HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » SouthernProgressive » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Member since: Wed Aug 26, 2015, 11:43 AM
Number of posts: 1,810

Journal Archives

Bernie Sanders and Chuck Todd Have Terrible Takes on Abortion

When the Meet the Press host alleged women get abortions when they don’t like the gender of the fetus, the candidate did not push back

But just a few seconds later, things went off the rails when Todd inexplicably asked, “Are you in all concerned, though, about this idea that people may try to worry about the sex of a child, or essentially, are those types of restrictions on abortions something you’re open to?

Bernie, obviously caught off guard but also obviously uneducated on the issue, capitulated. “That, I mean, that’s a concern,” Sanders said, adding, “Well, that’s not a, I wouldn’t use a restriction on, that’s an issue that society has got to deal with, and it is of concern.”

Todd followed up to the question asking, “How would you deal with that in the law?”

“I don’t know how, at this particular point,” Sanders said. “I would deal with it, but that is an issue that we really have got to deal with.

Rolling Stone

Rights are being rolled back and he is highlighting this a a concern when asked about it. I don't think he is concerned like I am. I am concerned that they are limiting access to abortions in any and every way possible.

This is a current issue.

Supreme Court compromise on Indiana abortion law keeps issue off its docket

But the court said it would not revive another part of the law, which would have prohibited abortions if the woman chose the procedure because of a diagnosis or “potential diagnosis” of Down syndrome or “any other disability,” or because of the fetus’s gender or race.

Washington Post

Posted by SouthernProgressive | Wed May 29, 2019, 03:52 PM (18 replies)


Blocking Dangerous and Deadly Abortion Restrictions Before They Take Effect

We are living through an all-out assault being waged on women’s health and reproductive rights. From Alabama to Ohio, and Missouri to Georgia, the goal of Republican politicians is clear: Overturn Roe v. Wade and end safe and legal abortion in America.

With the specter of a hyper-partisan Supreme Court, these attacks have laid bare the pressing need to pass federal legislation protecting reproductive rights, including access to abortion. But the truth is, simply codifying Roe v. Wade isn’t enough. Extreme politicians in state legislatures have been working to systematically chip away at Roe for decades, enacting over 1,000 measures since 1995 designed to wipe out access to abortion.

States have mandated that women submit to invasive ultrasounds, passed laws requiring survivors of sexual assault to carry their rapist’s child to term, and placed onerous and medically unnecessary restrictions on health clinics. These restrictions do nothing to make people healthier or safer. Their sole purpose is limiting access to abortion.

Kamala Harris believes we need to fight back and block these dangerous and deadly laws before they take effect. That’s exactly what she intends to do as president. Similar to the preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights Act, Harris will require, for the first time, that states and localities with a history of violating Roe v. Wade obtain approval from her Department of Justice before any abortion law or practice can take effect.


States and localities with a history of unconstitutionally restricting access to abortion will be required to pre-clear any new law or practice with the Department of Justice.

Under the plan, states and localities will be subject to the preclearance requirement if they have a pattern of violating Roe v. Wade in the preceding 25 years. For example, violations will include settlements or final findings by a court that a law or practice runs afoul of Roe, such as rulings in South Carolina, Iowa, and Georgia.

While the Supreme Court’s partisan majority gutted the Voting Rights Act on grounds the preclearance formula was purportedly “outdated,” it explicitly invited Congress to update the formula along these lines.

From 1965 to 2013, preclearance under the Voting Rights Act prevented hundreds of discriminatory laws and practices from going into effect. Just as states and localities enacted facially neutral measures to suppress the right to vote – including literacy tests, poll taxes, photo ID laws, and the closure of polling locations – states have similarly done so to limit reproductive rights – including placing targeted restrictions on abortion providers, requiring waiting periods, and imposing medically unnecessary doctor supervision requirements. A preclearance requirement will make it harder for states to implement these dangerous and deadly laws and practices. Like the blatant voter suppression the Voting Rights Act was designed to prevent, these restrictions on abortion fall disproportionately on people of color.

No abortion law or practice will take effect until the Department of Justice certifies it comports with Roe v. Wade.

Under the plan, any change with respect to abortion in a covered jurisdiction will remain legally unenforceable until DOJ determines it comports with the standards laid out by the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade, as applied in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, and the Women’s Health Protection Act, which Harris co-sponsors in the Senate.

More than just codifying every woman’s federal right to an abortion, this will shift the burden to jurisdictions with a pattern of violating Roe to prove any new law or practice does not deny or abridge the fundamental right to access abortion.

Jurisdictions will be required to submit any proposed change to DOJ. If the jurisdiction is unable to prove the change comports with Roe and the Women’s Health Protection Act, DOJ must object to the change.

Guardrails will ensure DOJ enforces the law even under an administration that’s hostile to women’s rights—and patients and providers will have standing to sue if they don’t.

DOJ will have an affirmative duty to review submissions and make formal determinations, which will be posted publicly.

Women and health care providers will have the ability to challenge DOJ’s approval of a law or practice in federal court, serving as a check on hostile administrations.

This is just one way Harris will fight back against the all-out assault being waged on women’s health and reproductive rights. She’ll also protect Planned Parenthood from Republican attempts to defund essential health services, nominate judges who respect Roe v. Wade, fight to repeal the Hyde Amendment, reverse the Trump Administration’s illegal attempts to cut evidence-based Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program grants, and immediately roll back dangerous and discriminatory rules the Administration put in place to limit access to contraception and safe abortion in the United States and around the world.

