Let the good times roll

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
45
48
65
Democrats Got Wrecked Again in State Legislative Races, and it Matters More Than You Might Think

The GOP has Donald Trump, a congressional majority, the majority of governorships, and full control of 33 state legislatures.

Just a little over two years after they used their control of the state House, state Senate, and governor's mansion to pass a bevy of progressive policies—one of the nation's highest minimum wages, tighter gun laws, and huge spending on rural broadband internet, to name a few—Democrats will be the minority party in both chambers of the Minnesota legislature next year.
They are the latest victims in a four-cycle-long electoral tidal wave that has flooded state legislatures with Republicans and cost Democrats nearly 1,000 seats, leaving them able to dictate policy in only a handful of states. Helped along by some friendly redistricting and a national backlash against the federal government, Republicans will continue to set the policy agenda in the majority of states, have a crucial backstop to protect their congressional majority, and are potentially one more successful cycle away from being able to exercise the ultimate power in U.S. politics: amending the Constitution.

In Minnesota, Republicans erased a 38-28 Democratic majority in a single election and will enter the 2017 session with a one-seat majority in the state Senate (they flipped the state House in the 2014 midterms). Aside from Donald Trump's shocking win in the presidential race, the outcome in Minnesota might have been the biggest surprise of election night, but it fits within a national trend. Democrats are struggling to hold legislative majorities, even in typically blue-ish states like Minnesota.

In red or purple states? Forget about it.
In Pennsylvania, where the legislative chambers historically have swung back-and-forth between the two major parties, Republicans have made gains in four consecutive cycles and now have the largest state House majority since 1958 (depending on how you're counting, it might be the largest since the 1940s when the legislature had fewer seats) and have a nearly veto-proof edge in the state Senate too.

The story is the same across the map. Republicans now control both legislative chambers in 32 states, up from 30 before last week's election. As recently as 2010, Republicans controlled as few as 14 states.




National Conference of State Legislatures


In addition to the Minnesota Senate, Republicans also won control of the Iowa Senate and the Kentucky House, giving them majorities in both chambers in those two states as well. It wasn't all bad news for Democrats, though, as they did flip the New Mexico House and both chambers in Nevada to their side.

A widely shared (but inaccurate) tweet from Marc Porter McGee, a Virginia-based education advocate, suggested that Republicans are just a single legislative chamber away from being able to amend the U.S. Constitution without any input from Democrats.

That's not true because amendments to the U.S. Constitution must be approved by a two-thirds vote in both chambers of Congress and Republicans don't have a super majority in either. Amendments must also be approved by three quarters of the states (38 out of 50), per Article V of the Constitution.

After this year's election, Republicans control both chambers in 32 states—it's actually 33 if you count Nebraska, which has a single legislative chamber and is technically non-partisan (but really isn't)—while Democrats control both chambers in 13 states and one chamber in four others. In order to amend the Constitution without Democratic votes, Republicans would have to flip at least six more legislative chambers (the four currently held by Democrats in states with split-party control and two more Democrat-controlled chambers in one of those other 13 states).

Still, after seeing what's happened in Minnesota in the last two years, it's not impossible to imagine that happening by 2018 or 2020. The fact that we're even discussing this possibility gives you a sense of how badly routed Democrats have been at the state level in recent years.

Perhaps more important than discussions about amending the Constitution is the fact that Republicans are likely to control the vast majority of state legislatures at the end of the decade. That would give them the ability to influence the redistricting process after the next Census. As I wrote last week, the wave of GOP victories at the state legislative level in 2010 is directly linked to Republican's virtually unassailable majority in the U.S. House. Even though redistricting is handled differently in different states, state lawmakers usually have at least some control over the process—and in some places they get to literally draw the congressional district maps with little oversight from the executive or judicial branches.

That means that If Democrats have any hope of winning full control of Congress before 2030, they have to start by reversing the trend of GOP victories in legislative races.

Realizing as much, President Barack Obama in October called for Democrats to put more of an emphasis on winning those sometimes-overlooked races. He personally endorsed more than 150 candidates in legislative races from coast-to-coast, but it doesn't appear to have made much of a difference.


