Thursday, February 16, 2012

The Difference Between Conservatives And Right Wingers

The Right-Wing Id Unzipped
by: Mike Lofgren, Truthout

Retired Republican House and Senate staffer Mike Lofgren spoke with Truthout in Washington, DC, this fall. Lofgren's first commentary for Truthout, "Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult," went viral, drawing over a million unique views.

Although Mitt Romney used the word "conservative" 19 times in a short speech at the February 10, 2012, Conservative Political Action Conference, the audience he used this word to appeal to was not conservative by any traditional definition. It was right wing. Despite the common American practice of using "conservative" and "right wing" interchangeably, right wing is not a synonym for conservative and not even a true variant of conservatism - although the right wing will opportunistically borrow conservative themes as required.

Right-wingers have occasioned much recent comment. Their behavior in the Republican debates has caused even jaded observers to react like an Oxford don stumbling upon a tribe of headhunting cannibals.

... Most estimates calculate the percentage of Republican voters who are religious fundamentalists at around 40 percent; in some key political contests, such as the Iowa caucuses, the percentage is closer to 60. Because of their social cohesion, ease of political mobilization and high election turnout, fundamentalists have political weight even beyond their raw numbers. An understanding of their leaders, infrastructure and political goals is warranted.

Read the full article @ Truthout

Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Unified Primary Election Date Moving To May 29, Maybe

According to tweets from the court house, the San Antonio District Court three judge redistricting panel informed the parties that they are zeroing in on a May 29 unified primary election date. Judge Jerry Smith told those assemble for the redistricting conference that an April date appears to be impossible, and asked the lawyers for the political parties and the Secretary of State to prepare recommendations for candidate filing and other election deadlines, assuming May 29 will be the election date. That date will presumably put the first day of primary early voting at Monday May 14.

Developing...

Texas Dems And Reps Decoupling Convention Delegate Selection From Primary Election?

The unified primary election date is (just about) definitely moving to May 29, if not June 26. (See Michael Li's Texas Redistricting blog)

On Tuesday representatives for both the Texas Democratic Party and Republican Party of Texas told the San Antonio District Court three judge redistricting panel that their state party conventions will definitely take place during the second weekend in June, as scheduled.

Both political parties also told the three judge panel, that if the primary election is set for either a May 29 or late June date, the parties would require changes to party rules [as may be codified in Texas law] for convention delegate selection in order to accommodate the already locked-in state convention dates.

Among the possible rule changes offered to the court on Tuesday by Democratic Party general counsel, Chad Dunn, was the possibility of forgoing precinct conventions and moving directly to senate district [and county] conventions in April (sans primary election) to select delegates to go to the state convention.

Another alternative, not detailed to the court on Tuesday, would be for the Texas Democratic Party to go back to a 100% caucus-style precinct convention method in early April to select all precinct delegates, who would attend county and senate district conventions later in April, who would in turn, select delegates to go on to the state convention in June. However, the preference seems to be to skip separate precinct conventions and hold just senate district [and county] conventions. Mini precinct conventions within the senate district conventions would probably be the first order of business. (only editorial speculation at this point)
Steve Muniseri, chair of the Republican Party of Texas, told party members late Tuesday evening that the party would be seeking authority to use an alternative delegate selection process in light of prospects that the Texas primary will be pushed back to May 29 or late June.

"In the event that the primary is pushed back further, the RPT will still seek court relief to allow district conventions to go forward on the dates already scheduled, but with the different delegate selection process. Consequently, at this time - we urge you not to cancel your district conventions as they still may occur on the same day. We anticipate having a conference call with the SREC in the next week to discuss the situation and examine options together"

For Texas Democrats, there may yet be "old style" precinct conventions on April 3 (decoupled from the primary election) with senate district and county conventions on April 21. OR, there may be just senate district and county conventions on April 21, forgoing the precinct convention step.

Stay tuned....

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Pew: 51 Million Citizens Unregistered To Vote

Approximately 24 million active voter registrations in the United States—one of every eight—are no longer valid or have significant inaccuracies, according to the Pew Center on the States' Election Initiatives.

New research in the report Inaccurate, Costly, and Inefficient - Evidence That America’s Voter Registration System Needs an Upgrade underscores the need for registration systems that use the latest technology to better maintain voter records, save money, and streamline processes—an effort that eight states are spearheading with Pew's support.

The ground-breaking examination of the nation's voter rolls, commissioned by Pew and undertaken by RTI International, a nonprofit, nonpartisan research institute, also finds that:

  • At least 51 million eligible citizens remain unregistered—more than 24 percent of the eligible population.
  • Nearly 2 million deceased individuals are listed as active voters.
  • Approximately 2.75 million people have active registrations in more than one state.
  • About 12 million records have incorrect addresses, meaning either the voters moved, or errors in the information make it unlikely any mailings can reach them.

Outdated systems are costly. Pew found that in 2008, Oregon's state and local taxpayers spent $4.11 per active voter to process registrations. By contrast, Canada, which uses modern technology common in the private sector, devotes less than 35 cents per voter to process registrations. In the U.S., localities that have implemented improvements are realizing returns: For example, Maricopa County, Ariz., which includes Phoenix, saved more than $1 million over five years by providing online registration, reducing the county's dependence on paper forms and manual data entry.

