Closing Thought–06Jul21

Oops! My bad!

A head honcho lobbyists at Exxon just revealed that he has 11 US Senators in his pocket and they will do as they are told in the law making process……

From an interview with Keith McCoy is a senior ExxonMobil lobbyist on Capitol Hill…

McCoy said he has 11 U.S. senators who are “crucial” in ExxonMobil’s efforts.

“Senator Shelley Moore Capito, Senator Joe Manchin, Senator Kyrsten Sinema, Senator Jon Tester, Senator Maggie Hassan, Senator John Barrasso, Senator John Cornyn, Senator Steve Daines, Senator Chris Coons, Senator Mark Kelly and Senator Marco Rubio,” were all cited.

He went on to explain that the last thing they want is to appear in a public hearing before Congress where the American people can see.

“We don’t want it to be us, to have these conversations, especially in a hearing. It’s getting our associations to step in and have those conversations and answer those tough questions and be for, the lack of a better term, the whipping boy for some of these members of congress,” McCoy confessed.

(rawstory.com)

There you have it…..I have always said that our elected officials care more about the cash they rake in than the country they have pledged to protect.

These gutless slugs are not alone….every major industry has an official in their pockets and controls the flow of issues in the Congress.

Time to shut down this pipeline and force the reps into working for the country and not some corporation.

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

 

SCOTUS–This Is What We Get

One of the more recent opinion offered by the Supreme Court was one that upheld the attempts to suppress the vote (at least in Arizona)……and as usual since I am an opinionated SOB I had something to say on this ruling……

 
Like I stated…this is what we get when we allow an agenda group like the Federalist Society pick our judges.
 
To explain the damage that this situation can implement….

In many ways, the recently completed Supreme Court term was our first comprehensive look at one of the most consequential legacies of the Trump presidency: his imprint on the court. 

Understanding the full impact of former President Donald Trump’s 6-3 conservative supermajority is challenging at this point, though. On the one hand, this term saw the highest share of unanimous rulings in the last three years. On the other hand, the court’s last two major rulings broke down along 6-3 ideological lines. But that seeming inconsistency may have more to do with divisions among the court’s conservatives over how fast to move — not in what direction. Make no mistake, the court is moving in a conservative direction, and the conservative justices are in the driver’s seat.

The Supreme Court’s Conservative Supermajority Is Just Beginning To Flex Its Muscles

The damage that these conservative ideologues can do is almost incalculable….

“The harmful rulings coming out of this court make it critical that Congress pass legislation to protect voting rights and shore up our democracy,” Jealous added. “We also have to build a strategy to reinforce the importance of fair courts and fair-minded judges, so we can counter the decadeslong efforts by the far right to pack our courts, including our Supreme Court, with ultraconservative judges.”

PFAW’s analysis came just a day after a pair of 6-3 SCOTUS rulings on Arizona’s voting restrictions and California’s dark money disclosure rules that led Senate Majority Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) to dub Thursday “one of the darkest days in all of the Supreme Court’s history.”

https://www.rawstory.com/gop-supreme-court/

Since the Supreme Court is suppose to be the highest authority in the land for the interpretation of the Constitution and law….what could be next in the fight against this voter suppression attempts?

The decision, though, was a blow to those who believe voting access is more important than rooting out fraud — and that’s most Americans, the latest NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll found. Fifty-six percent said making sure that everyone who wants to vote can do so is a bigger concern than making sure that no one who is ineligible votes.

“It very much narrows the path of challenging these many, many voter obstacles that states are instituting across the country,” Debo Adegbile, an anti-discrimination attorney, told NPR’s Nina Totenberg.

https://www.npr.org/2021/07/03/1012777226/whats-next-for-voting-rights-after-the-supreme-courts-decision

I say screw SCOTUS!

The fight must go on and using whatever legal tactic one can imagine.

Every American old enough to vote should have easy access to the machinations of voting…..this country should be doing everything possible to see that we all have the right and the easy access to the polls.

Stand for liberty or sit down and STFU!

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Brnovich v DNC

???

WTF, Professor?

If you are scratching your head then let me explain….this is the landmark SCOTUS decision to crap on voting rights……

From the majority opinion….

Arizona law generally makes it very easy to vote. Voters may cast their ballots on election day in person at a traditional precinct or a “voting center” in their county of residence. Ariz. Rev. Stat. §16–411(B)(4). Arizonans also may cast an “early ballot” by mail up to 27 days before an election, §§16–541, 16–542(C), and they also may vote in person at an early voting location in each county, §§16–542(A), (E). These cases involve challenges under §2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) to aspects of the State’s regulations governing precinct-based election-day voting and early mail-in voting. First, Arizonans who vote in person on election day in a county that uses the precinct system must vote in the precinct to which they are assigned based on their address. See §16–122; see also §16–135. If a voter votes in the wrong precinct, the vote is not counted. Second, for Arizonans who vote early by mail, Arizona House Bill 2023 (HB 2023) makes it a crime for any person other than a postal worker, an elections official, or a voter’s caregiver, family member, or household member to knowingly collect an early ballot—either before or after it has been completed. §§16–1005(H)–(I).

Justice Kagan wrote the dissenting opinion and in doing so gives the court a much needed civics lesson…..

If a single statute represents the best of America, it is the Voting Rights Act. It marries two great ideals: democracy and racial equality. And it dedicates our country to carrying them out. Section 2, the provision at issue here, guarantees that members of every racial group will have equal voting opportunities. Citizens of every race will have the same shot to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice. They will all own our democracy together—no one more and no one less than any other.

Her opinion is lengthy but is much needed for the voter to know what just happened in SCOTUS…..

Slowly but slowly we are losing the battle of having a voice in this government…..and illustrates what we get when we let some outside ultra-conservative group pick our judges for us.

Time for a change in SCOTUS and in the country…..we can no longer depend on the Court to have our backs from assaults on our rights as Americans.

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”