U.S. Politics: The Summer of Trump is Lasting Longer Than a Season in Westeros

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Could we end up with two contested conventions this year?

[IheartIheartTesla]

Nate Silver still gave Hillary odds to win both primary states, so she may yet win both (I guess the probabilities change rapidly in these small number states, so take it for what its worth). I remember in 2008 this was around the time Obama started overtaking Hillary, partly from the Ted Kennedy endorsement and partly from Bill Clinton gaffes. Would be interesting to see if the tightening of the race continues, but some part of Hillary has to go "oh no, not again".

Regarding Flint, its only an hour away from where I live, so I cant say its abstract for me. Even passing through, you have to wonder whether the gas stations on the way use Flint or Detroit water ........

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Sanders' supporters have so much more enthusiasm than Clinton's supporters. He should outperform his polling numbers.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

OAR,

Allow me to rephrase, if they break the rules why are these public sector unions allowed to continue to exist.

Because obliteration is not the penalty for violating restrictions against striking, nor should it be. And even if it were, the cases where public sector unions have violated restrictions against striking are exceptions, not the rule.

[Paladin of Ice]

In case anyone wants more updates (no one seems to have commented on previous updates), more news about Flint:

1) Along with lead poisoning, Snyder may have also hit the people of Flint with Legionnaire's Disease:

http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2016/01/legionnaires_disease_cases_spi.html

 

 

2) There may have been some good old fashioned shredding of documents to forestall criminal indictments going on:

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/1/12/1468806/-Michigan-police-confirm-break-in-at-the-City-Hall-office-where-the-Flint-water-documents-are-stored?detail=facebook

Or maybe someoen just wanted a TV from that exact room. Who knows.

But wait, there's more! Flint's residents are still being charged for their poisonous water that causes permanent brain damage,

At a press conference, Snyder was repeatedly questioned about the state's admitted mishandling of the water emergency and whether he knew it was a major problem before he addressed it in a press conference in early October. "I have a degree of responsibility," he said. It wasn't until last week that Snyder declared a state of emergency in Flint, where the first batch of 2,200 blood tests turned up 43 children with elevated lead in their blood—which can cause mental and physical development problems. Only 2 percent of the city's population has been tested, even though the state's chief medical officer said every child under the age of 6 years should be assessed. Officials warned Monday that the tap water still isn't safe to drink, but it took five days after the emergency declaration for the state to start handing out bottled water. And Flint's economically challenged citizens are still being billed for water that authorities say they shouldn't consume or even use to brush their teeth.

and Governor Snyder's fix for a crisis he started himself by insisting on using this source of water: sending 30 members of the National Guard to give out bottled water and filters to a city of 100,000.

Responding to calls that his administration has not done enough to help this city and its lead-poisoned water supply, Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder (R) dispatched his state’s National Guard on Tuesday to help distribute clean water.

More than 30 National Guard troops are expected to be on the ground by Friday, where they will go door to door to hand out water bottles, filters and testing kits to residents in this city of nearly 100,000.

The move comes amid rising anger here after it took 19 months for state officials to address a health crisis caused by the government itself, when it changed the source of its water to save money. Evidence has emerged that suggests state officials knew of the enormity of the problem and appeared to ignore or even downplay it.

For Gladyes Williamson, 61, a former worker at the Buick engine plant in Flint, apologies, free water and promises are meaningless. She, like many people in this city with a well-documented history of chronic unemployment and blight, says she believes they are the collateral damage of a coverup. She stood outside city hall Monday lugging a jug half-filled with orange water she says has been flowing out of her tap all summer.

“We are expendable,” she says.

 

[TerraPrime]

LoB:

What is your problem. SCOTUS ruling on major labor laws is well within the scope of US politics. Don't like it? Post something else. It has more impact on our society than whether Bernie leads another point or five in the most recent polls at a time that is more than months away from the primary. So, chill.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Because obliteration is not the penalty for violating restrictions against striking, nor should it be. And even if it were, the cases where public sector unions have violated restrictions against striking are exceptions, not the rule.