"Proven solutions and technology are already in place in many government offices and the private sector, and states can use them to improve the accuracy, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of their systems," Becker said. "State leaders from across the country and from both parties are pioneering these solutions. Pew supports their efforts to better serve voters and ensure the integrity of the electoral process."

Over the past two years, election officials from several states have been working with Pew on plans to upgrade their voter registration systems using advanced technology to achieve greater accuracy of the rolls, increased savings, and improved processes. This new approach consists of three elements:

  • Comparing registration lists with other data sources, such as motor vehicle and National Change of Address records, to broaden the base of information used to update and verify voter rolls.
  • Implementing proven techniques and security protocols that use those data sources to better track and identify both inaccurate records that could be removed and eligible citizens who could be registered.
  • Minimizing manual data entry by establishing ways voters can submit information online, which will result in lower costs and fewer errors.

Pew's Elections Initiatives supports innovative research and partnerships to achieve the highest standards of accuracy, cost-effectiveness, convenience, and security in America's system of election administration. For more information, visit www.pewcenteronthestates.org/elections.

Monday, February 13, 2012

The Real Voter Fraud Behind Photo ID

By Lee Rowland, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law
February 13, 2012

Photo ID supporters routinely cry “fraud” as the reason for supporting new restrictions on access to the ballot. But the real fraud is in the repeated use of inaccurate, or just plain manufactured, claims about voter fraud that just aren’t happening. The reality? Voter fraud is as likely to happen as getting struck by lightning. But if you listen to photo ID supporters, you’d think every rain drop represents a stolen vote.

Take last week’s quiet unearthing of fraud in South Carolina, where ID supporters cited evidence that hundreds of dead voters had voted in the state’s elections as a critical argument for passing a photo ID law in 2011.

The South Carolina Election Commission announced it had painstakingly reviewed a quarter of the supposed “dead voters.” Sure enough, they found fraud — just not the type you’d expect. The commission discovered there is in fact no evidence that any fraudulent votes were cast.

Yet, sadly, these nonexistent dead voters were Exhibit A used to dupe voters into passing a law that risks disenfranchising eligible voters.

Then there’s James O’Keefe, a vocal photo ID supporter, who has been in the news twice recently for “uncovering” fraud in New Hampshire and Minnesota. O’Keefe released video footage of New Hampshire polling locations during the Republican primary, purporting to show him and others posing as deceased voters and receiving ballots. The problem for O’Keefe is that his video itself might be evidence of fraud: committed by O’Keefe and his cronies. In fact, the New Hampshire State Attorney General’s Office has launched an investigation into O’Keefe’s conduct for a handful of possible criminal violations, including voter impersonation fraud.

The investigation hasn’t deterred him — he resurfaced again in Minnesota last week. The day before the Minnesota Republican caucus, O’Keefe registered several fake individuals to vote in order to receive absentee ballots. His video was leaked to drum up outrage about possible voter fraud. But there’s simply no evidence that — before O’Keefe rolled into town, anyway — Minnesota has any voter fraud problem whatsoever.

What do Minnesota and New Hampshire have in common? Unsurprisingly, there are photo ID bills before both states’ legislatures in 2012. Activists like O’Keefe will point to these videos as proof that our election systems lack integrity. But folks should flat-out refuse to take marching orders on election “integrity” from a gentleman who clearly doesn’t have much.

Voters in those states should refuse to be taken in by these fraudulent claims of voter fraud. There were no dead voters in South Carolina, and there aren’t in Minnesota or Maine either. Instead, there’s just O’Keefe and others like him — who will do anything it takes to provide “proof” that photo ID laws are necessary. There’s zero percent truth to any of these highly-publicized claims. But they unfortunately can lead to passage of laws requiring a photo ID that 11 percent of eligible American voters do not have.

When you scratch beneath the surface, you see that O’Keefe and others who make a living crying “fraud!” resort to manufacturing evidence of voter fraud that doesn’t otherwise exist — and potentially commit fraud in the process. If those who support photo ID are willing to commit fraud in the name of preventing it, maybe it’s time to stop taking these claims at face value. Like fool's gold, the claims of widespread voter fraud are fast, cheap, and shiny — and collapse under close inspection.

The above was posted at Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law

The initial evidence of dead people voting in South Carolina was based on matching only names on voter rolls to other lists. In follow-up of other, similar, allegations, further investigation matching additional identifying data, like age, address, junior for senior suffixes, has shown that:

And when the salacious allegations turn out to be mundane glitches, or unconnected to proving identity at the polls, there's a lot less attention paid.

Sunday, February 12, 2012

Severe Conservative Syndrome

NYT OpEd By Paul Krugman
Published: February 12, 2012

Mitt Romney has a gift for words — self-destructive words. On Friday he did it again, telling the Conservative Political Action Conference that he was a “severely conservative governor.”

