Archive for June, 2016

Politics of Texas – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For approximately 100 years, from the end of Reconstruction until the 1990s, the Democratic Party was dominant in Texas politics. After renewed competition from the Populist Party in the late 19th century and loss of a Congressional seat in 1896 and 1898 to a Republican elected by a plurality, the Democratic Party ensured its control by disfranchising most blacks, and many poor whites and Latinos, through imposition of the poll tax and white primaries in the early 20th century, as did other former Confederate states. These exclusions lasted until after passage of civil rights legislation in the mid-1960s.

In a reversal of alignments, since the late 1960s the Republican Party has grown more prominent within the state. By the mid-1990s, it became the state's dominant political party. This trend mirrors a national political realignment that has seen the once solidly Democratic South, initially dependent on disfranchisement of minorities, become increasingly dominated by Republicans. But growth among the Hispanic or Latino population in Texas, which favors the Democratic Party, may shift party alignments in the long term.

The traditional culture of the state was heavily influenced by the plantation culture of the Old South, dependent on African-American slave labor, as well as the patron system once prevalent (and still somewhat present) in northern Mexico and South Texas. In these societies the government's primary role was seen as being the preservation of social order. Solving of individual problems in society was seen as a local problem with the expectation that the individual should resolve his or her own issues.[1] These influences continue to affect Texas today. In their book, Texas Politics Today 2009-2010, authors Maxwell, Crain, and Santos attribute Texas' traditionally low voter turnout to these influences.[1] In addition, beginning in the early 20th century, voter turnout was dramatically reduced by disfranchisement of most blacks, and many poor whites and Latinos.[2]

From 1848 until Richard M. Nixon's victory in 1972, Texas voted for the Democratic candidate for president in every election except 1928, when it did not support Catholic Al Smith; and 1952 and 1956, when it joined the landslide for Dwight D. Eisenhower. (Texas did not vote in 1864 and 1868 due to the Civil War and Reconstruction).[3] From 1902 through 1965, Texas had virtually disfranchised most blacks and many Latinos and poor whites through the poll tax and white primaries.

Two of the most important Republican figures of the post-Civil War era were African Americans George T. Ruby and Norris Wright Cuney. Ruby was a black community organizer, director in the federal Freedmen's Bureau, and leader of the Galveston Union League. His protg Cuney was a mulatto whose wealthy, white planter father freed him and his siblings before the Civil War and arranged his education in Pennsylvania. Cuney returned and settled in Galveston, where he became active in the Union League and the Republican party; he rose to the leadership of the party. He became influential in Galveston and Texas politics, and is widely regarded as one of the most influential black leaders in the South during the 19th century.

In the post-Reconstruction era, by the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Republican Party became non-competitive in the South, due to Democratic-dominated legislatures' disfranchisement of blacks and many poor whites and Latinos. In Texas, the legislature excluded them through passage of a poll tax and white primary. As can be seen on the graph at the following link, voter turnout in Texas declined dramatically following these disfranchisement measures, and Southern voting was far below the national average.[4] This resulted in their nearly total exclusion from formal politics, when blacks made up 20 percent of the state population.[5] Republican support in Texas had been based almost exclusively in the free black communities, particularly in Galveston, and the so-called "German counties" the rural Texas Hill Country inhabited by German Americans, who had opposed slavery in the antebellum period. Republican Harry M. Wurzbach was elected from the 14th district from 1920 to 1926, contesting and finally winning the election of 1928, and being re-elected in 1930.

Some of the most important American political figures of the 20th century, such as President Lyndon B. Johnson, Vice-President John Nance Garner, Speaker of the House Sam Rayburn, and Senator Ralph Yarborough were Texas Democrats. But, the Texas Democrats were rarely united, being divided into conservative, moderate and liberal factions that vied with one another for power.

