Archive for the ‘Democrats’ Category

Top 100 Democrat Jokes Democrats Are A Joke

1. Did you hear how the yes we can slogan came to be? Well a reporter asked Obama, can you fool the nation in thinking your a moderate, Obama answered, Yes we Can. Another reporter asked, can you convince all the reporters to ignore your association with known terrorists? Yes we can!. Another reporter asked can you nationalize the banks? Yes we can.

2. How many democrats does it take to change a burned out lightbulbs? None, democrats believe the bulb cant change if its not a CFL.

3. Why was Obama so mad when he heard about the AIG bonuses? Because so many at AIG got a larger bonus from AIG than he did.

4. How does Obama win the war on terror? He renames it!Its now the overseas contingency operation.

5. Did you hear about the reporter who asked Obama a hard question? Neither have we!

6. Actually there was a reporter who asked Obama a reallyhard question. The question was, does he want his water plain or with a slice of lemon.

7. How many democrats does it take to change a light bulb? 5! Al Gore to insure its a CFL, and EPA agent in case the blub breaks and a mercury cleanup is necessary, a person to bail out the home owner, an ACORN member to insure that the right person changed the bulb, and a member of the media to celebrate the change.

8. How can a person get bailed out by Obama? Is it by 1. being a member of ACORN, 2. contribuiting to the campain funds of the democrats, 3. being irresponsible, 4.supporting liberal anti American causes, 5. all of the above?Theanswer is all of the above.

9. What does CNN stand for? Communist News Network.

10. What does ABC stand for? All oBama Channel.

11. What does NBC stand for? Now OBama Channel.

12. Whats the difference between God and Obama? God doesnt think Hes Obama.

13. Why wont Obama release his birth certificat? He hasnt decided where he was born.

14. The good news about Obamas inauguration was that of the two million people who showed up, only 10 of them had to call off work.

15. Whats the difference between Karl Marx and Obama? Nobody knows.

16. Why wont obama have a turkey for Thanksgiving? Because Vice President Biden will be out of town.

17. Why will Obama get a new puppy for the White House? Joe Biden is getting on in years.

18. How can you tell a Conservative home owner apart from a Democratic home owner? Ask who is paying the Mortgage. The Conservative will point to himself, and the democrat will also point at the conservative.

19. Democrats and liberals always say they are smarter than conservatives. If that is true, then why do democrats always have problems in filling out a ballot.

20. How many democrats does it take to cast a single vote? 3! Thedemocrat to cast the vote, the lawyer to make sure they did it right, and a party leader to tell them how to vote.

21. How do you scare a democrat? Have them cast a vote without a lawyer to show them how to fill out the ballot.

22. What happens when a democrat votes? Two votes are cast, and a lawyer is employed.

23. Why do democrats like illegal immigrants? They vote for democrats.

24. What do Obama and financial scam artist have in common? They both say yes we can, they both give hope, they both take your money, they both will leave you penny-less in the end.

25. What do you call a gathering of terrorists, financial scam artists, tax dodgers, and sexual preditors? A democratic convention.

26. How do you scare a democrat? Say your a gainfully employed church going family man.

27. How do you know when a democrat is lying? When his mouth is moving.

See more here:
Top 100 Democrat Jokes Democrats Are A Joke

Dallas County, Texas Democratic Party | Home

Early Voting andElection Day polling locations are now available!

We've obtained 150,000 "I Voted" stickers for this year. Thanks to all those who contributed to this project:

Hon. Jean Ball Hon. Susan and David Bradley Dallas County East Democrats Hon. Dr. Theresa Daniel Hon. Dick Dobson Mary Clare Fabishak Far North Dallas Richardson Democrats North Dallas Texas Democratic Women Hon. Rachel Baker Ford Hon. Lynda Hall Donna and Richard Henderson Judge Martin Hoffman Irving Democrats Judge Ken Molberg Dorotha Ocker Judge Craig Smith Stonewall Democrats

This year there will be no Precinct Conventions on Primary Election Day. Instead, Democratic voters from each precinct will gather at their Senate District Conventions on Saturday, March 19, 2016, to caucus and choose delegates to the State Convention this summer. Registration for the District Conventions opens at 9 AM, and the District Conventions will be called to order at 10 AM.

