Progressive Politics

842 readers
138 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
26
27
16
submitted 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) by SuperCub to c/[email protected]
 
 

Gov. Tim Walz is THE best choice for Vice President! Sign this petition to send a message to the Harris Campaign that we need VP Tim Walz.

Accomplishments as Governor:

  • Universal free school lunches
  • Paid sick and medical leave
  • Banned non-compete agreements
  • Expanded protections for workers at Amazon warehouses
  • Increased wages for Uber and Lyft workers
  • Legalization of cannabis
  • Achieved substantial police reform including bans on chokeholds, peace officers and deescalation training, and an independent Bureau of Criminal Apprehension 
  • 100% clean energy by 2040

Bio:

  • Governor of Minnesota since 2019.
  • US Representative for MN-01 2007-2019
  • 20 years as a public school teacher. Has also taught in China and on an Indian Reservation.
  • BS in Social Sciences, MS in Educational Leadership
  • 24 years service in the Army National Guard
  • Born in rural Nebraska town of West Point
28
 
 

A bit old at this point, but I think this article is a great example of what's good and bad about Kamala.

tl;dr, she wanted to call out Israel more strongly for Palestinian genocide, but Biden's people said no and rewrote her speech, so three anonymous sources (almost certainly Harris staffers) leak this to the press. When Harris is asked on the record she denies all this because she's ultimately a team player who will cover for crappy moderates when she has to, but her initial impulses are good (or, at the very least, better than Biden's).

Archived at - https://web.archive.org/web/20240000000000*/https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/kamala-harris-gaza-speech-watered-down-cease-fire-rcna141750

29
 
 
30
 
 
31
32
 
 

…he had set forth important tasks and ways for better sprucing up the city as an area for the study tour of revolutionary battle sites and a tourist area, including those of pushing ahead with the road and railway construction, taking measures for the protection of the ecological environment and forests and additionally building hotels and hostels, in keeping with its changed living environment.

The US could take some pointers on proper construction planning from Comrade Kim Jong Un.

33
 
 
34
 
 

Thirty years have passed since President Kim Il Sung, founder and eternal leader of the dignified Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and benevolent father of all the Korean people, passed away.

Kim Il Sung Was the father of progressive policies and helped his country escape the imperialist grasp.

35
 
 

Green Party candidate Jason Call has posted a thread on X. The key points are:

~ The duopoly is going all out to deny third party voices this year

~ The Stein campaign has qualified for Federal Matching Funds, but Congress robbed the fund and Treasury is refusing to pay us $270,000. It is unconscionable and unprecedented….

~ What are Federal Matching Funds? When you file your taxes each year, you’re asked “do you want $3 to go to the Presidential Matching Fund?”

~ It is essentially a fund reserved to help campaigns be more competitive against the flood of big money interests

~ The Jill Stein is the only campaign (other than Mike Pence, no longer active) that has met the threshold for this funding

~ And while the FEC has said we qualify for the match - a payment of $270k at this point - we are being denied that payment

~ Here’s what we are being told: Since the duopoly candidates have rejected that funding for the last 16 years, that $3 per IRS filing grew to over $400 million

~ And this year, Congress decided to “appropriate” those funds for other uses. They took $320mil and gave it to the Secret Service…

~ They took $25mil and gave it to the Justice Dept. They took $55mil for “election security” (ironically securing elections from 3rd parties it seems)

~ Right now we are being denied our earned primary matching funds because there is a “shortfall”

~ What we have earned amounts to 1.5% of what’s in the fund. And they are saying there’s a shortfall? Here’s their reasoning:

~ “We need to wait until the major parties have their convention so we will know if they are going to apply for the funds” Excuse me?

~ Use of matching funds for the general election takes priority over use of funds for the primary, but the only campaigns that can qualify for those funds are the duopoly campaigns

~ The two major parties have not used matching funds for 16 years due to the imposed spending limits

~ But this year, Congress robbed the fund (and if you are a taxpayer and have checked that $3 box, you should be righteously pissed off about this misappropriation)

~ And the Treasury is saying “sorry, we don’t have the money, we might need it for the general”

~ But understand this is a political hit. Congress appropriated that money right when we were messaging that we were about to hit the threshold.