Throughout her career, Harris has fought for women’s access to health care and reproductive rights. As Attorney General of California, she petitioned the Supreme Court to reverse unconstitutional abortion restrictions, protect women’s access to contraception, and ensure women have access to essential health care regardless of their for-profit employer’s beliefs.


Kamala Harris, in Town Hall, Lays Out Plan to Require Federal Approval for Abortion Laws

Senator Kamala Harris of California unveiled a plan on Tuesday that would require states and localities with a history of unconstitutionally restricting abortion rights to obtain federal approval before such laws can take effect.

Ms. Harris, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president, called for what is known as a “preclearance requirement” in the plan, released as numerous states have passed laws to sharply limit abortions.

“When we look at a law like what’s happening in Alabama and they’re saying they’re going to sentence a doctor to 99 years, as a prosecutor, let me tell you, I got a real problem with that,” Ms. Harris said on MSNBC on Tuesday night, referring to an Alabama law intended to ban most abortions in the state.


Posted by SouthernProgressive | Wed May 29, 2019, 10:30 AM (8 replies)

As Mayor, Bernie Sanders Was More Pragmatist Than Socialist

So when dozens of antiwar activists blocked the entrance to the local General Electric plant because it was manufacturing Gatling guns to fight the socialists in Central America, the protesters expected the mayor’s full support.

Instead, he lined up with union officials and watched as the police made arrests, saying later that in blocking the plant, the activists were keeping workers from their jobs.

Back then, the Democrats were considered the old guard, his adversaries; in many cases, Mr. Sanders aligned himself with Republicans to get things done.

“Even though he talks revolution, he’s an incrementalist,” said Richard Sugarman, a longtime friend and a professor of religion at the University of Vermont. “He knows that things will only be changed little by little, one by one. That’s why he’s been effective.”

Critics on the right said their socialist mayor gave the city a bad image, wasting time on foreign affairs, including trips to Nicaragua and the Soviet Union. At the same time, critics on the left said he compromised too much with business interests and did not go far enough in pursuing socialist ideals. Over the span of his mayoralty, the number of families living in poverty grew — to 798 in 1990 from 563 in 1980, an increase of 42 percent.

“Our slogan was we would ‘out-Republican the Republicans,’” said John Franco Jr., who was assistant city attorney in the Sanders administration. “The Republicans on the board liked that, and so on fiscal issues, they would side with us and we would have a governing coalition.”

This was the logic behind his support for the workers at the General Electric plant making Gatling guns, which opened him to criticism from activists on the left.

“It was a big disappointment that a fellow leftist did not support us,” said Jay Moore, a longtime Vermont political activist who was among those who had blocked the General Electric plant.

Mr. Sanders wanted to open up the lakefront, long marred by a decrepit rail yard, for public use. Eventually, that is what happened. But for a time he backed a private proposal to build a complex of high-end condos, hotel and commercial space that critics said would block views of the lake and limit public access.

More deal maker than ideologue, Mr. Sanders later worked for a compromise that scaled back the proposal and added public amenities like green space. He said the compromise, supported by most of the aldermen, was the best he could get and that the development would expand the city’s tax base, bringing millions of dollars into city coffers.

But environmentalists and others accused Mr. Sanders of selling out to business interests. The dispute led to a highly contentious campaign over the bond issue.

“We fought like hell,” recalled Sandy Baird, then part of the Green movement, now a professor at Burlington College. “We wanted that land open to the public.”


The difficulty many see is the inconsistency of his history. It's littered with inconsistencies. For private lands. For selling private lands. For Democratic Socialist policies. For direct and near unfettered capitalism. One of the few consistencies is his rhetoric involving crackdown on immigrants and yelling about income inequality. The former he is on record with votes, the latter is empty rhetoric.
Posted by SouthernProgressive | Mon May 20, 2019, 02:31 PM (2 replies)

Medal of Freedom Recipient: Joe Biden

Read the Full Transcript of President Obama Surprising Joe Biden With the Medal of Freedom

Posted by SouthernProgressive | Fri May 17, 2019, 01:59 PM (1 replies)

Harris Demands Delta Cease Anti-Union Activities

WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Wednesday sent a letter to Ed Bastian, CEO of Delta Air Lines, urging him to bring an end to Delta’s coordinated, strategic anti-union campaign, which has included distributing fliers to its non-unionized workforce discouraging unionization, playing anti-union advertisements continuously in employee break rooms, and holding weekly anti-union activities.

“The right of workers to join together in a union and collectively bargain has been fundamental in helping to build the middle class in this country,” wrote Harris. “Unions have a substantial impact on the compensation and work lives of both unionized and non-unionized workers. Union participation can improve an employee’s wages, health care, job security, workplace safety, and retirement benefits.”

Harris continued, “Delta’s Don’t Risk It. Don’t Sign It. campaign is disingenuous, disrespectful, and misleading. It is an attempt to interfere with its employees’ legal rights and hinder the ability of thousands of workers to make an important decision about their lives and livelihoods. I urge you to cease this campaign and allow Delta employees the ability to determine whether to unionize free from inference, intimidation, or retaliation.”


Full Letter Harris.Senate.gov
Posted by SouthernProgressive | Thu May 16, 2019, 10:33 AM (2 replies)
Go to Page: 1