The rebirth of the Republican Party in Texas can be traced back to 1952, when Democratic Governor Allan Shivers clashed with the Truman Administration over the claim on the Tidelands. He worked to help Dwight D. Eisenhower, who was born in Texas, carry the state. Beginning in the late 1960s, Republican strength increased in Texas, particularly in the growing "country club suburbs" around Dallas and Houston. The election of Republicans such as John Tower and George H. W. Bush to Congress in 1960 and 1966, respectively, reflected this trend. Nationally, Democrats supported the civil rights movement and achieved important passage of federal legislation in the mid-1960s. Following passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964, southern Democrats began to leave the party and join the Republicans.

Unlike the rest of the South, however, Texas was never especially supportive of the various third-party candidacies of Southern Democrats. It was the only state in the former Confederacy to back Democrat Hubert Humphrey in the 1968 presidential election. The 1980s saw a number of defections by conservative Democrats to the GOP, including Senator Phil Gramm, Congressman Kent Hance, and GOP Governor Rick Perry, who was a Democrat during his time as a state lawmaker.

John Tower's 1961 election to the U.S. Senate made him the first statewide GOP officeholder since Reconstruction. Governor Bill Clements and Senator Phil Gramm (also a former Democrat) followed. Republicans became increasingly dominant in national elections in Texas. The last Democratic presidential candidate to win the state was Jimmy Carter in 1976. Previously, a Democrat had to win Texas to win the White House, but in the 1992 election, Bill Clinton won the Oval Office while losing Texas electoral votes. This significantly reduced the power of Texas Democrats at the national level, as party leaders believed the state had become unwinnable.

Despite increasing Republican strength in national elections, after the 1990 census, Texas Democrats still controlled both houses of the State Legislature and most statewide offices. As a result, they were able to direct the redistricting process. Although Congressional Texas Democrats received an average of 40 percent of the votes, Democrats consistently had a majority in the state delegation, as they had in every election since at least the end of Reconstruction.

In 1994, Democratic Governor Ann Richards lost her bid for re-election against Republican George W. Bush, ending an era in which Democrats controlled the governorship all but eight of the past 120 years. Republicans have held the governorship ever since. In 1998, Bush won re-election in a landslide victory, with Republicans sweeping to victory in all the statewide races.

After the 2000 census, the Republican-controlled state Senate sought to draw a congressional district map that would guarantee a Republican majority in the state's delegation. The Democratic-controlled state House desired to retain a plan similar to the existing lines. There was an impasse. With the Legislature unable to reach a compromise, the matter was settled by a panel of federal court judges, who ruled in favor of a district map that largely retained the status quo.

But, Republicans dominated the Legislative Redistricting Board, which draws the lines for the state legislative districts, by a majority of four to one. The Republicans on this board used their voting strength to adopt a map for the state Senate that was even more favorable to the Republicans and a map for the state House that also strongly favored them as Democrats had before.

In 2002, Texas Republicans gained control of the Texas House of Representatives for the first time since Reconstruction. The newly elected Republican legislature engaged in an unprecedented mid-decade redistricting plan. Democrats said that the redistricting was a blatant partisan gerrymander, while Republicans argued that it was a much-needed correction of the partisan lines drawn after the 1990 census. The result was a gain of six seats by the Republicans in the 2004 elections, giving them a majority of the state's delegation for the first time since Reconstruction.

In December 2005, the US Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal that challenged the legality of this redistricting plan. While largely upholding the map, it ruled the El Paso-to-San Antonio 23rd District, which had been a protected majority-Latino district until the 2003 redistricting, was unconstitutionally drawn. The ruling forced nearly every district in the El Paso-San Antonio corridor to be reconfigured. Partly due to this, Democrats picked up two seats in the state in the 2006 elections. The 23rd's Republican incumbent was defeated in this electionthe first time a Democratic House challenger unseated a Texas Republican incumbent in 10 years.

