A Democrat won a state legislative special election in a district that President Trump carried by 17 percentage points, unnerving Republicans in Texas and beyond.
Oh, it gets better.
Right now there is a constitutional amendment (NOT convention, just an amendment; see footnote below**) in the works right now called “For Our Freedom” that would get unlimited campaign money out of US government and return control of campaign spending to Congress and the states. Heather Cox Richardson had a talk with one of the organizers on her channel last week, and I was surprised to see it’s already well underway, with just under half the states already prepared to ratify (map linked in footnote).
What this proposed amendment seeks to do is 1) constitutionally distinguish between humans and artificial “persons,” which overturns Citizens United and similar rulings, and 2) firmly establish the states and Congress as where election spending laws get decided, removing it entirely from the purview of the corrupt courts, which is how we got here to begin with.
When I first heard about it I didn’t think it had a snowball’s chance, but it turns out that legislators are in favor of it too because they have to compete in fundraising with all the PAC and foreign money now being thrown at their races by special interests, and all this cash is making it much harder for anyone not already purchased to win or keep a seat. This amendment helps them too, which is probably why it’s getting more than token support.
This is the proposed text of the amendment:
Section 1. We the People have compelling sovereign interests in the freedom of speech, representative self-government, federalism, the integrity of the electoral process, and the political equality of natural persons.
Section 2. Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to forbid Congress or the States, within their respective jurisdictions, from reasonably regulating and limiting contributions and spending in campaigns, elections, or ballot measures.
Section 3. Congress and the States shall have the power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation and may distinguish between natural persons and artificial entities, including by prohibiting artificial entities from raising and spending money in campaigns, elections, or ballot measures.
Beyond that I really only know what I heard in the talk and read in the FAQ so I’m probably not the best one to answer questions, but this is the most promising thing I’ve seen in some time, and apparently it stands a REALLY good chance of passing. I strongly encourage anyone interested to check it out, and especially listen to the guy explain it to Dr. Richardson. Good shit.
** Note: There are two methods to amend the US Constitution located in Article V. One is a constitutional convention, which no one wants (look it up if you’re interested). The other method, and the means by which we got most of our amendments, is when two-thirds – a supermajority – of both the House and the Senate approve a proposed amendment, AND then that amendment is individually ratified by at least three-quarters of the states. All the states can ratify (or not) but as soon as state ratification hits that magic number, which is 38 at present, it’s a valid constitutional amendment.
According to the map, this proposed amendment is now at 23 states approving, meaning that those states stand ready to both adopt the proposed amendment at the federal level when it appears before their representatives and senators in Congress, and then to approve it again it in their state legislatures when it comes back to the states for ratification. Fourteen more states are actively considering resolution at this time. Taken together, that’s almost three-quarters of the states already involved.
Rehmet won by around 10 points too, which puts the total swing around +30. If that kind of swing holds up in the rest of the state, it would completely blow up the Texas gerrymander. Remember, gerrymanders turn a lot of very safe districts into only moderately safe districts.
Sadly gerrymandering is only one tool in their arsenal of voter suppression. The next ones you’ll see (or already in progress)
- closure of polling sites in primarily left leaning/minority areas (some areas are being left with only one voting site)
- restriction to only being able to vote at your polling site (used to be you could vote at any site in the county, coupled with the first one will create incredibly long lines at certain stations, just rife for intimidation)
- reduction or removal of early voting times
- purging of voter registration with higher barrier to re-register
Sadly all four of those are being actively implemented in multiple places in the state. Most in the Houston and Dallas areas.
I’ve been saying this for ages and is refreshing to hear it from someone else for once! I’ve also learned the term “dummymander”
The problem is we need someone as galvanizing as Reagan. And absolutely none of the present DEM players including Buttigeig, is that person.
Need more of an FDR.
The New Deal is what america has needed for a long time, but instead we have been giving that money to the billionaires. Citizens united absolutely doomed us all to stay in this cycle in perpetuity.
It’s been nearly a hundred years. Trump’s great depression might arrive just in time for a real change, but we’ll see. There’s way more hurdles for someone trying to come in and actually make working class lives better. There’s no money in that for the ones running the show.
That’s the issue. A handful of billionaires who don’t feel the constitution serves them. Why should people as special as them only get one vote? It’s absurd. And so they buy votes via the same people who take a vow to serve the constitution, but like the special life given to them by excess wealth more.
It’s the same story as Trumps first term, in a way. People had to face the fact that the population had a large swath of people imbued with racism and misogyny. Some knew, sure, but the blatant nature of its current prevalence then had to be faced by everyone else. People realized he was the culmination of that ethos that had been simmering for some time.
Same thing this term, different context. Campaign finance, citizens united, corporations are people, a tax system that keeps shifting more and more wealth upward, an utterly absurd minimum wage. ALL of that is about men who feel they deserve more than 1 vote. Now, this term, we’re feeling more than just the financial end, the full force of just how broken the system is, how much “we the people” just don’t matter any more, to a bunch of people who feel entitled to more than one vote for themselves. The billionaires did as they liked, now everyone else feeling power is doing the same, per their own wishes and beliefs, and not anything to do with the constitution.
Next up, they won’t take the vote from us, per se, but a subset of men are going to reform the tax code to push women into the house, into perma-marriage, into kids. HIPAA, for women, will likely be removed (it’s in p25) I se the guise of promoting family heath. Financial freedom made women’s lib possible, for a mere 50 years, and now the next move is to start rolling that back in a way that will begin similar to the way trickle up economics worked from about 1981 to now. Slow enough that it’ll be like a frog in a slow boil until women are in the 2020s of where the lower 90% found ourselves financially now.
It all comes down to people who just don’t like the one vote per person system. They don’t like the American constitution being the fundamental power.
And so, those of us who do believe in one vote per person continue to believe that is what solves this. Pretty to think so. But it’s going to take much more to buck oppression than the one action that’s worked in past decades. That’s history. That’s not now. Yes, vote, while you still can. But the reality is that while we are under the thumbs of a handful of people who have no respect or belief in the one vote per person system, just voting will never solve this.
Not rattled enough. More rattling required.
I’m just gonna vote, and volunteer to get people to the poles to have the best turn out we can get.
People just need to realize that less than 2/3rds of Americans voted in the last election. Literally an extra percent of overall voters could have swung the entire election.
Their attempts to cheat all rely on suppressing voter turn out. If new voters turn out in unexpected numbers, the data they are using to cheat with will be entirely invalid, and so will their gerrymandering efforts.
Don’t be silent. Fucking vote
poles
North and South?
Eastern European.
MOAR!
The Nancy Pelosis and Hillary Clintons are the ones holding the democrats back and handing victory after victory to the republicans.
New blood is entering the arena and they all have exposure to how pissed off the left is that neither side represents their interests.
That’s right, dem primaries are arguably more important than the midterms for this reason. We have to get these pro-corporate pedophile protectors OUT of power.
