Monthly Archives: February 2019

If Bill De Blasio is stuck in a blizzard in Iowa…

Then the words “running for President” must be rattling around his brain somewhere, and that’s enough to add him to our potentials list. We now have 12 announced candidates, with 14 still to hear from.

Definitely running:

  1. Rep. John Delaney
  2. Sec. Julian Castro
  3. Gov. Jay Inslee
  4. Sen. Elizabeth Warren
  5. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard
  6. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand
  7. Mayor Pete Buttigieg
  8. Sen. Kamala Harris
  9. Sen. Cory Booker
  10. Sen. Any Klobuchar
  11. Andrew Yang
  12. Sen. Bernie Sanders

Potential candidates who have shown some interest: Continue Reading...

Posted in Democrats | Comments Off on If Bill De Blasio is stuck in a blizzard in Iowa…

Houston: Incredibly Optimistic

So says Houston tourism chief David Mincberg on the city’s chances of hosting the 2020 Democratic National Convention:

A decision could be coming this week.

Posted in 2020 Convention | Comments Off on Houston: Incredibly Optimistic

Appropriations and Executive Orders

When President Obama was in office, we heard a lot from Republicans about how President Obama was usurping the power of Congress to write laws.  Since President Trump has been in office, despite President Trump going much further than President Obama ever did, the Republicans have been noticeably unwilling to do anything to oppose this practice of legislating by executive order.  The most recent invasion of congressional authority was the President’s decision that he could ignore the line items in appropriations bills because he wants more money for border wall construction than Congress was willing to appropriate.

Over 50 years ago, in Youngstown Steel vs. Sawyer, a case involving the temporary seizure of a steel mill at the start of the Korean War (i.e. a real emergency), the United States Supreme Court found that the seizure exceeded executive authority.  At that time Justice Robert Jackson (one of the leading conservative justices of the mid-20th Century) wrote a concurrence that recognized three potential situations which had different implications for presidential authority.  First, the president was acting with maximum authority if there was a congressional statute granting him that authority.  Second, the president was in a middle zone when Congress had taken no action.  In other words, while such a president would be relying on his constitutional authority, there was at least no law barring the action.  Finally, there was the circumstance in which there was a contrary statute barring the President’s action.  In such a case, a court could only allow the president to act if the president had independent constitutional authority and Congress lacked the authority to limit the president’s actions.

In the current circumstance, the debate will be over whether President Trump’s actions fall into category one (authorized by Congress) or category three (barred by Congress).  The President will be relying on the law governing declarations of national emergencies.  As part of that law, the President is authorized to engage in construction to support the use of the military in responding to such an emergency.  While the statute does not define national emergency, the past use of that power has usually been in the case of a military crisis or a national disaster.  Additionally, the authorization for construction to support the military is implicitly for support facilities (e.g. housing, etc.) not for construction of permanent structures intended for civilian use. Continue Reading...

Posted in Federal Budget, House of Representatives, Judicial, Senate | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Appropriations and Executive Orders

Convention battle heats up

Lots of convention news today, starting with the lead story in Politico’s Playbook:

DEMOCRATS are anxiously awaiting a decision by the DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE on which city will host the 2020 Democratic National Convention. So far, the committee has been mum about whether HOUSTON, MIAMI or MILWAUKEE will get the nod, but we hear part of the delay is because each city has its own downsides.

THE PAIN POINTS … Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 Convention | Comments Off on Convention battle heats up

Sanders joins the fun

Sen. Bernie Sanders joined the race for the 2020 Democratic nomination today. We’re also adding businessman Andrew Yang to the list, as most listings of candidates are including him. And we’re removing Sen. Mark Warner, as there has been no indications of any interest from him over the last few months. We now have 12 announced candidates, with 13 still to hear from.

Definitely running:

  1. Rep. John Delaney
  2. Sec. Julian Castro
  3. Gov. Jay Inslee
  4. Sen. Elizabeth Warren
  5. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard
  6. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand
  7. Mayor Pete Buttigieg
  8. Sen. Kamala Harris
  9. Sen. Cory Booker
  10. Sen. Any Klobuchar
  11. Andrew Yang
  12. Sen. Bernie Sanders

Potential candidates who have shown some interest: Continue Reading...

Posted in Democrats | Comments Off on Sanders joins the fun

Dem’s heart says Milwaukee, but does the head say Houston?

It’s a classic convention bid site battle: In one corner: Mid-west Milwaukee, with the swing-state power, a brand new arena, and the pleasant, no hurricane summer weather, but hotels in the ‘burbs. In the other corner: Big-city Houston – not a swing state yet (sorry), but with hotels galore, and a better place to make an immigration statement. Milwaukee’s opponents seem to be making one last push to bring the convention to Texas:

The tension point is a view among some DNC members that Milwaukee might not be equipped to handle the needs of delegates in terms of hotel rooms in close proximity to the center of the convention action and easy transportation

Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 Convention, Milwaukee | 2 Comments

Iowa Caucus 2020 Rules — First Look

Part of the changes in the DNC Call for the 2020 Convention and National Delegate Selection Rules were provisions governing the caucus states.  In past cycles, the results in states which used caucuses as their delegate selection process but also used a later non-binding primary showed two things.  First, significantly more people participated in the non-binding primary.  Second, the voters in the non-binding primary had different preferences than those who attended the caucuses.  Additionally, the rules in some of the caucus states created an opportunity for “mischief” at the later levels of the delegate selection process permitting a well-organized campaign to win additional delegates at those later levels and costing a poorly-organized campaigns delegates that they had apparently won on caucus nights.  The new rules attempted to address these “problems”  In particular, Rule 2.K of the Delegate Selection Rules includes requirements that caucus state have a procedure for early or absentee votes in the caucus, have a mechanism to allow participation by those who are unable to attend their local caucus at the time and location set for the local caucus, a means for reporting the “statewide and district level results for each candidate based on the first expression of preference by the participants” in the first level of caucuses; and require that “the allocation of all national delegates, be locked in at the final expression of preference” in the first level of caucuses.  However, Rule 14.B and Rule 14.E seem to suggest that caucus states might still be able a later level as the determining step.  (In primary states, these same rules require using the primary vote.)

