voting rights – R&R – Reachout and Rebuild

“Dangerously fragile”… the right to vote.

David Posnett — Tue, 14 Jun 2022 15:05:29 +0000

Submitted by Stephen Ring from Southampton NY:

Early voting begins on June 18 – 26 (2022):

Starting last Thursday night (6/9/22), The United States House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack, began a series of eight public hearings, on the events leading up to and culminating with the attack on the United States Capitol on January 6, with the attempt to overturn the election of 2021. The very first thing that became apparent was how fragile our democracy is. The cornerstone of our democracy is the right to vote. Every citizen is entitled to vote and have their vote counted.

In New York State, early voting begins on June 18 – 26, and on June 28, the Primary Election for New York State Governor and Lt. Governor. The Democratic candidates for Governor are:

1. Congressman Tom Suozzi. Tom was the four-term Mayor of Glen Cove, the youngest elected Nassau County Executive, and the first Democrat in thirty years to be elected to that position. Tom was elected three times to The United States Congress from CD 3. Tom’s running mate is Diana Reyna for Lt. Governor. Diana served as Deputy Borough President of Brooklyn and was a twelve-year member of the New York City Council.

2. Governor Kathy Hochul. Kathy became Governor when Governor Cuomo resigned. Kathy was a one-term Congresswoman from upstate New York and proud to be one of only two Democrats to be approved by the NRA. Kathy’s running mate is Antonio Delgado for Lt. Governor. Antonio was appointed to the post of Lt. Governor after Brian Benjamin was indicted and resigned.

3. Jumaane Williams. Jumaane served as New York City Public Advocate and as a member of the New York City Council. Jumaane’s running mate for Lt. Governor is Ana Maria Archila. Ana Maria is a Civil Rights advocate.

President Jimmy Carter – “I now fear that what we have fought so hard to achieve, globally – the right to free, fair elections, unhindered by strongman politicians – who seek nothing more than to grow their own power – has become dangerously fragile at home.”

TO ALL REGISTERED DEMOCRATS, YOU HAVE A CHOICE OF CANDIDATES IN THIS PRIMARY – VOTE WISELY

Teens Molded by the Trump Era

David Posnett — Fri, 23 Apr 2021 21:16:07 +0000

Several recent articles have examined the influence of the Trump era on teens, at pre-voting ages. Claire Cain Miller looks at ‘What Teenagers Have Learned From a Tumultuous Time in Politics’ (April 22nd 2021 in the NYTimes). Emily Badger and Claire Cain Miller write about “How the Trump Era Is Molding the Next Generation of Voters“

Soon-to-be voters say they’re disillusioned by what they’ve observed, but many are also motivated to political action.

I was a teenager in the sixties. I remember the passion I felt when witnessing on TV a Buddhist monk sit down on a Saigon street, dowse himself with gasoline, light a fire and burn to death. I remember the passion I felt when the 6-day war broke out with many Arabic neighboring states threaten to invade Israel: I immediately went to the Israeli embassy to sign up as a volunteer! The events of the day had to have had a lasting effect on my adult views and politics.

So I understand, that for today’s teenagers the presidency of Donald Trump, the BLM protests following the murder of George Floyd and others, the pandemic, and the insurrection culminating with the storming of the US Capitol, are events that must have shaped the political views of teenagers.

In the NYT, MIller writes: “Apparently, research shows that a voting generation is typically shaped for life by what happens politically in their teen years and early 20s. What have teenagers taken away from all this? We asked 604 of them, ages 13 to 17, from around the country, in a poll by Dynata for The New York Times. A little more than half the teenagers surveyed were girls. And nearly half were Black, Hispanic, Native American or Asian-American. (We talked to more of them because Generation Z will be the first in which nearly half of the electorate is nonwhite.)”

The survey revealed disillusion, hardened political lines, but also motivation to become involved.

“Simultaneously, we have this caustic, scorched-earth politics of the Trump administration, particularly for people of color, and at the same time we see young people exercising power and influence and organizing and showing up in the marches and the election,” said Valeria Sinclair-Chapman, a political scientist at Purdue. “This is their political socialization, so we have to see how it plays out.”

A future woman president? Eighty-seven percent of them said they hoped a woman would be elected president in their lifetime; 47 percent of Trump supporters hoped so.

Confidence in government? About half agreed that government had their interests in mind. But less than half of girls or respondents who were Black, Hispanic, Native or Asian-American agreed, and only one-third of Trump supporters did. White boys were most likely to believe the government represented them. Minority girls were 21 percentage points less likely to agree that the government had their interests in mind. White boys were 20 percentage points more likely to be interested in running for office than boys of color; white girls were eight points more likely than girls of color.

Effect of the Trump presidency: In regard to political ambition it made 1/3 of teenagers of both genders less interested in running (with a larger effect on those of color.) But it also made about 1/2 of survey respondents, and nearly 3/4 of Trump-supporting teenagers, more interested in running.

By comparison, the 2020 election made 2/3 of teenagers more interested in running.

