#without 2/3 control of house and senate and a blue pres. | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

radicalurbanista · 4 years

Photo

there is one possible good outcome of this year that I’ve been thinking about a lot

It requires a lot of action before and after the election and a focused political strategy for the next few election cycles. It will have to meet certain conditions at critical times, but if it does, it could mean the end of the republican party the passage of Medicare for All and a Green New Deal, and a labor party. Basically, it depends on splitting the Democratic party after ensuring Democrat control of Congress and the White House, DSA expansion, and eliminating the electoral college.

1) Circa the 2020 election

Biden wins the electoral college

This is almost completely dependent on white moderates in swing states voting for Biden and on massive protests during what will likely be a highly contested legal battle for the presidency. The protests are to show leaders that we reject any legitimacy of another trump term. Protests against trump will face even more violence at the hands of police and their conspiring with white nationalists. There is still the possibility of a coup. But voting alone will not ensure trump’s removal from office, everyone needs to be out in the streets and organizing strikes and protests. It will be a lot easier than stopping trump after he’s secured a second term. If this fails, protesting conditions will become even more hostile, and Americans will see no relief from the economic depression or pandemic. The U.S. may end as a dictatorship, but I have no idea when.

Democrats take majority control of the senate

This is essential as well. There are many senate seats this year where Republicans could be replaced by Dems. Here is a more thorough guide on who could be unseated. This will help with passing bills that Dems agree on. The more the better. Without this, splitting the party won’t be possible yet.

Democrats expand control of the House

This will make splitting the Dem party easier.

DSA (Democratic Socialists) expand control at the local and state level

The emergence of DSA to a national party requires many more wins at the local level. This will give them the chance to become the left-wing national party. 50% of Democrat voters support socialism, and that’s pre-pandemic and pre-depression. It is these voters who will be attracted to the DSA as they grow.

Democrats expand control in state legislatures

Once the census results are in and states have to redistrict, Democrat-controlled state legislatures will likely produce less gerrymandered conservative districts. This will secure more representational elections for the next decade.

2) Before the 2022 election

Eliminate the electoral college

This is another very difficult part. Conservative Dems (like Biden) oppose eliminating the electoral college. His current views may not matter once the DNC tells him to do otherwise. It will likely be moderate and left Dems who push this agenda forward, as it is within the best interest of the Dem party to make the popular vote chose the presidency. National support for it may also be higher than ever after the election, meaning more pressure on Dems to act while they can. If the electoral college is eliminated, Republicans will lose their chance at winning the presidency again, meaning trump 2024 won’t be possible

Begin major canvassing for M4A, GND, police defunding, and abolishing ICE

Once Dems control Congress and the White House, the left can be more on the political offense rather than defense. The DNC opposes Medicare for All and the Green New Deal, but support for them will only likely increase as more people die from COVID-19, suffer under medical debt, face record breaking unemployment and evictions, and climate crises continue to destroy areas. These bills are popular, and the DSA supports them, which will give them leverage in winning more elections and even in poaching Democrat representatives like Bernie and AOC. Support for abolishing ICE and the police are only likely to grow thanks to continued BLM organizing.

Counter Republican campaigns at the state and local levels

Republicans are unified, backed by money, and think long-term, but this election is different because their only platform is supporting trump. Should they lose the White House and Congress, and lose the electoral college, they will have to create a whole new base and platform goals to win a national election ever again. Local organizers will have to counter republican strategies at the local and state levels in hopes of killing the party. Republicans might be able to find a way to attract half of the voter base again, but they might also be clinging too tightly to racism, which, although strong, is no longer enough to win the presidency through popular vote. They could also lose southern state control as cities like Atlanta and Houston grow and their voters flip the state blue.

3) Circa the 2024 election

Enter the DSA into national elections

If the electoral college is gone and the DSA was won more local and state seats in 2020 and 2022, the DSA has a chance to enter national elections. As a popular left-wing party and with the decline of the republican party, the DSA can now attract left-wing previously “captured” by Dems. They may likely not win the presidency, but the DSA will force Dems to be the nation’s right-wing party and become the left-wing party in doing so. Formerly republican voters will likely switch to Dems as the Democratic party becomes more conservative and if republicans no longer have a chance at winning national elections.

Center campaigns around major bills not yet passed (M4A, GND, police defunding, and/or abolishing ICE)

This keeps important issues relevant and keeps Dems on the defense as to why they won’t pass the bills.

4) After

Continue building revolutionary potential now that the two national parties are welfare capitalism/socialism-lite and neoliberalism.

The DSA will likely capture much of the working-class vote, Millennials and Gen Z, and POC. If republicans are still around, their goal will be to find a new way to split the working class vote, likely requiring collaborating with Dems. However, their old strategy of splitting by rural/urban may no longer work. Businesses will do everything they can to stop a party from representing workers: it’s why the parties realigned after the New Deal.

This is all possible and will offer actual harm reduction to the working class for the first time since the 70s. None of it will be possible without massive organizing and protest efforts on the ground. None of it will be possible without strong interracial ties and community building. Voting is essential, but it’s the bare minimum and inadequate alone. During this period, BLM and new leftist movements could grow, we could see a militant left party to further curb U.S. domestic authoritarianism. We could see national policy that interferes less in the Global South. We would likely see increased protections for workers, a redistribution of wealth, and new public infrastructure. We could even see the end of the U.S. by the close of the decade, or at least how it would finally happen.