Republicans control all statewide Texas offices, both houses of the state legislature and have a majority in the Texas congressional delegation. This makes Texas one of the most Republican states in the U.S.[citation needed]

Despite overall Republican dominance, Austin, the state capital, is primarily Democratic, as are El Paso and the Rio Grande Valley. However, the suburbs of these cities remain heavily Republican.[citation needed]

Texas, like California, is now a minority-majority state. This means that non-Hispanic whites no longer make up a majority of the population. This is predominantly due to the booming Hispanic population, which accounted for 38.1% of the state's population as of 2011[update] (compared to 44.8% for non-Hispanic whites).[6]

The state's changing demographics may well result in a change in its overall political alignment. As most Hispanic and Latino voters support the Democratic Party, Texas may eventually become a tossup state in presidential elections and turn blue for the first time since 1976.[7] Mark Yzaguirre questioned this assumption through highlighting Governor Rick Perry's courting of 39% of Hispanics in his victory in the 2010 Texas Gubernatorial.[8] However many contend that it is low turnout among Texas Hispanics that are keeping the state Red.[9]

Texas has a reputation for strict "law and order" sentencing. According to the Prison Policy Initiative, of the 21 counties in the United States where more than a fifth of residents are prison inmates, 10 are in Texas. Texas leads the nation in executions, with 464 executions from 1974 to 2011.[10] The second-highest ranking state is Virginia, with 108. A 2002 Houston Chronicle poll of Texans found that when asked "Do you support the death penalty?" 69.1% responded that they did, 21.9% did not support and 9.1% were not sure or gave no answer.

Texas has a long history with secession. It was originally a Spanish province, which in 1821 seceded from Spain and helped form the First Mexican Empire. In 1824 Texas became a state in the new Mexican republic. In 1835 Antonio Lpez de Santa Anna assumed dictatorial control over the state and several states openly rebelled against the changes: Coahuila y Tejas (the northern part of which would become the Republic of Texas), San Luis Potos, Quertaro, Durango, Guanajuato, Michoacn, Yucatn, Jalisco, Nuevo Len, Tamaulipas, and Zacatecas. Several of these states formed their own governments: the Republic of the Rio Grande, the Republic of Yucatan, and the Republic of Texas. Only the Texans defeated Santa Anna and retained their independence.

Some Texans believe that because it joined the United States as a country, the Texas state constitution include the right to secede.[11] However, neither the ordinance of The Texas Annexation of 1845[12] nor The Annexation of Texas Joint Resolution of Congress March 1, 1845[13] included provisions giving Texas the right to secede. Texas did originally retain the right to divide into as many as five independent States,[14] and as part of the Compromise of 1850 continues to retain that right while ceding former claims westward and northward along the full length of the Rio Grande in exchange for $10 million from the federal government.[15]

The United States Supreme Court's primary ruling on the legality of secession involved a case brought by Texas involving a Civil War era bonds transfer.[16] In deciding the 1869 Texas v. White case, the Supreme Court first addressed the issue of whether Texas had in fact seceded when it joined the Confederacy. In a 5-3 vote the Court "held that as a matter of constitutional law, no state could leave the Union, explicitly repudiating the position of the Confederate States that the United States was a voluntary compact between sovereign states."[17] In writing the majority opinion Chief Justice Salmon Chase opined that:

When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.[18]

However, as the issue of secession per se was not the one before the court, it has been debated as to whether this reasoning is merely dicta or a binding ruling on the question.[19] It is also worth noting that Salmon Chase was nominated by Abraham Lincoln and was a staunch anti-secessionist. It is unlikely that he or his Republican appointed court would have approved of the Confederacy and Texas' choice to join it.

While the state's organized secessionist movement is relatively small, a notable minority of Texans hold secessionist sentiments.[20] A 2009 poll found that 31% of Texans believe that Texas has the legal right to secede and form an independent country and 18% believe it should do so.[21]

Until 2010, Texas had weathered the Great Recession fairly well, buffered by its vast oil and gas industries. It avoided the housing industry meltdown and its unemployment rate continues to be below the national level. It benefited from having a two-year budget cycle, allowing officials create budget plans with more time to focus on issues of importance. However, Texas was impacted by the economic downturn just like many other states, and by 2011 was suffering from tens of billions of dollars in budget deficits. In order to deal with this deficit, a supermajority of Republicans led to a massive cost cutting spree.[22] In order to draw new businesses to the state, Texas has developed a program of tax incentives to corporations willing to move there.[23] These efforts, along with Texas focusing on developing their natural energy resources, has led to a surplus as Texas begins its next two year budget cycle.[24][25]

For FY 2011, the top Texas revenue sources by category were approximately:[26] Federal Income: $42,159,665,863.56 Sales Tax: $21,523,984,733.17 Investments: $10,406,151,499.48 Other Revenue: $8,569,805,443.66 Licenses, Fees, Fines and Penalties: $7,741,880,095.57

As of 2008, Texas residents paid a total of $88,794 million dollars in income taxes.[27] This does not include Federal taxes paid by Texas businesses.