These Temporary Chairs and Co-Chairs find locations for their Senate District Conventions, and make all the other arrangements for those. That includes designating members and Chairs of the various Convention Committees. This is an enormous task and they will be glad to have any help you can give. Contact them at:

Senate District 2 -- Barbara Rosenberg 214-923-8067 email berosenberg AT sbcglobal.net Sally White 214-808-7784 email sallywht AT att.net

Senate District 2 Convention: CWA Hall, 1408 N. Washington, Dallas, Texas 75204.

Senate District 8 -- Donna Bullard 214-664-3935 email terrybullard AT hotmail.com

Senate District 8 Convention: First Presbyterian Church of Richardson, 271 Walton St., Richardson 75081

Senate District 9 -- Michael McPhail 972-922-6295 email mmcphail1974 AT gmail.com

Senate District 9 Convention: Iglesia Renovacion Espiritual, 333 NE 5th St., Grand Prairie 75050

Senate District 16 -- David Griggs 214-244-5979 email wdgriggs AT yahoo.com Janice Schwarz 214-460-7283 email tamsterbath AT gmail.com Katherine McGovern 214-755-2762 email ksm51711 AT gmail.com

Senate District 16 Convention: E. D. Walker Middle School, 12532 Nuestra Dr., Dallas 75230

Senate District 23 -- Jeff Strater 214-893-1336 email jeffstrater AT gmail.com Shay Wyrick-Cathey 214-850-9285 email shaycathey AT gmail.com

Senate District 23 Convention: Kimball High School, 3606 S Westmoreland Rd, Dallas, 75223. Convention Facebook event page: https://www.facebook.com/events/1029161260429510/

See the rest here:
Dallas County, Texas Democratic Party | Home

The Democratic Party of Davidson County, North Carolina

Jeanne and Bill Doom at registration

Loretta Martin, Second Vice Chair conducting delegate selection for District Conventions

Bill Doom explaining resolutions

Max Walser, former Davidson County Commissioner

Courtroom view of Convention Attendees

Jane Hill, First Vice Chair conducting meeting

Jane Hill and Mary Cridlebaugh paying tribute to outgoing Chairman Craig Lindsay

Delegates pledging allegiance to flag

Mary Cridlebaugh presenting plaque to Craig Lindsay

Tommy Hedrick and Andy Hedrick, new chairman for Davidson County

Date: April 11, 2015

Time: 10am

Location: Davidson County Courthouse, Courtroom C

ALL Democrats are invited to attend. There will be an election of party officers.

For more information, contact Jane Hill at 475-1021.

The Democratic Party believes strong, well-funded public schools, colleges and universities will produce a skilled workforce. These are the foundation for a strong economy. We believe that our tax system must be structured to promote a strong middle class. And all our citizens are entitled to government that reflects fairness, justice, and opportunity for all. We support candidates who will use their positions to move North Carolina forward, not backward.

Read the original:
The Democratic Party of Davidson County, North Carolina

Australian Democrats – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Australian Democrats was a centrist[1]political party in Australia with a social-liberal ideology. The party was formed in 1977, a merger of the Australia Party and the New Liberal Movement, with former Liberal minister Don Chipp as its high-profile leader. Though never achieving a seat in the House of Representatives, the party had considerable influence in the Senate for the following thirty years. Its representation in the Parliament of Australia ended on 30 June 2008, after loss of its four remaining Senate seats at the 2007 general election. As of October 2012[update], the organisation had disintegrated and control was contested by two factions associated with two former parliamentarians.[2] The party was deregistered by the Australian Electoral Commission on 16 April 2015 due to the party's failure to demonstrate requisite 500 members to maintain registration.[3] Even before its deregistration and since it became extinct as a parliamentary party anywhere in Australia, the party saw many of its prominent members including former federal party leader Andrew Bartlett and former NSW MLC Arthur Chesterfield-Evans defect to the Greens.