I’m happy to explain any point further, but I thought I’d put my degree to use and share a possible political strategy for the next decade that could use protest and direct action with electoral politics to end U.S. dominance and global capitalism while making the conditions for final stages of revolution less hostile. The next decade will be turbulent regardless, but would this ^^^ is the best way for that turbulence to lead to liberation.

#essay #politics #strategy #social policy #text #US #biden #green new deal #medicare for all #DSA #defund police #blm #party realignment #DNC #long post #revolution

250 notes · View notes

robertreich · 4 years

Video

youtube

Who is Worse: Donald Trump or Mitch McConnell?

He’s maybe the most dangerous politician of my lifetime. He’s helped transform the Republican Party into a cult, worshiping at the altar of authoritarianism. He’s damaged our country in ways that may take a generation to undo. The politician I’m talking about, of course, is Mitch McConnell. Two goals for November 3, 2020: The first and most obvious is to get the worst president in history out of the White House. That’s necessary but not sufficient. We also have to flip the Senate and remove the worst Senate Majority Leader in history. Like Trump, Mitch McConnell is no garden-variety bad public official. McConnell puts party above America, and Trump above party. Even if Trump is gone, if the Senate remains in Republican hands and McConnell is reelected, America loses because McConnell will still have a chokehold on our democracy. This is the man who refused for almost a year to allow the Senate to consider President Obama’s moderate Supreme Court pick, Merrick Garland.

And then, when Trump became president, this is the man who got rid of the age-old Senate rule requiring 60 Senators to agree on a Supreme Court nomination so he could ram through not one but two Supreme Court justices, including one with a likely history of sexual assault. This is the man who rushed through the Senate, without a single hearing, a $2 trillion tax cut for big corporations and wealthy Americans – a tax cut that raised the government debt by almost the same amount, generated no new investment, failed to raise wages, but gave the stock market a temporary sugar high because most corporations used the tax savings to buy back their own shares of stock. McConnell refuses to support what’s needed for comprehensive election security – although both the U.S. intelligence community and Special Prosecutor Mueller say Moscow is continuing to hack into our voting machines and to weaponize disinformation through social media.

McConnell has earned the nickname “Moscow Mitch” because he’s doing exactly what Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump want him to do – leave America vulnerable to another Putin-supported victory for Trump. McConnell is also blocking bipartisan background-check legislation for gun sales, even after the mass shootings in Dayton, Ohio, El Paso and Odessa, Texas. So even if Trump is out of the White House, if McConnell remains Senate Majority Leader he will not allow a Democratic president to govern.

He won’t allow debate or votes on Medicare for All, universal pre-K, a wealth tax, student loan forgiveness, or the Green New Deal. He won’t allow confirmation votes on judges nominated by a Democratic president. The good news is McConnell is the least popular senator in the country with his own constituents. He’s repeatedly sacrificed Kentucky to Trump’s agenda – for example, agreeing to Trump’s so-called emergency funding for a border wall, which would take $63 million away from projects like a new middle school on the border between Kentucky and Tennessee.

McConnell is even cut funding for black lung disease suffered by Kentucky coal miners. I know from my years as labor secretary that coal mining is one of the most dangerous jobs in the country, and the number of cases of incurable black lung disease has been on the rise. But when a group of miners took a 10-hour bus ride to Washington this past summer to ask McConnell to restore the funding, McConnell met with them for one minute and then refused to help them. No wonder Democrats are lining up in Kentucky to run against Moscow Mitch in 2020. The not-so-good news is that McConnell is up for re-election the same day as Donald Trump, and Trump did well in Kentucky in 2016. Which means we have to help organize Kentucky, just as we have to organize other states that may not be swing states in the presidential election but could take back the Senate.

Consider Georgia: Republican Senator Johnny Isakson is retiring, meaning both of Georgia's Senate seats are now up for grabs. And this one extra seat—in a state that is trending blue—could be the tipping point that allows Democrats to win enough seats to end GOP control of the Senate. Trump has to go, but so does McConnell. Here’s what you can do: Wherever you are in the country, you can donate to McConnell’s challengers. If you live in or near Kentucky, you can get out and knock doors or make calls. Or if you have friends or family in the state, encourage them to get involved. As to the question of who is worse, Trump or McConnell — the answer is that it’s too close to call. The two of them have degraded and corrupted American democracy. We need them both out.

#video #videos

215 notes · View notes

patriotsnet · 3 years

Text

Which Democratic Candidate Would Republicans Vote For

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/which-democratic-candidate-would-republicans-vote-for/

Which Democratic Candidate Would Republicans Vote For

How Are Primary Elections Conducted In California

Why lifelong Republican voted for a Democratic candidate in GA

All candidates for voter-nominated offices are listed on one ballot and only the top two vote-getters in the primary election regardless of party preference move on to the general election. Write-in candidates for voter-nominated offices can only run in the primary election. A write-in candidate will only move on to the general election if the candidate is one of the top two vote-getters in the primary election.

Prior to the Top Two Candidates Open Primary Act, the top vote-getter from each qualified political party, as well as any write-in candidate who received a certain percentage of votes, moved on to the general election.

The Top Two Candidates Open Primary Act does not apply to candidates running for U.S. President, county central committee, or local office.

Why You Need To Vote In The Primary Elections

True or false. You only need to vote in the November presidential election and not the primary elections.

FALSE!

For most American voters, the presidential primary elections matter more than the general election. Like Ive said before, if you live in a red state or a blue state, your vote in the presidential election wont make a difference. The rest of your state will overwhelming vote for a Democrat or a Republican. Your vote wont change your states outcome. .

But the primary elections are an entirely different story.