OAR,

Okay, what are the penalties for unauthorized public sector strikes?  I seem to remember Reagan dealing rather harshly with the PATCO strike.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

OAR,

Okay, what are the penalties for unauthorized public sector strikes?  I seem to remember Reagan dealing rather harshly with the PATCO strike.

It depends on the jurisdiction, but I would imagine in most places it's fines, firing of workers, possibly jail time, maybe even refusal to recognize the union as bargaining agent. If there is anywhere that the penalty is outright destruction of the union I'm unaware of it.

LoB:

What is your problem. SCOTUS ruling on major labor laws is well within the scope of US politics. Don't like it? Post something else. It has more impact on our society than whether Bernie leads another point or five in the most recent polls at a time that is more than months away from the primary. So, chill.

Plus, I imagine Sanders himself thinks this is a pretty important issue.

[Paladin of Ice]

In other interesting news: the militia in Oregon has turned to following law enforcement figures home and attempting to intimidate people who work for the Fish and Wildlife Service,

Harney County Sheriff Dave Ward accused militias Monday of harassing law enforcement officials and federal employees. Though there haven't been physical threats, he said, the alleged behavior is clearly meant to intimidate.

An armed group led by Ammon Bundy, calling itself the Citizens for Constitutional Freedom, has since Jan. 2 occupied the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge near Burns. The group has demanded that control of the refuge's land be handed over to locals. The Sheriff has offered the group an opportunity to leave peacefully, but they have declined.

Since the occupation began, there have been reports of law enforcement being followed home or watched, Sheriff Ward said in a written statement. A recent call to action by one of the groups drew many more people to Harney County, and the intimidating behavior continued, he said.

Although the sheriff did not identify any specific groups or individuals, the Pacific Patriot Network, a coalition of anti-government groups, put out a statement Jan. 7 urging its members to come to the wildlife refuge. 

One of the network's founders bristled at the idea that his organization could be responsible for harassing law enforcement.

"That's not anything we tolerate and its not anything that we're doing," Joseph Rice said. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife employees have told the Sheriff that they've been approached by self-styled militia members while grocery shopping or running errands with their families. The militia members would "engage employees and family members in debates about their status as Federal employees," Sheriff Ward said.

"The people on the refuge – and those who they have called to our community – obviously have no consideration for the wishes or needs of the people of Harney County," Sheriff Ward said. "If they did, they, too, would work to bring this situation to a peaceful close."

the Maryland police have rejected the fairly minor reforms suggested out of hand, saying they "are opposed to any and all changes" to policing

After a Maryland task force advanced 22 policing reforms for the state, a police union representative made a blunt, telling comment to the Baltimore Sun: "At this point we remain opposed to any and all changes," Frank Boston III, lobbyist for the Maryland Fraternal Order of Police, said.

"Any and all changes." A top police union in Maryland opposes any reforms — full stop. It's an impressive comment, especially in a state where distrust of police is particularly high after Freddie Gray died last year from a spinal cord injury he suffered while in Baltimore police custody. (Other police groups have taken a milder approach, and back some of the measures in the reform package.)

The proposals, for what it's worth, seem pretty mild. Here's how reporter Erin Cox described some of the measures, which still must get approval from the legislature and governor, over at the Sun:

The group suggested cutting in half the time officers can wait before speaking to investigators, from 10 days to five. Under the task force's proposal, victims of police brutality would have a year to file a complaint — four times longer than under current law — and be guaranteed an investigation. And in addition to opening all police trial boards to public scrutiny, the group proposed striking down a state law that prevents citizens from serving on those boards.

Separately, the task force recommended new whistle-blower protections for officers who help internal investigations or raise concerns about colleagues' conduct.