Besides sales tax, other taxes include franchise, insurance, natural gas, alcohol, cigarettee and tobacco taxes. Texas has no personal state income tax.

For FY 2011, the top Texas State Agency spending categories were approximately:[28] Public Assistance Payments: $26,501,123,478.54 Intergovernmental Payments: $21,014,819,852.52 Interfund Transfers/Other: $12,319,487,032.40 Salaries and Wages: $8,595,912,992.82 Employee Benefits: $5,743,905,057.61

More:
Politics of Texas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Democracy | Define Democracy at Dictionary.com

Historical Examples

Friends and fellow citizens, we must make the world free for democracy.

We "believe in" democracy, as we have been brought up in it, or we do not.

In all lands it was hailed as the end of despotism and the triumph of democracy and freedom.

The abuses of democracy in the cities took away all the joy of success.

That at least is the only kind of unity that offers hope finally of making a world safe with democracy in it.

British Dictionary definitions for democracy Expand

government by the people or their elected representatives

a political or social unit governed ultimately by all its members

the practice or spirit of social equality

a social condition of classlessness and equality

the common people, esp as a political force

Word Origin

C16: from French dmocratie, from Late Latin dmocratia, from Greek dmokratia government by the people; see demo-, -cracy

Word Origin and History for democracy Expand

1570s, from Middle French dmocratie (14c.), from Medieval Latin democratia (13c.), from Greek demokratia "popular government," from demos "common people," originally "district" (see demotic), + kratos "rule, strength" (see -cracy).

democracy in Culture Expand

A system of government in which power is vested in the people, who rule either directly or through freely elected representatives.

Read more here:
Democracy | Define Democracy at Dictionary.com

Republicans: Pictures, Videos, Breaking News

There's poetic justice in Trump's rise to the top of the GOP presidential field. The GOP is reaping precisely what it has sown.

Dave Pruett

Former NASA researcher; Emeritus Professor of Mathematics, James Madison University

When Michigan can't ensure safe drinking water in a major city and can't figure out how to educate children in its biggest school district, it's safe to say that our state's vaunted "comeback" is incomplete.

Get ready New York City - Ron and Laura Grawsill of Bakersfield, California are going to be taking over for the next week.

This article was originally posted on Inverse. ...

Sailors have many tales of the dangers of the seas, which include vicious sea serpents and whirlpools. And for the terrors he strikes in many people t...

Trump's political campaign has devolved into a freak show that demonstrates our worst selves on the global stage. We also have to remember that the whole world (not just Americans) is watching. I get calls and emails from overseas wondering if Americans have lost their collective minds.

Mary Buffett

Author, international speaker, entrepreneur, political and environmental activist

Every conversation I am in about this year's presidential primary campaign regardless of the person's political affiliation quickly evolves into an expression of strong feeling and concern about what it reflects about the current state of our political dysfunction.

The signs can be found at numerous rallies Republican and Tea Party alike. There is no mistake in the hidden meaning of these words when you read "we want to take our country back," or hear presidential candidates like Donald Trump repeat them.

Republican insiders were saying, as far back as 2012, that the real political battle they cared about was not the White House, but control of the future of a party about to fracture and be transformed.

Carl Pope

Former executive director and chairman, Sierra Club

President Obama ramped up the pressure on Republicans today by withdrawing his nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court and replacing him with what he believes to be the ultimate consensus and "Holier than thou" candidate: Jesus of Nazareth.

Flora Nicholas

(Non) Oscar, Emmy, and Golden Globe winning writer, producer, director

Trump is increasingly scaring everyone, as he is more and more seen as a fearsome monster who has to be stopped.

