Monthly Archives: May 2019

The Walk and Chew Gum Agenda

Earlier this week, the petulant child-in-chief stated that Democrats on Capitol Hill can either choose to work on legislative issues or investigate him.  As we have gotten used to over the past several years, President Trump simply does not understand the rules for how government works.  This latest temper tantrum, however, is a challenge to Democrats on Capitol Hill.  It’s important that our leaders show that we can do both and do both in a big way.

Because President Trump can veto any legislation and because Senator Mitch McConnell is best at blocking legislation and lousy at getting anything done, it is unlikely that Democrats can actually get any significant laws passed until after the 2020 election.  But Democrats can make a big deal of the House passing a set of laws that will be the core of the legislative agenda in 2021. 

On infrastructure, the appropriate committee needs to draft a bill that will make a major down payment on the backlog of crucial infrastructure projects.  And then, the Rules committee can set aside a healthy block of time to debate that bill on the floor of the House.  During that debate, Democrats from every swing state and swing district can speak about what that bill will mean for their area — the type of speeches which can be blasted on you tube with highlights on the local news.  Then Democratic Senators can regularly ask when Mitch McConnell will let that bill come up for a vote in the Senate. Continue Reading...

Posted in Donald Trump, House of Representatives | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The Walk and Chew Gum Agenda

And then there were 21


And that’s a wrap, folks. With Bullock and, amazingly, De Blasio, joining the race, we have 21 candidates, and that’s not counting Williamson, Gravel or Messam. The DNC has set a limit of 20 candidates for the first debates, so it will be interesting to see who doesn’t make it, and whether they then drop out.

Running: Continue Reading...

Posted in Debates, Democrats | Comments Off on And then there were 21

Biden, Bennet in

Still waiting on Bullock and De Blasio. And watching to see if Williamson, Gravel or Messam actually make the debate stage (not just qualify)

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
  13. Gov. John Hickenlooper
  14. Rep. Beto O’Rourke
  15. Rep. Tim Ryan
  16. Rep. Eric Swalwell
  17. Rep. Seth Moulton
  18. Sen. Michael Bennet
  19. VP Joe Biden

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

Posted in Democratic Debates, Democrats | Comments Off on Biden, Bennet in

Supreme Court and Sexual Orientation

While we wait for the major decisions from this term over the next seven weeks, the Supreme Court has added three cases for next term (likely to be argued in the Fall and decided next Spring) involving sexual orientation and employment.  Two cases involve gay men who allege that they were terminated for being homosexual and one involves a transgender individual who alleges discrimination based on that status.  While at the lower court level, all three claimed, in part, that one of the factors in the employment decision was their failure to comply with gender stereotypes (i.e. they did not conform to the employer’s expectations for male behavior), that claim is only part of the Supreme Court case for the transgender individual.

These cases are going to be difficult for the employees to win, especially the two gay men.  Their claim is statutory, based on Title VII (of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended) which bars discrimination in employment “because of sex.”  And the natural reading of “because of sex” is “because of gender.”  That is the way that the Supreme Court has always read the provision.  And, even today, many states and government agencies use “sex” when they mean gender (e.g., on driver’s licenses and application forms).  The arguments of the employees is hindered by the fact that their claim is statutory rather than constitutional.  Other than the most conservative justices, the justices are somewhat willing to apply constitutional texts and principles to new issues.  Put simply, a constitutional amendment is viewed as an extraordinary thing.  Thus, if a claim is similar enough to existing constitutional protections, courts will sometimes find that it fits under those protections. 

On the other hand, notwithstanding the current problems in Congress, courts tend to see statutory problems as something that the legislature could fix if the legislature wanted to fix the problems.  And Congress has failed to pass proposed legislation that would amend Title VII to include sexual orientation (or create Title VII-type protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation).  Continue Reading...

Posted in Civil Rights, Judicial, LGBT | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Supreme Court and Sexual Orientation

Delegate Selection Plans — Kansas

Somewhat late in the process, Kansas Democrats have issued their draft delegate selection plan for 2020.  Like the prior plans from Alaska, Hawaii, and North Dakota, Kansas will be using a party-run primary instead of their traditional caucus.

As with most of the other states that held a caucus in 2016, this plan authorizes registered democrats to participate in the primary either by a mail-in absentee ballot or by depositing a ballot at one of the party-run ballot centers on the primary day.  Under the proposal, the party will mail a notice to all registered Democrats in early March 2020 explaining how to vote in the primary.  Voters will be able to request an absentee ballot starting March 30.  Any absentee ballot must be mailed by April 24.  On primary day (May 2 — a Saturday), the ballot centers will be open for four hours (from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m.).  

The plan indicates that the ballots will use ranked-choice voting, but does not expressly explain how ranked-choice voting will work.  In other states, if there are candidates how fail to meet the threshold for delegates, then their votes are redistributed (starting with the last-placed candidate) until all remaining candidates are over 15%.  Ranked-choice voting should be applied separately at the congressional district and at the state-wide level.  If, by the time of the state convention, a candidate “is no longer a candidate,” any at-large and pleo delegates that the candidate would have won will be proportionately reallocated to the remaining candidates.  Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 Convention, Elections, Primary Elections | Tagged | Comments Off on Delegate Selection Plans — Kansas