The bill would also task the Maryland Police Training and Standards Commission with creating uniform standards for hiring, training, punishing, and helping police officers. And the plan would set funding to encourage cops to live in the communities they police, as well as create community programs in which officers and kids can interact, such as athletic leagues.
Mostly, the reforms take aim at protections currently written into Maryland law and police contracts, which unions like the Fraternal Order of Police push so strongly for. But the provisions written into these contracts and laws can make it very difficult to hold cops accountable for excessive use of force, abuse, or negligence — and Maryland provides a clear example for why.
In a 2015 report, Samuel Walker, a criminal justice expert from the University of Nebraska Omaha, analyzed the Baltimore Police Department's contract with the Fraternal Order of Police and the Maryland Law Enforcement Officers' Bill of Rights. Here were three of his findings:

The Maryland Law Enforcement Officers' Bill of Rights permits a 10-day delay in any interrogation of a police officer involved in a matter that could require discipline. As Walker notes, this conflicts with widely accepted best practices established by the Justice Department that require police officers to be interviewed as soon as possible following a shooting or use-of-force incident that causes an injury. It also gives officers more time to possibly conspire with others, including fellow cops, to fabricate a story.

Maryland law also requires that police officers be interrogated only by another sworn officer, the state attorney general, or a designee if requested by the governor. Walker writes that this largely blocks civilian oversight, which was pitched by the President's Task Force on 21st Century Policing as one way to help build community trust toward police.

Maryland law prohibits police departments from firing, demoting, suspending without pay, or cutting the salaries of officers "solely" because they're placed on state lists that track officers "who have been found or alleged to have committed acts which bear on credibility, integrity, honesty, or other characteristics that would constitute exculpatory or impeachment evidence." Walker calls this "unbelievable," writing, "A police officer who has been determined to have performance problems related to 'credibility, integrity, or honesty' should not be retained by the department."

Some specifics of the law are unique to Maryland. But the general themes presented by these findings — mainly the big protections against investigations and oversight — are typical of policing laws and contracts all around the country. These are the types of measures that make it very difficult to even investigate a police officer for potential abuse.

the two co-founders of a planned anti-Obama march, (which has ties to the militia situation in Oregon) got into a drunken argument over a gun and one shot the other in the head,

An anti-Obama group’s plan for a cross-country march to “restore America” — which is related to the Oregon nature preserve armed standoff — isn’t going down well after the organizer shot the other co-founder dead (pictured) in an argument over a gun. At least one of the men was drunk at the time of the shooting.

The group’s Facebook page is littered with language about God and the Constitution, because deities always get inebriated before the next purge I guess.

Raw Story reports:

Sheriff’s deputies in Grayson County, Texas, have not released details about the fatal shooting, but social media posts by right-wing “patriots” associated with militants occupying an Oregon nature preserve identified the victim and shooter as the organizers of the Paul Revere 2016 Final March To Restore America.

“Dear friends it’s my dearest regrets to have to share this heart breaking new (sic) with you tonight. That OUR fellow patriot and brother Charles Carter is no longer with us. He gone to be with Jesus. Today killed by a fellow patriot Vincent Smith. Who was suppose (sic) to be his brother in arms and friend,” posted online radio host Keith Williams, who identified himself as the victim’s next of kin and shares posts from Jon Ritzheimer, another ‘patriot’ involved with the Bundys.

Bill Williamson, who is associated with the Oregon militants, said in a Facebook post that Smith shot Carter in a drunken argument over a gun. Williams said Carter was drunk and pulled Smith’s gun from its holster, but Smith drew a “spare gun” and shot his friend in the head.

...

The 3% Idaho militia group also showed up last week to safeguard the perimeter of the armed occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. The group also confronted the FBI — and the feds did nothing.

One of the 3%ers  said that Carter “violated one of the first rules of firarms (sic) safety.”

“NEVER mix guns & booze,” said Joe Bleaugh. “Charles got drunk and belligerent and took away his friend’s sidearm and threatened him with it; at which time his friend drew his backup weapon and fired to defend his own life.” This is why it is a ‪#‎felony‬ for an intoxicated person to be in possession of a firearm. Guns and booze do not mix. End of story, and unfortunately the end of Charles’ life. What a waste, & by his own hand!,” he added.

The march which was organized by Carter and Smith in the hopes of removing President Obama and congressional leaders from office before November’s elections, just hit a snag.