Other research has also found that for some young people who were disappointed by the Trump presidency, it awakened their interest in political involvement, according to David Campbell and Christina Wolbrecht.

“What we found is that there was great disillusionment in democracy among adolescents, especially girls, especially those who think of themselves as Democrats,” Mr. Campbell said. “Then we found this upsurge in protest activity, so the disillusionment, rather than driving them out of politics, pushed them into political activity.”

Their research also suggests that the surge of women running has been encouraging to young people — among liberals and some conservatives as well.

Young people are not likely to forget the activism they’re learning now, said Ella Robinson, a 16-year-old in Silver Spring, Md. The Trump era has taught her and her fellow students political savvy, she said, as their spontaneous school walkouts have been replaced by organized protests, with permits and tailored messages around issues like gun control and climate change.

“People in my generation are very aware that walkouts can only go so far,” Ms. Robinson said. “Voting needs to happen.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/01/upshot/trump-era-molding-young-voters.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article

Our democracy is broken. H.R. 1 can combat voter suppression and fix it

David Posnett — Sun, 14 Mar 2021 17:00:14 +0000

Mondaire Jones

Special to the USA TODAY Network: link here.

March 9, 2021

Our democracy is badly broken. Right now, Republicans in Arizona, Georgia and elsewhere are working hard to break it even further. But last week, my Democratic colleagues and I rose to repair and reconstruct it.

The For the People Act (H.R. 1), which passed the House of Representatives last week, will be the most significant improvement to our democracy since the Voting Rights Act of 1965. My colleagues in the Senate should act swiftly to send this bill to President Biden’s desk. It is required to save our democracy from the people who incited the violent insurrection at the Capitol on January 6th.

The For the People Act is a comprehensive bill that establishes automatic voter registration, combats voter suppression, protects our elections from foreign interference, and ends partisan gerrymandering — a process by which representatives choose their voters rather than voters choose their representatives.

But I want to focus on how H.R. 1 changes how campaigns are funded, amplifying the voices of everyday Americans.

Our current campaign finance system gives the wealthy a megaphone and silences the rest of us. In 2016, just 400 mega-donors contributed a total of $1.5 billion – more than every small donor combined. Those donors are predominantly wealthy white men, and they predominantly contribute to white candidates.

Congress isn’t just funded by wealthy people — it’s full of them. More than 50% of lawmakers in the 116th Congress have a net worth of more than $1 million, compared to just three percent of the population. This is not by accident: our campaign finance system is rigged to favor wealthy candidates. They can fund their own campaigns. They’re more likely to have nest eggs they can rely on while campaigning. And when they need extra funds, they can lean on networks of affluent family and friends.

I experienced our broken campaign finance system firsthand in my own run for Congress. When I was considering running for office, the first question insiders asked me was not what I would fight for, not whether my community was behind me, but how much money I could raise.

My leading primary competitor never had to answer that question. As the son of a pharmaceutical billionaire, he didn’t have to raise any money at all. Instead, he spent $5.4 million of his inherited wealth to blanket the airwaves with TV commercials three months out from the primary election. In the general election, I faced yet another self-funding candidate who outspent me by pumping $1.5 million into his campaign.

Against these long odds, I was elected to Congress. As an openly gay, Black, working-class candidate whose community sent him to Congress, I’m an exception. But I shouldn’t be. With the small-donor matching system in H.R. 1, candidates like me could be the norm.

Small-donor matching is simple: for every dollar a regular person donates up to $200, public financing matches that dollar with $6. A $50 donation becomes a $350 donation. As a result, small donors would matter — fixing the toxic power dynamics that threaten our democracy.

Small-donor matching has already transformed New York politics for the better. The donors in New York City elections, which have a matching program, are by far more racially and socioeconomically diverse than the donors in New York State elections, which do not. H.R. 1 would take that transformation nationwide.

The same goes for candidates. Candidates of color disproportionately rely on small donations. But because big money drowns out small donors’ voices, we typically raise less money than our opponents. Thus, we are often prevented from even making the ballot. By multiplying the power of the people candidates of color rely on most, small-donor matching empowers more people to take their seats at the table.

When we can elect people who really represent us, we get a government that really serves all of us — not just the wealthy and well-connected. If Congress had more ordinary Americans, it surely would not be so indifferent to the needs of working families. My Democratic colleagues and I in this Congress are already proving that by passing real COVID-19 relief in the American Rescue Plan. And we’re just getting started.

For at least a decade, Democrats have promised that when we had the chance, we would fix our broken campaign finance system. It’s taken over 10 years, but we’re here. It’s time. If the Senate fails to follow through — if we compromise with corruption — we risk confirming many Americans’ beliefs that billionaires and corporations have captured both parties, that our elections offer no real choices, and that our democracy is a swamp in need of a strongman to drain it.

So let’s fight for H.R. 1 and its small-dollar matching program like our democracy depends on it — because it does.

Rep. Mondaire Jones represents New York’s 17th Congressional District, which includes most of Westchester County and all of Rockland County.