Getting away from D.C. every so often helps with perspective. Life inside the Beltway can cloud one's views and lead to an inflated sense of axis mun...

Michael Farr

President and majority owner, Farr, Miller & Washington, LLC

Dear Cherished Friends, The Republican Party has become intellectually and morally bankrupt, a mockery of its traditions -- corrosive to our society, our civility, and our capacity to govern. This is not a temporary condition; it is woven into the fabric of the party. Unless and until it reverses course, you should take your votes and money and walk away. I never thought I would presume to say this. I respect that your allegiance is rooted in considered beliefs and years of loyalty which, at the beginning of my political journey, I shared. I certainly don't think I have all the answers, and I enjoy exploring our differences. You inform me, correct me and, most generously, tolerate me. You care, as do I, about the world we are leaving the next generations.

For all of his bravado, obnoxiousness, hatred, and vitriol, the scariest thing about Trump to me is his unique combination of ignorance about the world, convolved with ignorance about himself.

Lawrence M. Krauss

Director of the Origins Project at Arizona State University; Author, 'A Universe From Nothing'

Between now and March 26, voters who are feeling the Bern in Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Washington, Alaska and Hawaii have a once-in-a-lifetime chance to prove the pundits wrong by propelling Sanders toward victory in Philadelphia. We need our strongest fighter in the ring this fall. That fighter is Bernie Sanders.

Tom Weis

President, Climate Crisis Solutions

During the year that was 2015, we were all laughing about Mr. Trump run for President. His crazy inappropriate remarks about made us believe that he could in no way be the frontrunner for the Republican Party. But as the year 2016 dawned on us Trump's increasing support became obvious.

See the rest here:
Republicans: Pictures, Videos, Breaking News

Republican Presidential Candidates 2016

Over the past two decades, devotees of the Republican party and the advancement of its principles have been well served by a strong stomach. Indeed, one could scarcely blame them for feeling as if they were riding on a roller coaster, with one important difference: At least if they were on a carnival ride, they could theoretically have asked that it be stopped so they could get off.

As far back as 1994, the GOP enjoyed a political windfall when midterm election results awarded them control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Termed then the Republican Revolution, some optimistic fellows on the right even dared to declare that a permanent majority had begun, with the US congress becoming red for the foreseeable future. They suffered under a Democratic President at the time, but had high hopes of changing that in two short years.

Frustration in the presidential election of 1996, however, resulting in the reelection of President Bill Clinton, meant that the Republicans would have to wait a total of six years after their landslide to take the White House and dominate American government. Unfortunately, this was when the roller coaster began to dip, as President George W Bush would prove to be one of the least popular commanders in chief in the nation's history, provoking a backlash against Republican rule that began in the 2006 midterms ending the supposed permanent majority in the Senate - and culminated in 2008 with the election of current President Barack Obama. The Revolution was over.

Or was it? While unmistakably starting strong, President Obama's approval ratings have suffered as estimations of the country's prosperity remain lukewarm. Between a sluggish economy whose recovery has yet to be felt by many Americans still seeking work and popular wariness over Obama's much-trumpeted healthcare plan, the Democratic party paid for its President's poor image during the 2014 midterm elections: An 8-seat loss in the Senate cost them their hard-won control of that chamber of congress, while a net loss of 15 seats in the House of Representatives forced them to cede a stronger majority there to a Republican party otherwise smarting from '06 and '08.

Nowadays, of course, the GOP is all about claiming victory in the 2016 presidential election, and fortune may favor them in that pursuit, as well. While the time was that their party gave the appearance of being fractured and belligerent against itself with some 17 Republican candidates considered viable for the nomination, the ongoing primary season has welcomely whittled down their list of serious contenders to just a handful. Simultaneously, ongoing questions concerning Hillary Clinton's scandals and the surprisingly strong primary performance of Bernie Sanders have eroded the image once enjoyed by the Democratic party of merely ushering in an heiress, and thrown the identity of their party's nominee (and the apparent unity that came with having a shoo-in candidate) into real question.