“It is being planned as a march/caravan starting from multiple points on the west coast, and advancing across America gathering steam and troops, with its final destination Washington DC and Final Aim at removing the corrupt leadership that has taken over our beloved country and ousted her God and constitution,” Smith wrote in a Facebook post last month.

 

and executives bear far more responsibility for wage stagnation than immigrants, counter to certain claims.

Are immigrants to blame for America’s economic rut? In his recent cover story for The Atlantic, David Frum points to that belief as a major reason for the dynamics of the Republican primary, particularly Trump’s rise. In his final State of the Union address, President Obama pushed back against those who would answer that question in the affirmative, saying, “Immigrants aren’t the reason wages haven’t gone up enough; those decisions are made in the boardrooms that too often put quarterly earnings over long-term returns.”

Is Obama right?

The extent to which immigration impacts wages is a contentious and layered question. Critics of current immigration policy often cite the work of the economist George Borjas, a professor at Harvard, who finds that in both the long and short run, the impact of immigrants on wages can be deleterious, particularly for low-skilled workers. But Borjas also finds that the opposite can be true, and that the outcome on wages depends largely on the size of demand and the consumer base in a particular area of for a particular product. A recent paper from researchers at Indiana University and University of Virginia advances the finding that immigration can boost the economy overall since an influx of immigrants can actually create jobs in a local economy, as new residents generate demand for everything from housing, to haircuts, to restaurants. The wage effect is a bit less clear, the paper concedes. The research found that an influx of immigrants can cause a decline in wages for tradeable professions (things that can be outsourced like manufacturing or engineering) but can cause an increase in the wages for local workers in non tradable professions (jobs that must be done locally, like waitresses, retail, or hospitality professionals).

But on the bigger picture, Obama is right: The discussion of just how much wage suppression immigrants might be responsible for is a bit beside the point. The president’s argument during the State of the Union address was probably not that wage redistribution and suppression doesn’t exist, but instead that the level of wage dampening that immigration is actually responsible for in the broader scope of the problem pales in comparison to the wage suppression that has occurred since multi-billion dollar companies decided to prioritize rewarding shareholders first and workers last.

Obama is certainly not the first to draw a connection between corporate priorities and low wages. A recent report from the Brookings Institution found that over the past several decades, the payrolls of the largest companies (by market cap) have gotten much smaller, and not because jobs have en masse gone to immigrants willing to work for less. Jerry Davis, a professor at the University of Michigan and the author of the paper, postulates that the new generation of leaner companies is largely related to changes in how the stock market and shareholders assessed value. “By the 1990s it was widely agreed among executives and investors, and many policymakers, that corporations existed primarily to create shareholder value. Other stakeholders were relevant, but at the end of the day, increasing market value was the dominant objective,” he writes. The result? Massive corporate reorganization to cut back on labor spending via outsourcing, lowered wages, or layoffs.  

The recession, of course, plays a role in the current predicament. “The strength [in corporate profits] is directly related to the weakness in hourly wages, which are still growing at just a 2 percent nominal pace. The weakness of wages and the resulting strength of profits are telling signs that the US labor market is still far from full employment,” Jan Hatzius, the chief U.S. economist at Goldman Sachs wrote in a 2014 research note. That’s because many companies have learned to be leaner, they hire fewer employees, and still benefit from continually growing productivity. And because the country is still not at full employment, they can keep paying workers less. All of this serves to boost the company’s bottom line, while workers are unable to participate in those benefits.

And keeping those profits high is of critical importance to corporate boards who have to report back to shareholders every three months for quarterly earnings reports. Thinning profit margins or missed earnings can tank a stock price, enraging shareholders and leading them to pressure company executives. That, some economists have said, means that companies place much more value on producing quick, quarterly gains, instead of focusing on strategies that produce long-term success (with the possibility of growing pains) and thriving companies that could better care for employees.

[Shryke]

Very curious about what happens if Bernie wins the first two states.  One key difference from 2008 is that Clinton had not consolidated this much official party support that time at this point.

The media will make a big deal of it because woo narative! but I doubt it will impact the race much overall. Sanders issues have always been in places like the South, where the large minority Democratic bases are the big voters in the primary. 