The party was founded on principles of honesty, tolerance, compassion and direct democracy through postal ballots of all members, so that "there should be no hierarchical structure ... by which a carefully engineered elite could make decisions for the members."[4]:p187 From the outset, members' participation was fiercely protected in national and divisional constitutions prescribing internal elections, regular meeting protocols, annual conferencesand monthly journals for open discussion and balloting. Dispute resolution procedures were established, with final recourse to a party ombudsman and membership ballot.

Policies determined by the unique participatory method promoted environmental awareness and sustainability, opposition to the primacy of economic rationalism (Australian neoliberalism), preventative approaches to human health and welfare, animal rights, rejection of nuclear technology and weapons.

The Australian Democrats were the first representatives of green politics at the federal level in Australia. They played a key role in the cause clbre of the Franklin River Dam.

The party's centrist role made it subject to criticism from both the right and left of the political spectrum. In particular, Chipp's former conservative affiliation was frequently recalled by opponents on the left.[n 1] This problem was to torment later leaders and strategists who, by 1991, were proclaiming "the electoral objective" as a higher priority than the rigorous participatory democracy espoused by the party's founders.[n 2]

Over three decades, the Australian Democrats achieved representation in the legislatures of the ACT, South Australia, New South Wales, Western Australia and Tasmania as well as Senate seats in all six states. However, at the 2004 and 2007 federal elections, all seven of its Senate seats were lost.[5] The last remaining State parliamentarian, David Winderlich, left the party and was defeated as an independent in 2010.

On the evening of 29 April 1977, Don Chipp addressed an overflowing Perth Town Hall meeting which unanimously passed a resolution to form a Centre-Line Party, which Chipp was invited to lead[4]:p185but he firmly declined to reverse his avowed decision to quit politics, having resigned from the Liberal Party and been offered a lucrative position as a radio public affairs commentator. The Centre-Line Party was the provisional title of the Australian Democrats party.[4]:p 185 The occasion was a meeting at the Perth Town Hall to which Don Chipp had been invited in the hope that he would accept the position of leader of the new party, which would be an amalgamation of the Australia Party and the New Liberal Movement. On that occasion, Chipp declined to commit himself but did so at a corresponding public meeting in Melbourne on 9 May 1977. Chipp received a standing ovation from over 3,000 people, including former Prime Minister John Gorton, and decided to commit himself to leading the new party which was already being constructed by a national steering committee.[4]:p186 The new party was eventually renamed the Australian Democrats by a ballot of its membership. "Fifty-six suggestions produced by members were listed on the ballot paper, including Uniting Australia Party, Australian Centre Line Party, Dinkum Democrats, Practical Idealists of Australia and People for Sanity Party!! After the ballot, the suggestion of the Steering Committee, 'Australian Democrats', was overwhelmingly accepted."[4]:p188 The name "Australian Democrats" was already in informal currency before this decision.[6]

The first Australian Democrats (AD) federal parliamentarian was Senator Janine Haines who filled Steele Hall's casual Senate vacancy for South Australia in 1977. Surprisingly, she was not a candidate when the party contested the 1977 federal elections after Don Chipp had agreed to be leader and figurehead. Members and candidates were not lacking in electoral experience, since the Australia Party had been contesting all federal elections since 1969 and the Liberal Movement, in 1974 and 1975. The party's broad aim was to achieve a balance of power in one or more parliaments and to exercise it responsibly in line with policies determined by membership.

The grassroot support attracted by Chipp's leadership was measurable at the party's first electoral test at the 1977 federal election on 10 December, when 9.38 per cent of the total Lower House vote was polled and 11.13 per cent of the Senate vote. At that time, with five Senate seats being contested in each state, the required quota was a daunting 16.66 per cent. However, the first 6-year-term seats were won by Don Chipp (Vic) and Colin Mason (NSW).