The presidential primaries determine who will represent the Republicans and the Democrats during the November election. Instead of voting between just 2 candidates, you have the choice of 3 Democrats or 12 Republicans. Unlike the general election, you actually have a chance of voting for your preferred candidate, not just the lesser of two evils.

How Do I Register To Vote

You have a few options:

If you have a New York drivers license or state ID from the Department of Motor Vehicles, you can register online using this tool from NYC Votes and TurboVote.

If you dont have a New York drivers license or state ID, the law requires that you sign a form and mail it to the Board of Elections office.

You can use this site to have the forms mailed to you, or you can and print the forms yourself to fill out and mail in. If you request to have the forms sent to you, they come with a pre-addressed envelope to return them.

You will be asked to plug in your name as it appears on your state ID. If you dont have one, thats OK. Just put how your name appears on official documents.

If you need language access or you want to help someone register to vote in another language, you can download the registration forms and FAQs in a bunch of languages here.

You can also request voter registration forms in various languages by calling 1-866-VOTENYC.

Lastly, you can pick up voter registration forms at any library branch, any post office or any city agency office.

After you fill them out, mail them to the BOEs main office:

Board of Elections

New York, NY 10004-1609

And make sure its postmarked by May 28.

Other materials needed: If you dont have a state ID, you will need to provide the last four digits of your Social Security number.

Don’t Miss: Democrats More Educated Than Republicans

Listen To The Podcast Episode

A dizzying selection of 46 candidates appear on the ballot in California’s recall election. Here’s a closer look at four of them three Republicans and one Democrat.

Aired: August 23, 2021 |

Early voting is underway in the Sept. 14 recall election that will decide whether California Gov. Gavin Newsom will be removed from office. The first question on the ballot is a simple yes or no: Should Newsom be recalled?

The second question who should replace Newsom if the recall passes has many voters scratching their heads. Forty-six candidates appear on the ballot, most of them longshots with little to no name recognition or political experience.

KPBS chose to examine the four replacement candidates who have most frequently polled near the top and have raised the most money. Here are details on those four.

Conservative radio host Larry Elder has led in most polls, likely helped by his national profile. But his right-wing politics would be a dramatic departure from the leftward trend in California.

Elder, who is Black, denies the existence of system racism. He opposes gun control, abortion rights and clings to the outdated term “illegal alien” to describe immigrants who are in the country without legal permission.

Elder also believes the minimum wage should be abolished.

Aired 8/23/21 on KPBS News

Listen to this story by Andrew Bowen.

Democratic Majority Whip Says He’s Disappointed But Not Surprised Republicans Voted To Block The Bill

Sen. Dick Durbin, the Democratic Majority Whip, said on CNN that he was “disappointed but not surprised” that Republicans voted to block the sweeping voting rights bill today.

“I thought perhaps some of the;Republicans would step up and;say that this national strategy;of changing state laws and;making it more difficult was;just wrong, but they didn’t.;They stood together,” he said.

Durbin went on to criticize Republicans as “the party that is supporting voter suppression.”

“I hope they understand, as we;do, that going in history as a;party that is supporting voter;suppression is not a good place.;For many decades, the Democratic;party of the early 20th century;was that party.;I’m not proud of that moment,;and I don’t make any excuses for;it.;I don’t want to be part of it in;the future, and I hope many;Republicans feel the same,” he said.

You May Like: Why Does Donald Trump Wear Red Ties

What You Need To Know

The Democrats voting and election bill failed to advance in the Senate after a procedural vote to open debate on the legislation was defeated by a tally of 50-50, falling short of the 60 votes needed to succeed.

Senate Democrats pitched the legislation as necessary to counter efforts by GOP-led legislatures to swiftly pass state laws that would impose restrictions on voting.;

All 50 Senate Republicans united in opposing the bill, having decried it as a partisan power grab and federal overreach into state voting and election systems.

Our live coverage has ended. Read more about today’s vote here.

List Of Registered 2024 Presidential Candidates

The following table lists candidates who filed with the FEC to run for president. Some applicants used pseudonyms; candidate names and party affiliations are written as they appeared on the FEC website on the date that they initially filed with the FEC.

Candidates who have filed for the 2024 presidential election Candidate

Also Check: How Many States Are Controlled By Republicans

Democrats Are United In Support Of Cooperation With Us Allies Differ On Importance Of Us Military Superiority

Democratic registered voters overwhelmingly agree that the United States should address the interests of its allies when conducting foreign policy. This view varies little among supporters of Democratic presidential candidates.

Fully 87% of Democratic voters say the U.S. should take into the account the interests of its allies when making foreign policy decisions, even if it means making compromises with them. Few say the U.S. should follow its own national interests, even when its allies strongly disagree.

Republican and Republican-leaning voters are divided over whether the United States should follow its own national interests, even when allies disagree or address the interests of allies, even if this means compromises .

There is far less agreement among Democrats in views of whether U.S. policy should work to maintain its global military superiority. Among Democratic voters who name Warren as their first choice for the nomination, 65% say that in the future it would be acceptable if another country became as militarily powerful as the U.S.; just 31% say U.S. policies should try to maintain its position as the worlds only military superpower.

Majorities of those who support Sanders and Buttigieg also say it would be acceptable if another country became as militarily powerful as the U.S.

Republican voters, by a margin of about 4-to-1 , say U.S. policies should try to keep it that America is the only military superpower.