In 2016, the Iowa Caucus (held under the old rules) did have a process by which voters could vote absentee via satellite and tele-caucuses but the satellite caucuses only elected three state convention delegates and the tele-caucuses only selected two state convention delegates.  Voters participating in either of these alternative caucuses had no role in the selecting delegates at the district level.  For those who could attend the precinct caucuses, at the precinct caucus, attendees would divide into an initial preference and determine which groups were viable (with a general 15% threshold unless the precinct was electing three or fewer delegates to the county convention).  After the initial count, attendees would have the opportunity (based on which preferences were viable or close to viable) to change their preference.  The precinct chair would report the results of this second count to the state party in terms of “state delegate equivalents” and would not result raw votes.  The delegates selected at the precinct caucuses would attend the county conventions where a similar process would occur to select the delegates who would be attending the congressional district convention and the state convention.  A similar process would again occur at the congressional district conventions and the state convention to determine the allocation of the national convention delegates selected at those conventions.  For multiple reasons (the possibility of delegates elected at precinct caucuses and county conventions not attending later conventions, the possibility of changes in preference of such delegates, delegates pledged to withdrawn candidates choosing between the remaining candidates, and the fact that each delegate chosen at a precinct meeting was a fraction of a state delegate and those fractions would be converted to whole numbers at the county convention), the report of the state delegate equivalent only provided a rough estimate of the national delegates that each candidate was likely to receive from Iowa.

We now have a draft of the 2020 Delegate Selection Rules for Iowa.  (Of course, these rules still have to go through a public comment period, be finally approved by the Iowa Democratic Party, and by approved by the Rules and By-laws Committee of the Democratic National Committee before becoming final.)  This draft gives us a first look at how the caucus states might change their state rules to comply with the new national rules.  Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 Convention, Delegates, Democratic Party, Elections | Tagged , | Comments Off on Iowa Caucus 2020 Rules — First Look

Debate Rules

This past week, the Democratic National Committee announced the standards that will be used to determine which candidates will appear in the first two debates of the cycle (one in June and one in July).  As these standards set a very low bar to participation, it is more likely than not that each debate will actually be two debates on consecutive nights.

A candidate can qualify by meeting one of two standards.  First, a candidate qualifies by getting one percent in at least three “approved” polls.  I assume by “approved” that the DNC means a poll by a reputable media organization that, at the very least, includes all of the declared candidates that major media organizations and blogs like this site are listing.  (There are always a large number of unknown candidates who file paperwork with the FEC and file declarations of candidacy in states like New Hampshire.  Currently, beyond the present and former elected officials that are listed here, there are four other candidates who filed paperwork with the FEC to run.)  Figuring that we will probably end up with fifteen to twenty candidates, it is likely that there will be over ten candidates who meet this standard.

Second, a candidate can qualify by raising $65,000 from a minimum of 200 donors in a minimum of 20 states.   Those candidates who have declared and have announced fundraising to date appear to be blowing well past this threshold.  This threshold appears to be set in a way that favors late declarers.  If a candidate who declares before May 1 hasn’t raised more than $1 million from over 1,000 donors in over 30 states by June 1, it is unlikely that they will be the nominee.  Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 Convention, Debates, Democratic Debates, Democratic Party, DNC | 1 Comment

Milwaukee and Houston battling to win next week’s convention bid

All indications are that the host of the 2020 Democratic National Convention will be announced next week. Milwaukee is still considered the front-runner, although Houston is fighting to the end. (Miami is the 3rd city in consideration). First, Milwaukee is getting help from its neighbors:

Top Midwestern Democrats and business leaders are engaged in a frenzied, last-minute effort to bring the Democratic National Convention to Milwaukee next year, insisting that a Wisconsin convention presence would help repair the frayed relationship between the party and heartland voters.

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker has been involved in the behind-the-scenes overtures, offering up his own political muscle to lure the marquee political event to his neighboring state. Pritzker told POLITICO on Wednesday he spoke to Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers this week about helping to land the convention. Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 Convention, Milwaukee | Comments Off on Milwaukee and Houston battling to win next week’s convention bid

Klobuchar running; Kennedy endorses Warren

Sen. Any Klobuchar became the tenth candidate to enter the race for the Democratic nomination today. Meanwhile, Rep. Joe Kennedy endorsed Sen. Elizabeth Warren today, thereby removing his name from our potential candidate list. We now have 10 announced candidates, with 15 still to hear from.

Definitely running:

  1. Rep. John Delaney
  2. Sec. Julian Castro
  3. Gov. Jay Inslee
  4. Sen. Elizabeth Warren
  5. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard
  6. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand
  7. Mayor Pete Buttigieg
  8. Sen. Kamala Harris
  9. Sen. Cory Booker
  10. Sen. Any Klobuchar

Potential candidates who have shown some interest: Continue Reading...

Posted in Democrats | Comments Off on Klobuchar running; Kennedy endorses Warren