Meanwhile, the Republicans even with a divided field - have long hosted a contender who has consistently remained at the top of national polls: Donald Trump. The tough-talking New York business mogul is by no means a sure thing, not since Ted Cruz prevailed in the critical Iowa caucus, but Trump remains the clear GOP frontrunner. Moreover, his popularity stubbornly refuses to erode, even in the face of remarks he has made and policy positions he has taken that have been considered extreme by many. He wants to round up and deport immigrants present in the country illegally and build a fence along the southern border for which he plans to maneuver Mexico into paying, he has praised low wages for workers as vital to keeping American businesses competitive internationally, and he favors a temporary moratorium on allowing people of the Islamic faith to enter the United States. It's the kind of gloves-off attitude that has excited the conservative base and led Trump to such impressive popularity, but it carries its own risks: Many analysts worry that he is too harsh and severe to be electable, and that his nomination could set the GOP up for defeat at the ballot box.

It's far from clear how the Republican candidates will fare in the coming 2016 election. Their opponents' greatest strength a clear nominee behind whom virtually the entire party was united may have evaporated as Clinton finds herself on the defensive against an encroaching Sanders, but Donald Trump's seemingly-unstoppable popularity could well carry him to a 2016 GOP nomination that risks proving more of a curse than a blessing.

We profile all official candidates, from all political parties, on a level platform. Some may be nutcases, but most are respectable individuals with legitimate positions on the issues. Any officially registered candidates not included may be fictitious, or have insufficient available information from which to build a profile.

We dont know if any of these candidates would make a better president than a career politician, just as there's no guarantee that any of the 2016 campaign promises will actually be kept.

Word of mouth and today's web of social networks empower 'We the People' to promote a candidate more effectively than any media conglomerate, and subsequently scrutinize their every detail in thousands of national online platforms.

Take a look at the candidates, visit their websites and if you find them worthy of being given a chance, share their candidacy with friends and family.

May the best person win!

Excerpt from:
Republican Presidential Candidates 2016

Giuliani: Hillary Clinton "could be considered a founding …

Giuliani, a Republican, delivered the sharp criticism in an interview on Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor" during a segment on the Brussels attacks and the Obama administration's response to them. He was quick to link Clinton to what he saw as failures of the administration's response to ISIS.

"She had her chance to (rally people against ISIS) -- she helped create ISIS. Hillary Clinton could be considered a founding member of ISIS," Giuliani said.

Pressed by host Bill O'Reilly, Giuliani explained his reasoning.

"By being part of an administration withdrew from Iraq. By being part of an administration that let (Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki) run Iraq into the ground, so you forced the Shiites to make a choice. By not intervening in Syria at the proper time. By being part of an administration that drew twelve lines in the sand and made a joke out of it," Guiliani said.

O'Reilly then pointed out that as secretary of state, Clinton was not personally responsible for the decisions, and that the most she could have done to compel Obama to change his policy was resign.

"Which is what a patriot does," Giuliani said.

"The threat we face from terrorism is real, it is urgent and it knows no boundaries," Clinton said. And she pushed the European Union to "make good on the proposal to establish a new unified European border and coast guard" as well as invest more in defense.

Clinton also criticized the foreign policy and anti-terror strategies offered by GOP candidates Donald Trump and Ted Cruz in her speech. She said that Cruz's call for increased policing and monitoring of Muslim communities is "wrong, it is counterproductive, it is dangerous," and compared it to "treating American Muslims like criminals" and "racially profiling."

And Clinton blasted Trump's proposal to have the United States withdraw from NATO, saying "If Mr. Trump gets his way, it will be like Christmas in the Kremlin."

During his interview on Fox news, Giuliani -- who has yet to endorse a GOP candidate -- heaped praise on both Trump and Cruz for their approach to fighting ISIS.

"I think Trump and Cruz probably have been the most specific on it, as specific as you would expect at this level of the campaign," the former mayor said. "There's no question they will take the war to ISIS -- exactly how they'd do it, they probably don't know yet, until they get in there."

The rest is here:
Giuliani: Hillary Clinton "could be considered a founding ...