Recent History Isn’t As Bleak As Dems Might Think

California Primary 2020: Why independents can vote for Democrats, but not for Republicans

In 2020, national Democrats looked to Texas with hope and helped raise money for State House races they thought could be flipped to take control of the chamber in Austin. The goal was to have Democrats steering the wheel when redistricting maps were drawn in 2021.;

The Democrats didnât lose any seats, but they didnât pick up any either.;

That election came on the heels of 2018 when Texas Democrats flipped 12 seats in the State House and former congressman Beto OâRourke came within 2.5 percentage points of beating Republican Sen. Ted Cruz.;

While 2020 may have been a disappointment after 2018, the Democratsâ position needs to be put into perspective, Van Meter said.

“Texas Democrats have spent the last 20 years trying to build up infrastructure in a state where everyone believes that it’s not possible to elect a Democrat,â she said.;

More and more Democratic candidates have entered local and state races in recent years after decades of election cycles when there would often be no opposition challengers to the Republican candidates.

Democratsâ momentum in 2020 continued with increased registration and voter turnout, she said.;

âIt just so happened that so did the Republicans,â Van Meter said.

The fact that Donald Trump was on the ballot proved to be a huge motivator for Republicans who previously werenât registered to get to the polls.

Read Also: What Caused Republicans To Gain Power In Congress In 1938

Democrats’ Recall Dilemma: Should They Cast A Vote For A Candidate To Replace Gavin Newsom

For many Democrats and other opponents of the recall, question No. 1 is easy. They plan to vote ‘no’.

But what about question No. 2?

That’s a dilemma for Democrats because the best-known recall candidates are Republicans like Newsom’s 2018 opponent John Cox and conservative talk radio host Larry Elder. By not voting on question No. 2, Democratic voters risk ceding the recall election to a candidate whose views they oppose.

Elder, for instance, believes that the minimum wage should be abolished and supports former President Donald Trump. Cox courted Trump’s endorsement in 2018. Former San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer, another well-known candidate, supported Trump’s 2020 campaign.

There are 46 candidates on the recall ballot, including nine Democrats.

The California Democratic Party is urging left-leaning voters not to select anyone on the recall ballot’s second question.

“The California Democratic Party is activating voters to vote no on the Republican Recall and leave the second question blank. It’s the only way to stop Republicans who want to take California back to some very dark days,” said party spokeswoman Shery Yang.

Former Newsom spokesman, Nathan Click, reiterated Yang’s advice for Democratic voters.

“Leave it blank. Voting no is the only way to block the Republican power grab and prevent the Republican takeover of California,” Click said.

‘No on recall, yes on Bustamante’

Bustamante told his supporters to vote “no on recall, yes on Bustamante.”

Rutherford B Hayes: Campaigns And Elections

The Campaign and Election of 1876

As the favorite son of Ohio, Rutherford B. Hayes had much in his favor. Both regular and reform Republicans liked him. He was a war hero, had supported Radical Reconstruction legislation, and championed African American suffrage. He also came from a large swing state. His reputation for integrity was excellent, and his support of bipartisan boards of state institutions endeared him to reformers. Hayes ultimately, though, realized that his simple “availability” was his greatest strength. Distasteful to no one, he was the second choice among the supporters of the other leading candidates. Nevertheless, Hayes insisted on a united Ohio delegationand at the same time did nothing to lessen his availability.;

Moreover, the 1876 Republican convention was in Cincinnati, which teemed with Hayes supporters. “Availability” did work for Hayes. James G. Blaine, the frontrunner and the favorite of partisan Republicans, was tarnished by allegations of corruption; Oliver P. Morton, the favorite of Radicals, was in ill health; Benjamin H. Bristow, the favorite of reformers, was anathema to Grant; and Roscoe Conkling, the quintessential spoils politician, was unacceptable to reformers and to Blaine. In the end, none of these candidates could muster the votes of the majority of the convention. By the fifth ballot, Hayes had picked up votes; by the seventh, he had clinched the nomination.

The Disputed Election of 1876

Read Also: Donald Trump Saying Republicans Are Stupid

Harris: The Fight Is Not Over

Vice President Kamala Harris’ told reporters that “the fight is not over” after Republicans unanimously blocked the Democrats’ sweeping election and voting reform bill.

Harris expressed that she and President Biden intend to continue to push for voting reform, including the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, which is likely to come to the Senate floor later this year.

This what Harris told reporters after leaving the Senate floor where she presided over the vote:

“I was here today because obviously this is one of the most critical issues that the United States Congress could take up, which is about the fundamental right to vote in our country. And I think it is clear, certainly, for the American people that when we’re talking about the right to vote, it is not a Republican concern or a Democratic concern. It is an American concern. This is about the American people’s right to vote unfettered. It is about their access to the right to vote in a meaningful way. Because nobody is debating, I don’t believe, whether all Americans have the right to vote. The issue is the access to the voting process. Or is that being impeded? And the bottom line is that the President and I are very clear. We support S-1. We support the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the fight is not over.”

Watch Harris’ remarks:

Cancellation Of State Caucuses Or Primaries

The Washington Examiner reported on December 19, 2018, that the South Carolina Republican Party had not ruled out forgoing a primary contest to protect Trump from any primary challengers. Party chairman Drew McKissick stated, Considering the fact that the entire party supports the president, well end up doing whats in the presidents best interest. On January 24, another Washington Examiner report indicated that the Kansas Republican Party was likely to scrap its presidential caucus to save resources.

In August 2019, the Associated Press reported that the Nevada Republican Party was also contemplating canceling their caucuses, with the state party spokesman, Keith Schipper, saying it isnt about any kind of conspiracy theory about protecting the president; Hes going to be the nominee; This is about protecting resources to make sure that the president wins in Nevada and that Republicans up and down the ballot win in 2020.

