Minority.

   Should we do away with the Electoral College? Several national organizations are fighting to do just that this year. What if Biden wins the popular vote in a landslide and loses in the Electoral College?

   Democracy is good, but we are reminded that the Tyranny of the Majority is also quite real. In fact, to win a majority for president, it would only require a handful of big states, such as California, Florida, New York, Illinois and Texas, to elect the president without the electoral college and they are heavily Democratic. What about the rest of the states? Would winning only require campaigns in the top five states? How would that affect national policy? Would politicians pander to those states at the expense of the other 45? Nothing is simple in politics.

   There’s an old saying in politics and life, “Be careful what you wish for.”

 ------------------

Jim Grandone is a long-time resident of Edwardsville, Ill. He was the architect of the 'East County...If You Only Knew' marketing campaign promoting the Metro East to businesses in St. Louis in the 1990s. Grandone holds a BA in political science from the University of Illinois at Springfield and was a Coro Fellow and serves on a variety of boards. He lives in Leclaire with his wife, Mary.

------------------

(Reprinted with permission. This article originally ran in the Edwardsville Intelligencer)
Posted on RP News, Aug 17, 2020

Election 2020

Biden's VP Pick Checks 

All The Right Boxes

By Cheryl Eichar Jett
Opinion/Analysis

_______________

   EDWARDSVILLE, Ill., (RP NEWS) - 8/17/2020 - One hundred years nearly to the day (August 18, 1920) after the ratification of the 19th Amendment that guaranteed American women (white women, anyway) the vote, a multi-racial woman – Kamala Harris – made history this past week as the first woman of color to run for vice-president on a major

Graph courtesy of statista

party ticket. After a closely-followed, much-speculated, but tightly-held process to determine his pick, former vice-president Joe Biden selected Senator Harris (D-CA) and on Tuesday, August 11, he announced his pick via Twitter. His tweet was picked up immediately and news outlets quickly spread the announcement. Republican mistruths and conspiracies were not far behind.

   In many opinions, including my own, Sen. Harris checks all the right boxes to serve as former vice-president Joe Biden's running mate. Some of these are obvious. She's a woman – of color. And some check marks have been on display – in spades – particularly since the announcement. Motivated supporters contributed, allowing the campaign to rake in $48 million in as many hours. And, fulfilling one of the modern roles of a vice-presidential candidate, Harris has shown that she's capable of assuming the role of attack dog.

   So what are the ways that Harris fills the bill as Biden's vice-presidential candidate – and as vice-president, should their Democratic ticket win the election?

Attack Dog

   Harris has already proven that she can competently handle the task of launching attacks on the opposition. At their August 11 press conference, she and Biden seemed to already have their routine down pat. Biden outlined issues and touched on policies, while Harris offered attacks on the Trump administration's failures, followed by assurances that Biden would capably lead their new administration. Several pundits have been heard commenting on Harris' ability to “throw a real good punch.” And Joy Reid, MSNBC host of “The ReidOut,” commented that “anyone who criticizes her will face a wall of opposition.” Harris has been a fierce and consistent critic of Trump. Reid has called her the “anti-Trump.”

Kamala Harris / Wikimedia Commons

 Female During the Trump Era

   Of course, this is a historically significant pick in the era of the “me too” movement, the centennial of the 19th Amendment, and the surge of women voters and electees in the 2018 election. Harris is the first African American, the first Asian American, and the first Howard University (a historically black college) vice-presidential candidate on a major party ticket. Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) said, “This is huge.” Presidential historian Michael Beschloss described the pick as it “recognizes the glory of diversity in America.” Beschloss added that Harris' entire career had been spent “defending the rule of law, at the time the rule of law is under grave danger from the president.” “A really qualified choice and future leader of the Democratic party,” said political consultant James Carville.

Biden's Preference For a Close Connection

   Harris became good friends with Biden's son Beau when they were fellow state attorney generals – Harris in California and Beau Biden in Delaware. That's when Joe Biden first met Harris. Sharp-eyed journalists and photographers zeroed in on Biden's notes at a campaign event on July 28, which at the top of the list said “do not hold grudges,” assumed to be a reference to Harris' sharp attack on Biden in the first primary debate over Biden's opposition to school busing in the 1970s. Biden apparently kept his own advice in mind. Columnist Eugene Robinson commented that both Biden and Harris have the empathetic connection thing going for them.”

Harris' Multi-Racialism Offers Many Americans A Connection

   Harris' Indian mother and Jamaican father emigrated to the US, where they married and had two daughters, Kamala and Maya. At her graduation from Howard University, Harris looked around and realized how many graduates looked like her – multi-racial. In John Blake's article, “Why Kamala Harris as VP would be a revelation for Black America,” Blake states, “Presidential candidate Joe Biden's selection of Harris as his running mate could have a similar impact. Thousands of students at Howard and other historically Black colleges and universities – known as HBCUs – can now look at the 55-year-old Harris' ascension and say the same: She looks like me.”

Articulate and Strong Debater

   Joe Biden, if he didn't already know, found this out during the televised first primary debate when Harris went after him on his school busing stance back in the 1970s. Reverend Al Sharpton has called her a “very good debater. She will give Vice-President Pence a very bad evening in the debates.” At the same time, she is clear-eyed about what will be coming at her, both on the vice-presidential debate stage and in the opposition's ads and tweets. Harris has stated in interviews that she knows what's coming from the Trump campaign – “lies.”

Reputation as Champion For The People

   Harris' reputation-making achievement as California Attorney General was the $20 billion in settlement funds for California homeowners that her negotiations eventually garnered. Playing hardball and pulling out of the nationwide mortgage settlement talks in 2011, Harris was under fire from housing rights advocates and union leaders for doing so. In the long run, the larger mortgage settlement – the $20 billion – finally came through to mitigate some of the disastrous effects of the financial and housing crisis of 2008.

Liberal Voting Record In The Senate

   Despite a reputation that seems to persist as a “law and order” or “top cop” senator, Harris has maintained one of the most liberal voting records in the Senate during her term as junior senator from California, according to watchdog groups. A recent ranking by the government watchdog website GovTrack.us ranked Harris more liberal than Bernie Sanders.

In Duo With Biden, Gives Voters A Clear Choice

   The Biden-Harris campaign presents a clear choice between government for the people, and government for one's own purposes and pockets, as exhibited by the Trump administration. The Biden-Harris team has been visible in the past week providing leadership on the COVID crisis that is sorely lacking from the current occupant of the White House. As Princeton University James S. McDonnell Distinguished University Professor of African American Studies, author, and cable news commentator Eddie S. Glaude Jr. said recently, it will now be a “reckoning at the ballot box” between two very stark choices.

Fund Raising

   And finally, as mentioned above, her announcement as VP pick touched off a record-breaking wave of donations to the campaign. Of course, Biden is hoping that this is the tip of the iceberg as their campaign gathers steam. See: Biden Campaign Raise $48 Million in 2 Days

   As Harris continues to prove her mettle on these points, one can't help but think, even if it's a simplistic notion, that it's a rewarding nod to the 19th Amendment ratification 100 years ago, and to the suffragettes who made it happen.

 

For further reading:
University's history of producing trailblazing Black leaders on display
Nomination Gives Joe Biden a Recording-Breaking Fundraising Bump
The Harris pick is a hit with voters so far
In Historic Pick, Joe Biden Taps Kamala Harris to Be His Running Mate