~ The FEC is not the responsible party here. They qualified us, said we were good to go. This is coming from higher up, politically motivated to shut down our traction

~ And it has. It has stifled our momentum. This, and the bullshit lawsuits to keep us off the ballot

~ Democrats say they are defending democracy, but this is how they are doing it. Political trickery and lawfare

~ They are limiting the choices of voters when voters (not BlueMAGA of course, they are cheering on the chicanery) are fed up with the garbage forced on us by the duopoly

~ The Green Party takes no corporate money. We are following the rules. And the playground bullies are continuing to rig the system for the war machine and other corporate interests

~ This is not democracy. It is not justice.

36
 
 

The case for employee-owned companies

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/column-the-case-for-employee-owned-companies

In the sidebar, it asks for recommendations such as reading lists. I propose that David Ellerman's work be included in the reading list. He makes a unique argument in favor of workplace democracy

@progressivepolitics

37
38
1519
70% (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 
 
39
40
 
 

I know people will say anyone, but realistically, if you could hand pick our next President, who would you choose? Who do you think could win?

41
42
 
 

At 70, and with a list of endorsements from centrist Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, Latimer is far from the exciting prospect Bowman was four years ago. He is, however, a vocal advocate for Israel – in the final debate between the pair he declined to criticize Israel, something Biden has previously done – who visited the country before launching his campaign against Bowman in December. He has won the support of Aipac, and was endorsed by the Jewish Democratic Council of America in March.

Much of the money has been spent on attacking Bowman. The UDP has invested $14.5m in the race – $9.8m of which has gone towards knocking Bowman, and just $4.8m on promoting Latimer.

If Bowman is defeated, there is a potential impact beyond just politics in the Middle East. Some younger, progressive Democrats feel that the primary campaigns against Bowman and other Squad members could drive young voters away from the Democratic party.

43
44
45
 
 

Distressingly, the opinion leaves breadcrumbs for [anti-abortion] activists to follow next time—and sets up some roadblocks to keep progressive activists out. For example, Kavanaugh writes that plaintiffs who aren’t actually affected by a given regulation, like the AHM, can still “thread the causation needle” if they show that the parties who are regulated “will likely react in predictable ways that in turn will likely injure the plaintiffs.” The Court also clarified that an organization does not have standing merely if it “diverts its resources in response to a defendant’s actions.”

Why does this matter? The diversion-of-resources argument comes from a landmark 1982 case called Havens Realty Corporation v. Coleman, in which a fair housing organization sought to sue an apartment complex for its refusal to rent apartments to Black “testers”—people who posed as potential renters to test compliance with the law. The Court ruled in Havens Realty that the organization, although it wasn’t actually trying to rent apartments, nonetheless had standing to sue, in part because the realty company’s actions forced the organization to use its limited resources to ferret out illegal discrimination.

Kavanaugh’s opinion declines to extend standing to the AHM under Havens Realty. But he also goes out of his way to call Havens Realty an “unusual case” that the Court “has been careful not to extend…beyond its context.” If this language signals that the Court is looking skeptically at future diversion-of-resources claims, that could be bad news for civil rights groups trying to use the courts to enforce the law.

Archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20240614122724/https://ballsandstrikes.org/scotus/abortion-pills-case-time-bomb-alliance-for-hippocratic-medicine/

46
47
 
 

When the House passed legislation to reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) in April, it included a new provision that Senator Ron Wyden described as “one of the most dramatic and terrifying expansions of government surveillance authority in history.” Concern over the provision mounted in the Senate and threatened to derail the law’s renewal. Anxious to secure reauthorization before Section 702 expired, the chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), Senator Mark Warner, promised to work with other senators to narrow the provision in subsequent legislation.

To his credit, Senator Warner has made good on that promise; but the cure that SSCI has chosen is nearly as bad as the disease. The committee has created a dangerous new form of “secret law,” in which the legal parameters for surveillance—rules that bind not only the government, but private parties—are themselves classified. There is a much better solution available: Congress can legislate both responsibly and openly, as long as the administration declassifies certain information that is already in the public domain.

Archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20240614115258/https://www.justsecurity.org/96638/secret-law-overbroad-surveillance-authority/

48
49
50
view more: ‹ prev next ›