Kansas, Nevada and South Carolinas state committees officially voted on September 7, 2019, to cancel their caucus and primary. The Arizona state Republican Party indicated two days later that it will not hold a primary. These four were joined by the Alaska state Republican party on September 21, when its central committee announced they would not hold a presidential primary.

Virginia Republicans decided to allocate delegates at the state convention.

You May Like: What Is Donald Trump A Republican Or Democrat

The 2024 Republican Presidential Candidate Wild Cards

The first Democratic debate back in 2019 had 20 TWENTY! candidates, so dont be surprised if the Republican field is just as large or larger. We could have some more governors or representatives run, or even other nontraditional candidates, like a Trump family member, a Fox News host or a celebrity, like Dwayne The Rock Johnson, whos said hes seriously considering a run. Stranger things have happened.

No Party Preference Voters: Pay Attention

Registered Democrats, Republicans, Greens, Libertarians and other party members, rest assured. You are guaranteed a primary ballot with all of your partys presidential contenders on it.

But voters who dont belong to a political party the fastest growing voting block in the state will have to navigate a more daunting set of obstacles to cast a presidential primary vote.

Some parties have members only policies:

The Republican Party

The Green Party

The Peace and Freedom Party

If you want to vote in one of these three primaries, youll have to join that party. You cant do it as a member of any other party, or even as a no party preference independent. No exceptions.;

The following three parties do allow political independents to cast ballots in their presidential primaries :

The Democratic Party

The Libertarian Party

The American Independent Party

But and this is an important caveat these voters do have to specifically request the ballot they want.

For those who vote in person, this is a cinch. Just go into your polling place when its time to vote and ask. But independents who vote by mail need to let your county know which ballot they want ahead of time.

Maybe you received a postcard that looks like this:

And if youve already received a ballot in the mail and were disappointed by the lack of presidential candidates, do notfill it out. You can always request a new ballot, but trying to vote twice is frowned upon .

Recommended Reading: Did Republicans And Democrats Switch Names

Counties Are Doing Things A Little Differently This Time

If you live in one of the counties highlighted below, voting might look a little different this year.

In 2016, California passed the Voter Choice Act, a law aimed at modernizing the states election system, such that:

Every registered voter gets a ballot in the mail

Voters are no longer required to go to a specific polling place, but can vote at any number of voting centers or drop-off points

Voters can cast their ballots in person beginning 11 days before, and up to and including, Election Day

In 2018, five counties rolled out the new system. This year, 10 more will join their ranks. Thats fifteen counties in all containing 49% of the state population.

This is key for no party preference voters living in these counties who may not get the ballot they want in the mail. See the previous section for details.

0 notes

khalilhumam · 4 years

Text

Ending corporal punishment of preschool-age children

New Post has been published on http://khalilhumam.com/ending-corporal-punishment-of-preschool-age-children/

Ending corporal punishment of preschool-age children

By Marie Falcone, Diana Quintero, Jon Valant Over the last several years, education policymakers and school leaders have worked to rein in excessively punitive school discipline practices. Motivated by concerns about disproportionality in discipline rates and the consequences of harsh discipline, they have limited the use of suspension and expulsion, especially for young children. It’s been among the most active areas of state and district education policymaking, while also attracting the attention of federal policymakers. In this context, it seems remarkable that so many states continue to allow corporal punishment in schools and that there hasn’t been more legislative effort to end the practice. According to the Education Commission of the States, 23 states either explicitly allow corporal punishment in public schools or defer to localities. Perhaps even more remarkable is that state laws on corporal punishment, unlike many laws on exclusionary discipline, do not distinguish between children of different ages. We reviewed state legislation on corporal punishment (aided by research from the National Center for Safe Supportive Learning Environments). Our review turned up no cases of states prohibiting the use of corporal punishment for young children where the practice is allowed for older children. This is true even for children enrolled in school-based pre-K programs. State laws that allow educators to hit 14-year-olds generally allow educators to hit 4-year-olds as well. We don’t accept that any child, of any age, should be subject to corporal punishment at the hands of a teacher or school administrator. However, with corporal punishment in grades K-12 still a contentious issue in some areas, we looked into the practice in pre-K in particular. While it appears less common at these ages—and harder to track, with many children in private child-care centers that do not provide data—we would hope that objections to corporal punishment for very young children are shared widely enough to motivate legislative action.