You also gotta be careful of what polls you are looking at. Especially in state primaries there's usually specific polling outfits that do really good jobs there and the rest do rather eh. I believe Selzer is the one in Iowa that generally nails it and I can't remember for NH.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

Hillary Clinton Is Using GOP Fear Tactics Against Bernie Sanders’ Health Care Plan

Welcome to the campaign trail, Chelsea Clinton. Got anything on your mind? “Sen. Sanders wants to dismantle Obamacare, dismantle the CHIP program, dismantle Medicare, and dismantle private insurance,” she said in New Hampshire on Tuesday. “I worry if we give Republicans Democratic permission to do that, we’ll go back to an era—before we had the Affordable Care Act—that would strip millions and millions and millions of people off their health insurance.”

The Hillary Clinton presidential campaign is in serious danger of losing both Iowa and New Hampshire, and this dire—though by no means fatal—situation is reflected in its new, aggressive posture toward her challenger, Sen. Bernie Sanders.  Her attacks are largely coming on two fronts: Sanders’ dicey history on certain gun control votes and his support for single-payer health care.

While her criticisms of the former come from the left, her assault on the latter comes from the right, and it homes directly on a long-sought policy idea treasured by Democratic voters. The arguments her campaign is using against single-payer health care are earning plenty of griping from progressives, who see this as proof that Clinton will only play nice with them until the precise second that turning on them becomes politically advantageous.

...

The Sanders plan that the Clinton campaign is attacking is a 2013 piece of single-payer, or “Medicare for all,” legislation that he introduced. The bill would have folded existing insurance programs into state-run single-payer systems, in which the government covers all medical costs, effectively eliminating the private insurance industry. It would have paid for the proposal, as I wrote when Clinton first started wielding this attack in the fall, by levying a “2.2 percent tax on individuals making up to $200,000 or couples making up to $250,000, and progressively increasing that rate to 5.2 percent for income beyond $600,000.” Sanders’ 2013 plan “also would have tacked an extra 6.7 percent payroll tax on the employer side, at least some”—or all—“of which employers would likely pass on to workers.”

The Clinton campaign approaches Sanders’ strategy through a clever-but-not-really tactic of dressing up standard right-wing arguments against socialized health insurance as from the left. Sanders’ 2013 plan would have only “dismantled” existing health insurance programs in the sense that it would roll them into a new one in which everyone has medical coverage. Saying that it would “dismantle Medicare” is a truly head-spinning way of describing a plan that would enroll everyone in Medicare. The plan would indeed have raised taxes by an effective 8.9 percent on most individuals, and higher for those at the top—but no one would be paying insurance premiums anymore. The idea is that public, universal health insurance works out cheaper on net since the government would have lower actuarial and administrative costs, more leverage to negotiate medical costs with providers, and no profit expectations to meet. As for the Clinton campaign’s talk about how Sanders’ single-payer plan would have put each state single-payer system in the hands of Republican governors who could reject them, Sanders’ policy director tells the Week that they would be like Obamacare’s individual exchanges: If a state doesn’t set one up, the federal government would do it for them. (The Sanders campaign may also change this structure in its supposedly forthcoming new plan.) 

Clinton is a health policy wonk and fully understands these arguments, but she and her campaign are nevertheless describing the plan as one in which apparently no one has access to medical coverage anymore but does, just for the hell of it, pay an additional 9 percent in taxes. These talking points do not endear Clinton to progressives who were already inclined to believe that her otherwise leftward posture this primary has been a temporary pose and that she will do anything to win.

[Paladin of Ice]

This is an old story I just came across, but a great reminder of what money actually does in politics: failing Florida hospital with dreadful surgical safety record gave hundreds of thousands to Republicans for 2014 elections, and Florida promptly dropped surgical safety standards afterwards.

Children’s heart doctors in Florida are reeling from a recent decision by the state to drop surgical standards for pediatric open heart surgery, CNN reports. To add insult to injury, doctors and medical experts suspect that the decision was purely political.