Democrats Got Wrecked Again in State Legislative Races, and it Matters More Than You Might Think - Hit & Run : Reason.com

 

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
75
Eagle Creek
Barbara Kay: U.S. Democrats show they still haven’t learned a thing


U.S Rep. Keith Ellison became emotional while testifying at a hearing before the House Homeland Security Committee in 2011 on "The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response."

Until president-elect Donald Trump named Reince Priebus, the Republican National Committee chairman, as his chief of staff, there was concern that the job might go to Stephen Bannon, chief executive of the Trump campaign. Instead Bannon got another plum job as chief strategist and senior counsel.

The double appointment evoked mixed feelings. Priebus telegraphs knowledge, prudence and competency. Bannon not so much. His Breitbart web site devoted itself very aggressively to securing a Trump victory and smeared anyone perceived as an obstacle, while providing a podium for nativist, sexist and anti-Muslim views that would not have been granted legitimacy in any respectable publication. This is pretty scuffed-up baggage to lug into the White Houserump named Reince Priebus, the Republican National Committee chairman, as his chief of staff, there was concern that the job might go to Stephen Bannon, chief executive of the Trump campaign. Instead Bannon got another plum job as chief strategist and senior counsel. The double appointment evoked mixed feelings. Priebus telegraphs knowledge, prudence and competency. Bannon not so much. His Breitbart web site devoted itself very aggressively to securing a Trump victory and smeared anyone perceived as an obstacle, while providing a podium for nativist, sexist and anti-Muslim views that would not have been granted legitimacy in any respectable publication. This is pretty scuffed-up baggage to lug into the White House.

There’s another appointment under consideration that I find even more concerning. On Friday, support started coalescing to install Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison as head of the Democratic National Committee. If Bannon’s baggage is scuffed up, Ellison’s is so battered it’s held together with duct tape, but with dirty laundry still spilling out the sides.

Keith Ellison grew up Catholic in Detroit and converted to Islam as a student at Wayne State University before going on to the University of Minnesota law school. As a third-year law student, writing under the name of Keith Hakim and as an advocate for the Nation of Islam (NOI), Ellison defended NOI spokesman Louis Farrakhan, renowned for his hatred of whites and Jews, and black supremacist Khalid Abdul Muhammad.

In1990, Ellison helped sponsor a talk at his law school by black separatist Kwame Ture (Stokely Carmichael) on the topic: “Zionism: Imperialism, White Supremacy or Both?” the content of which was starkly anti-Semitic. Ellison continued to involve himself with the NOI, many of whose members were publicly and aggressively anti-Semitic. He also continued to defend Farrakhan against charges of racism and anti-Semitism in the face of indisputable evidence to the contrary.

Finally realizing his associations would prove a liability to his political career, Ellison wrote a letter to the local chapter of the Jewish Community Relations Council, in which he tried to walk back his long involvement with the NOI as a superficial and benign 18-month affiliation. The letter was a farrago of lies. As journalist Joe Kaufman, founder of Americans Against Hate, wrote: “Indeed, although he has since denied it, Ellison was involved with NOI for ten long years. In that time, he participated in NOI rallies, including the Million Man March hatefest; he defended NOI hate speech; and he used such NOI aliases as Keith Hakim, Keith X Ellison, and Keith Ellison-Muhammad.”


Ellison won his first congressional election in 2006, and has been re-elected every two years since then. As a congressman he has demonstrated a tendency to say very stupid and jarring things. In a July 2007 speech, for example, Ellison compared the U.S.military response to 9/11 with the reaction of the Nazis to the 1933 burning of the Reichstag in Berlin. “It’s almost like the Reichstag fire, kind of reminds me of that. After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the Communists for it, and it put the leader [Hitler] of that country in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted.”

A full account of Ellison’s dubious or extremist affiliations and disquieting public statements can be found here.

From now on, because of the great revulsion so many Americans feel for Trump, there will be microscopic scrutiny applied to every one of his appointments. That’s fine. But there should be no double standard. If someone with Keith Ellison’s history can be considered for the post of chairman of the Democratic National Committee, it means the Democrats have not learned a thing from their election loss. Doubling down on the tendencies that alienated so many people in the first place is not the wisest course of action in plotting the long road back to political hegemony.

Barbara Kay: U.S. Democrats show they still haven’t learned a thing | National Post