The landscape of corporal punishment of young children

Corporal punishment is the practice of intentionally inflicting pain upon a child in response to a behavior deemed unacceptable. It has a long history in U.S. schools, evoking images of paddles, belts, and open hands. Concerns about corporal punishment also have a long history, too, with New Jersey being the first state to ban the practice in 1867. Today, corporal punishment laws vary across states, as well as across districts (and schools) within states. About half of all states ban it outright. Some say little about it, implicitly deferring to local leaders and educators, perhaps relying on child-abuse laws as guardrails. Others are more explicit. For example, Oklahoma’s school discipline laws state that “nothing contained in this act shall prohibit any parent, teacher or other person from using ordinary force as a means of discipline, including but not limited to spanking, switching or paddling.” Its policy defines some limits—specifically for students with “the most significant cognitive disabilities”—but does not restrict its use for very young children. Even the restriction for students with severe disabilities is waived if the child’s parent or legal guardian provides written consent. Figure 1, below, shows the legal landscape for the corporal punishment of preschool students. States colored in some shade of blue allow the practice. The different shades of blue reflect the number of preschool children (ages 3 to 5) who experienced corporal punishment during the 2015-16 school year according to the Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC). These figures show the number of children who received corporal punishment, not the number of incidents, so a child who was punished multiple times would only count once. Moreover, these data reflect only children in public programs or receiving public services—and only the incidents that educators actually reported. While it’s hard to know the extent to which corporal punishment might be underreported, the U.S. Government Accountability Office identified evidence of underreporting in CRDC data of disciplinary incidents involving students with disabilities. That type of underreporting is possible here, too, though it cannot be known for sure. The map shows clear trends by region, especially in the number of reports. Nearly all of the reported cases are in the South or parts of the Great Plains, generally in states with Republican state leadership. Ten states reported at least one preschooler receiving corporal punishment in 2015-16, for a total of about 1,500 children. Children in Texas and Oklahoma account for the majority of these cases. Mississippi and Oklahoma have the largest number of pre-K children subjected to corporal punishment relative to their public preschool populations reported in the CRDC data. In all, the rates of corporal punishment are lower for pre-K than K-12. About 1 of every 1,000 preschool children in the CRDC data are reported to have been corporally punished in 2015-16, compared to about 2 of every 1,000 students in K-12 grades. Interestingly, pre-K corporal punishment patterns by race and ethnicity differ from the disproportionality observed in suspensions. Black and white children in public pre-K programs are both overrepresented among those receiving corporal punishment relative to their shares of the full public pre-K population. Latino children are substantially underrepresented: 11% of preschoolers receiving corporal punishment are Latino, compared to 29% of all children in public pre-K programs and 21% of children in public pre-K programs that reported at least one case of corporal punishment). Some states allow corporal punishment, but they give parents an opportunity to opt out. For example, Texas law defers to districts on the use of corporal punishment, but it allows parents/guardians to opt out via a written, signed statement. However, decades of research in psychology and behavioral economics show that default options are powerful. Requiring families to actively opt out—and then do it again every new school year—likely leads to many families who oppose the practice unknowingly opting in. Moreover, schools don’t always comply with those parental requests, and it’s not at all clear that this question should be left to parents in the first place.

Evidence on the effects of corporal punishment

The strongest arguments against schools deliberately inflicting physical pain on preschoolers are rooted in ethics, not empirical research. In fact, issues of ethics and empirical evidence are interconnected, since it’s hard to imagine an institutional review board (IRB) approving the type of experimental study that would produce the clearest causal evidence of its effects. Still, there is now an extensive body of research on this subject and, in fact, an extensive body of meta-analyses and reviews of this research. It comes with a couple of caveats. First, the evidence to date is more correlational than causal, with researchers attempting to control for differences between students who are and are not exposed to corporal punishment. Second, the evidence on the effects of pre-K children receiving corporal punishment at school is scarce. Most of the studies consider older children, and many consider the effects of corporal punishment at home as well as (or instead of) school. Taken as a whole, this literature offers nothing to suggest corporal punishment as a promising strategy with long-term benefits. Proponents of corporal punishment tend to see it as way to secure compliance and prevent future negative behaviors (e.g., seeing the threat of being hit as a powerful deterrent). However, the positive effects–if and where they exist–tend to be very short term (e.g., getting a child to comply with an adult’s immediate command). They are overwhelmed by a broader set of negative outcomes, including in long-term compliance. Many studies find associations between corporal punishment and negative outcomes such as aggression and antisocial behavior, although the strength of these negative associations and the extent to which they represent causal effects continue to be debated. Leading organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Association (APA) have condemned corporal punishment in schools, citing its likely harm to children. The APA recently passed a resolution that strongly condemns its use by parents as well.

Looking ahead

Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1977 that corporal punishment at school does not violate Eighth Amendment protections against “cruel and unusual punishment,” a push to curtail its use has come from the local and state levels. However, that work remains incomplete, with about 45% of U.S. schoolchildren living in states that still allow it. Federal action seems unlikely, at least without a change in majority control of the Senate. House Democrats introduced a bill in 2019 that would prohibit states and local educational agencies that permit corporal punishment from receiving federal funding. However, that bill has not attracted Republican support and, with Congress not passing much legislation of late, looks unlikely to go anywhere anytime soon. In the absence of federal action, state governments should take action on this issue, not leaving decisions about whether to harm young children to local leaders, educators, or even parents. Many issues in education are complicated, with reasonable arguments on multiple sides. This isn’t one of them. Even if the politics of student discipline do not allow for the full-fledged prohibition of corporal punishment, one would hope that enough support exists to stop the practice for preschool-age children.

0 notes

xtruss · 4 years

Text

Who Is Worse: Donald Trump or Mitch McConnell?

Even if Trump is gone, if the Senate remains in Republican hands and McConnell is reelected, America loses because McConnell will still have a chokehold on our democracy.

— by Robert Reich | December 2, 2019 | Commondreams.Org

The two of them have degraded and corrupted American democracy. We need them both out.

Two goals for November 3, 2020: The first and most obvious is to get the worst president in history out of the White House. That’s necessary but not sufficient. We also have to flip the Senate and remove the worst Senate Majority Leader in history.

Like Trump, Mitch McConnell is no garden-variety bad public official. McConnell puts party above America, and Trump above party. Even if Trump is gone, if the Senate remains in Republican hands and McConnell is reelected, America loses because McConnell will still have a chokehold on our democracy.

This is the man who refused for almost a year to allow the Senate to consider President Obama’s moderate Supreme Court pick, Merrick Garland.