The decision follows a 2014 medical review and a June 2015 report by CNN, which found that one particular medical facility, St. Mary’s Medical Center and Palm Beach Children’s Hospital, had an abysmal track record for pediatric open-heart surgery—a death rate more than three times the national average. And the two reports found that the facility was failing to meet the now-repealed standards, which include proficiency in performing the surgeries themselves.

The St. Mary’s facility is run by Tenet Healthcare, which coincidentally donated $200,000 to the state’s republicans between 2013 and 2014, including $100,000 to Republican Governor Rick Scott’s political action committee. Those donations were the highest of any Tenet gave to political groups in other states.

A month after CNN’s report, the state announced that it would repeal the standards for children’s heart surgery. Florida’s health department explained the move by saying that the standards were never properly approved by the legislature, but it failed to explain to reporters why legislative approval was not sought upon realizing the lapse.

Doctors and top medical experts are strongly against the repeal. They also suspect that the decision to cut the standards came directly from the Governor’s office. David Nykanen, a pediatric cardiologist and member of the state's Cardiac Technical Advisory Panel, told CNN that the Department of Health's chief of staff was always very careful at every meeting to say there's no political agenda. “But we thought to ourselves, 'Do you think we're stupid?'”

Sure is such a good thing there's all this speech around, that has no chance of corrupting or influencing politics beyond simply telling politicians about the concerns of their constituents.

[Commodore]

it won't get any play

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

LoB:

What is your problem. SCOTUS ruling on major labor laws is well within the scope of US politics. Don't like it? Post something else. It has more impact on our society than whether Bernie leads another point or five in the most recent polls at a time that is more than months away from the primary. So, chill.

To me, the discussion about the horserace might be the least interesting part of these threads.

[Martell Spy]

It will be interesting to see how much play this gets during the debate tonight, especially considering it plays right into Trump's rhetoric about bought politicians.Ted Cruz may have just handed the Republican nomination to Trump simply because he's a slimy piece of shit who neglected to file information with the FEC about a $500,000 dollar loan he received from Goldman Sachs during his Senate campaign, while he spent most of that campaign railing against the bank bailout, among other things. It will be interesting to see how much play this gets during the debate tonight, especially considering it plays right into Trump's rhetoric about bought politicians.

 

Yeah, Trump's started using his birtherism tricks and suggesting Cruz may not meet the requirements to run since he was born in Canada. (which isn't true of course) It may come up tonight and there's at least one poll where it may have effected Cruz in Iowa.

 

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

WWTR,

Agreed.  The horserace is really boring.  

[Mlle. Zabzie]

Ok, so how about an interesting sovereignty question!

Today was oral arguments in Puerto Rico v. Sanchez Valle.  (Linkage:  http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/supreme_court_dispatches/2016/01/the_supreme_court_considers_puerto_rico_s_sovereignty_in_sanchez_valle.html)

The question in the case is whether Puerto Rico is a sovereign such that the double jeopardy clause does not apply to it or if instead it is something else and lesser so that it cannot separate try a person for a crime that the federal government has also tried it for.  This is a fascinating case which mixes pretty bare bones constitutional questions (more so than a lot of Supreme Court cases!) with international law.  Bonus, I know Chris Landau (cheering for him in a professional sense whatever the merits) so this is super fun for me to read :).

 

[DanteGabriel]

Yeah, Trump's started using his birtherism tricks and suggesting Cruz may not meet the requirements to run since he was born in Canada. (which isn't true of course) It may come up tonight and there's at least one poll where it may have effected Cruz in Iowa.

 

Actually the issue of Cruz's birth might be dicier than you think. Dicier than Obama's and McCain's, certainly.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-01-13/ted-cruz-has-a-real-birther-problem

[Larry of the Lawn]

FWIW, Trump says he won't bring up Cruz's birth / presidential eligibility.  Of course, that doesn't mean he won't weigh in if someone else brings it up.  And of course, just because he says it now doesn't really mean anything.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

WWTR,

Agreed.  The horserace is really boring.

You'd think differently if you had been part of the horserace at some point.