As Molly Ball of The Atlantic pointed out, Mr. Romney “described conservatism as if it were a disease.” Indeed. Mark Liberman, a linguistics professor at the University of Pennsylvania, provided a list of words that most commonly follow the adverb “severely”; the top five, in frequency of use, are disabled, depressed, ill, limited and injured.

That’s clearly not what Mr. Romney meant to convey. Yet if you look at the race for the G.O.P. presidential nomination, you have to wonder whether it was a Freudian slip. For something has clearly gone very wrong with modern American conservatism.

Read Krugman's full OpEd @ NYTimes

Obama's Birth-Control Rule Will Help Prevent Accidental Pregnancies

Live Science

In the United States, nearly 50 percent of pregnancies are unintended. A new health care rule — which stirred controversy due to its implications for church-affiliated organizations' coverage of contraception — has the potential to significantly reduce accidental pregnancies by increasing access to birth control, according to public health experts.

And the accommodation made by President Barack Obama on Friday (Feb. 10) — making insurers rather than the church-affiliated organizations responsible for contraceptive benefits — won't change this, they say.

"It will have a huge effect," said Diana Greene Foster of the Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health at the University of California, San Francisco. "It is not the entire solution, but it is such an obvious first step."

The cost

Reducing unintended pregnancies is a well-established public health goal. They are associated with a variety of health issues for both mother and child from maternal depression to birth defects. There are also economic consequences, particularly for teen mothers who are less likely to graduate from high school, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

By fully covering the spectrum of contraceptives and eliminating co-payments, the rule would give women the option of picking the method of birth control best suited for them, regardless of cost, according to Adam Sonfield, a senior public policy associate at the Guttmacher Institute.

The most effective forms of contraception are long-acting, like intrauterine devices and implants that are put under the skin. Both can last for years, eliminating the possibility that a woman will miss a dose or use the inconsistently, according to Sonfield.

"They are extremely effective in the long run, but in the short run, they often have high upfront costs," Sonfield said. "Rates of unintended pregnancies are many times higher among poor women, [so] this has the potential to really help with that."

The rule originates with the health care overhaul, which Obama signed into law in 2010, and it packages contraception along with other preventive care. It exempts churches and houses of worship from offering insurance that covers contraception. Earlier this year, Obama rejected an exemption to this coverage for organizations with religious affiliations, such as, a Catholic hospital or school. This sparked accusations that the rule violated religious liberty by forcing institutions to buy something they opposed. (The Catholic Church considers deliberate contraception a sin.) [8 Ways Religion Impacts Your Life]

GOP Will Fight To Let ANY Employer Deny Birth Control For Employees

The U.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops, Republicans in Congress, and Republican presidential candidates almost immediately rejected a compromise on employer provided health insurance programs offering contraception coverage for women.

On ABC’s This Week, Rep. Paul Ryan echoed the Republican objection of contraception coverage. Ryan told host George Stephanopolous the compromise is nothing more than a “fig leaf” and an “accounting trick”:

RYAN: To paraphrase the bishops’ letter, this thing, it’s a distinction without a difference. It’s an accounting gimmick or a fig leaf. It’s not a compromise. The president’s doubled down. [...] If this is what the president’s willing to do in a tough election year, imagine what he’s going to do to implement the rest of his health care law after an election.

TPM

Not satisfied with President Obama’s new religious accommodation, Republicans will move forward with legislation by Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) that permits any employer to deny birth control coverage in their health insurance plans, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said Sunday.

“If we end up having to try to overcome the President’s opposition by legislation, of course I’d be happy to support it, and intend to support it,” McConnell said. “We’ll be voting on that in the Senate and you can anticipate that that would happen as soon as possible.”

Republican Party Returns To Its Base "Culture War" Focus

The 2012 election was supposed to be about jobs and the economy and, though that will still be central, the Republican Party has returned to its base "culture war" issues.

Proposition 8! Birth control! Susan G. Komen and Planned Parenthood!

Increasingly the man of the moment seems to be GOP culture warrior Rick Santorum, not Mitt Romney, although Romney is also trying to capitalize on hard right "culture war" issues, too.

Former Sen. Rick Santorum (Penn.), Mitt Romney and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, the top three 2012 GOP presidential candidates, have committed to a "personhood" constitutional amendment that would outlaw most common contraceptive choices available to women. Mother Jones reports that Republicans in the U.S. Congress also want to pass a federal Personhood Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That amendment would effectively reverse the 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut Supreme Court finding that Americans have a fundamental right to use birth control.

Public Policy Polling has a pretty convincing rundown of the political ramifications of the contraception installment of the various "culture war" controversies:

Friday, February 10, 2012

Drug Quickly Reverses Alzheimer's Symptoms in Mice

ScienceDaily: Neuroscientists at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine have made a dramatic breakthrough in their efforts to find a cure for Alzheimer's disease. The researchers' findings, published in the journal Science, show that use of a drug in mice appears to quickly reverse the pathological, cognitive and memory deficits caused by the onset of Alzheimer's. The results point to the significant potential that the medication, bexarotene, has to help the roughly 5.4 million Americans suffering from the progressive brain disease. More...