This is the man who rushed through the Senate, without a single hearing, a $2 trillion tax cut for big corporations and wealthy Americans – a tax cut that raised the government debt by almost the same amount, generated no new investment, failed to raise wages, but gave the stock market a temporary sugar high because most corporations used the tax savings to buy back their own shares of stock.

McConnell refuses to support what’s needed for comprehensive election security – although both the U.S. intelligence community and Special Prosecutor Mueller say Moscow is continuing to hack into our voting machines and to weaponize disinformation through social media.

McConnell is also blocking bipartisan background-check legislation for gun sales, even after the mass shootings in Dayton, Ohio, El Paso and Odessa, Texas.

So even if Trump is out of the White House, if McConnell remains Senate Majority Leader he will not allow a Democratic president to govern.

The good news is McConnell is the least popular senator in the country with his own constituents. He’s repeatedly sacrificed Kentucky to Trump’s agenda – for example, agreeing to Trump’s so-called emergency funding for a border wall, which would take $63 million away from projects like a new middle school on the border between Kentucky and Tennessee.

The not-so-good news is that McConnell is up for re-election the same day as Donald Trump, and Trump did well in Kentucky in 2016. Which means we have to help organize Kentucky, just as we have to organize other states that may not be swing states in the presidential election but could take back the Senate.

Consider Georgia: Republican Senator Johnny Isakson is retiring, meaning both of Georgia’s Senate seats are now up for grabs. And this one extra seat—in a state that is trending blue—could be the tipping point that allows Democrats to win enough seats to end GOP control of the Senate.

Trump has to go, but so does McConnell.

Here’s what you can do: Wherever you are in the country, you can donate to McConnell’s challengers. If you live in or near Kentucky, you can get out and knock doors or make calls. Or if you have friends or family in the state, encourage them to get involved.

As to the question of who is worse, Trump or McConnell—the answer is that it’s too close to call. The two of them have degraded and corrupted American democracy. We need them both out.

Robert Reich, is the Chancellor’s Professor of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and a senior fellow at the Blum Center for Developing Economies. He served as secretary of labor in the Clinton administration, for which Time magazine named him one of the 10 most effective cabinet secretaries of the the twentieth century. The author of many books, including the best-sellers Aftershock, The Work of Nations, Beyond Outrage and, Saving Capitalism. He is also a founding editor of The American Prospect magazine, chairman of Common Cause, a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and co-creator of the award-winning documentary, "Inequality For All." Reich's newest book is "The Common Good." He's co-creator of the Netflix original documentary "Saving Capitalism," which is streaming now.

Watch!

youtube

#Youtube

0 notes

truck-fump · 4 years

Text

Who is Worse: Donald Trump or Mitch McConnell?He’s maybe the...

New Post has been published on https://truckfump.life/2019/12/01/who-is-worse-donald-trump-or-mitch-mcconnellhes-maybe-the/

Who is Worse: Donald Trump or Mitch McConnell?He’s maybe the...

youtube

Who is Worse: Donald Trump or Mitch McConnell?

This is the man who refused for almost a year to allow the Senate to consider President Obama’s moderate Supreme Court pick, Merrick Garland.

McConnell is also blocking bipartisan background-check legislation for gun sales, even after the mass shootings in Dayton, Ohio, El Paso and Odessa, Texas.

So even if Trump is out of the White House, if McConnell remains Senate Majority Leader he will not allow a Democratic president to govern.

Trump has to go, but so does McConnell.

As to the question of who is worse, Trump or McConnell — the answer is that it’s too close to call. The two of them have degraded and corrupted American democracy. We need them both out.

#Uncategorized

0 notes

khalilhumam · 4 years

Text

Broadband in red and blue states: Three solutions to low-income internet access

New Post has been published on http://khalilhumam.com/broadband-in-red-and-blue-states-three-solutions-to-low-income-internet-access/

Broadband in red and blue states: Three solutions to low-income internet access

By Tom Wheeler “At night, after hours, in good weather, and even when the weather is not so good, people gather around the library to try and get on Wi-Fi leaking through the doors,” Linda Johnson, president of the Brooklyn Public Library told me a few days ago. While the Trump administration—especially the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)—preaches about its commitment to close the digital divide, they have done little to help the largest component of that divide: low-income Americans such as those on the library steps. Instead, the Trump FCC’s efforts have focused on Donald Trump’s base of rural voters. With typical Trumpian fanfare, the Chairman of the FCC has frequently and fervently proclaimed his top priority is ending the digital divide. “Since my first day as Chairman of the FCC, my number one priority has been closing the digital divide and bringing the benefits of the internet age to all Americans,” Trump’s FCC Chairman Ajit Pai proclaims on a slickly produced FCC web page. Accompanying that pledge is a list of “Key Initiatives” of the Chairman’s—all of which are directed at rural areas. Donald Trump won 62 percent of the national rural vote. But that’s not where the biggest broadband problem lies. There are almost three times as many Americans without a broadband subscription in blue urban areas than in red state rural areas.

Two Parts of the Digital Divide: Adoption vs. Access

The Trump FCC, by focusing its attention on rural areas with a lack of access (i.e., those unable to get broadband) is dealing with only part of the digital divide. The larger part of the digital divide is adoption; those Americans who may have broadband available, but don’t or can’t use it. According to data assembled by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the most important reason why the available broadband isn’t used is “can’t afford.” Billions of dollars have been given to corporations that refuse to extend broadband connections without such welfare. Yet, the Trump FCC has done little to help low-income Americans—urban or rural—bring the internet into homes already passed by broadband. This dichotomy becomes particularly pernicious as America goes back to school in a pandemic. Having to sit on the steps of the library after hours or go to McDonald’s to get on the internet for school is not an acceptable education strategy. The Trump FCC’s inattention falls heaviest on blue state low-income Americans. The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies reports that “30.6% of Black households with one or more children 17 or younger lack high-speed home internet (over 3.25 million Black children live in these households).” When the pandemic shut down schools, for instance, approximately 90 percent of the 51,000 students in the predominantly African American Detroit Public Schools Community District could not access the internet. It is not just schoolwork that is affected by the lack of action on urban internet connectivity. It is virtually impossible to get a job without an internet connection to both search and apply for that job. Led by Rep. James Clyburn (D- SC), the House of Representatives has twice this year passed legislation to fund a $50 per month emergency credit for low-income Americans to obtain broadband connectivity. The HEROES Act and Moving Forward Act have both died in the Republican-controlled Senate. For years the FCC has struggled to develop a response to this poor connectivity, largely because the existing federal program was designed around telephone service rather than internet service. Working inside those restrictions, the Obama FCC took two steps to try and expand low-income connectivity. First, it established a one-stop federal approval process for firms to participate in the low-income support program (called Lifeline) rather than an arduous state-by-state process. Second, the Obama FCC expanded the Lifeline-supported use of mobile networks for internet access. The Trump FCC repealed the first and gutted the second by proposing to deny participation to those companies specializing in pre-paid services for low-income Americans.

Time to Show Top Priority

The COVID-19 pandemic provides an opportunity for the FCC to break the legacy policy logjam. A national emergency justifies emergency actions. Here are three solutions the Trump FCC could pursue if they really were dedicated to making the digital divide their “number one priority.” Spend E-Rate Surplus to Connect the New “Classrooms” Thanks to Obama-era reforms, the FCC’s E-Rate program has enabled over 95 percent of all school campuses to connect to the internet all the way to the students’ desks. These reforms also resulted in program costs going down while coverage went up. As a result, by one estimate, there is now approximately $2 billion sitting unspent in the E-Rate program. The pandemic has moved the “classroom” to the living room and kitchen. The unspent E-Rate funds should be redirected on an emergency basis to help low-income students connect with their teachers. As Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser recently pointed out in a petition to the FCC, Congress explicitly gave the agency “specific authority to alter the definition [of services] to provide a different definition for schools…”[1] If the Trump FCC wanted to it could use its general powers to ensure universal service by opening E-Rate funds for out-of-school use. Even if it was unwilling to do that, the agency could identify, on a temporary basis, that pandemic classrooms included student homes, thus qualifying low-income Americans for E-Rate support enabling them to purchase the internet service that already runs by their doors. Make Cable Companies Eligible for Lifeline To be eligible for the Lifeline low-income support program an internet service provider must be an “Eligible Telecommunications Carrier” (ETC). Basically, this favors telephone companies, which are already ETCs, and therefore eligible for Lifeline support. This is a legacy from when the Reagan administration created Lifeline as a subsidy for telephone service in low-income households—long before anyone had heard of the internet. Today, however, it is cable companies, not telephone companies, that are the principal providers of high-speed broadband service. The cable companies have acted responsibly to create a minimum-tier, reduced-price program for low-income Americans. Comcast’s low-tier “Internet Essentials” offering, for instance, is $9.95 per month. But because cable companies generally are not ETC’s, we are missing a huge opportunity to support the responsible actions of the cable companies. President Trump has described himself as a “wartime president.” Under such emergency “wartime” conditions, one would expect the FCC would be looking for ways to combine Lifeline dollars with programs such as Internet Essentials to actually address the problem of people lacking access to broadband because of a red tape definition. Repeat What the FCC Has Already Done for a Favored Constituency In July, Trump-appointed FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr proposed creation of a new health care support program for rural residents. The Commission adopted the proposal in August—lightning fast action for the agency. Commissioner Carr’s proposal modified an existing program designed to support rural healthcare facilities to support rural individuals. It is an excellent initiative. Like the Trump FCC’s other efforts, however, the new initiative focused on the rural constituency of Trump voters. Yet in doing so, Commissioner Carr created the model for how the FCC could also deal with the needs of low-income Americans. If the Trump FCC were serious about overcoming the educational digital divide, it could similarly modify the E-Rate program to move from supporting services to buildings housing schools and libraries and allow support of services to individuals.

A 21st Century Civil Right

Amidst the overriding national challenges of racial equality, a poorly managed pandemic, and economic upheaval it is legitimate to ask whether broadband for all Americans rises to the level of a national priority. The huge challenges faced by the United States represent the metastasis of multiple issues. As is true of all great battles, the outcome will be determined by the results of smaller skirmishes dealing with those parts. In the great battle for social equality, a healthy population, and a growing economy, one of those skirmishes is whether and how we finally come to grips with the provision of the high-speed broadband connectivity for equality, opportunity and education. For sure, rural broadband is a national deficiency failing that must be overcome. The Trump FCC, however, has politicized the programs created to attack the digital divide. Targeting effort to help the base of rural Trump voters while largely turning a blind eye to the plight of blue state low-income Americans is hardly the promised “bringing the internet to all Americans.” Shortly before he died, civil rights leader and congressman John Lewis (D-GA) explained in an interview, “Access to the internet…is the civil rights issue of the 21st century.” It is time to move forward on that right—for all Americans.

[1] 47 U.S.C. §254(c)(3)

0 notes