The Australian Democrats' first national conference, on 1617 February 1980, was opened by the distinguished nuclear physicist and former governor of South Australia, Sir Mark Oliphant, who said:

I was privileged to be in the chair at the public meeting in Melbourne when [Don Chipp] announced formation of a new party, dedicated to preserve what freedoms we still retain, and to increase them. A party in which dictatorship from the top was replaced by consensus. A party not ordered about by big business and the rich, or by union bosses. A party where a man could retain freedom of conscience and not thereby be faced with expulsion. A party to which the intelligent individual could belong without having to subscribe to a dogmatic creed. In other words, a democratic party.[7]

At a Melbourne media conference on 19 September 1980, in the midst of the 1980 election campaign, Chipp described his party's aim as to "keep the bastards honest"the "bastards" being the major parties and/or politicians in general. This became a long-lived slogan for the Democrats.[8]

At the October 1980 election, the Democrats polled 9.25 per cent of the Senate vote, electing Janine Haines (SA) and two new senators Michael Macklin (Qld) and John Siddons (Vic), bringing the party's strength to five Senate seats from 1 July 1981 .

A by-election in the South Australian state seat of Mitcham (now Waite) saw Heather Southcott retain the seat for the Democrats in 1982. Since 1955 it had been held by conservative lawyer Robin Millhouse whose New Liberal Movement merged into the Democrats in 1977, and who was resigning to take up a senior judicial appointment. Southcott was defeated later that year at the 1982 state election. Mitcham was the only single-member lower-house seat anywhere in Australia to be won by the Democrats.

Don Chipp resigned from the Senate on 18 August 1986, being succeeded as party leader by Janine Haines and replaced as a senator for Victoria by Janet Powell.

At the 1987 election following a double dissolution, the reduced quota of 7.7% necessary to win a seat assisted the election of three new senators. 6-year terms were won by Paul McLean (NSW) and incumbents Janine Haines (South Australia) and Janet Powell (Victoria). In South Australia, a second senator, John Coulter, was elected for a 3-year term, as were incumbent Michael Macklin (Queensland) and Jean Jenkins (Western Australia).

1990 saw the voluntary departure from the Senate of Janine Haines (a step with which not all Democrats agreed) and the failure of her strategic goal of winning the House of Representatives seat of Kingston.

The casual vacancy was filled by Meg Lees several months before the election of Cheryl Kernot in place of retired deputy leader Michael Macklin. The ambitious Kernot immediately contested the party's national parliamentary deputy leadership. Being unemployed at the time, she requested and obtained party funds to pay for her travel to address members in all seven divisions.[9] In the event, Victorian Janet Powell was elected as leader and John Coulter was chosen as deputy leader.

Despite the loss of Haines and the WA Senate seat (through an inconsistent national preference agreement with the ALP), the 1990 federal election heralded something of a rebirth for the party, with a dramatic rise in primary vote. This was at the same time as an economic recession was building, and events such as the Gulf War in Kuwait were beginning to shepherd issues of globalisation and transnational trade on to national government agendas.

Virtually alone on the Australian political landscape, Janet Powell consistently attacked both the government and opposition which had closed ranks in support of the Gulf War. Whereas the House of Representatives was thus able to avoid any debate about the war and Australia's participation,[n 3][10] the Democrats took full advantage of the opportunity to move for a debate in the Senate.[11]

Possibly because of the party's opposition to the Gulf War, there was mass-media antipathy and negative publicity which some construed as poor media performance by Janet Powell, the party's standing having stalled at about 10%. Before 12 months of her leadership had passed, the South Australian and Queensland divisions were circulating the party's first-ever petition to criticise and oust the parliamentary leader. The explicit grounds related to Powell's alleged responsibility for poor AD ratings in Gallup and other media surveys of potential voting support. When this charge was deemed insufficient, interested party officers and senators reinforced it with negative media 'leaks' concerning her openly established relationship with Sid Spindler[12] and exposure of administrative failings resulting in excessive overtime to a staff member. With National Executive blessing, the party room pre-empted the ballot by replacing the leader with deputy John Coulter. In the process, severe internal divisions were generated. One major collateral casualty was the party whip Paul McLean who resigned and quit the Senate in disgust at what he perceived as in-fighting between close friends. The casual NSW vacancy created by his resignation was filled by Karin Sowada. Powell duly left the party, along with many leading figures of the Victorian branch of the party, and unsuccessfully stood as an Independent candidate when her term expired. In later years, she campaigned for the Australian Greens.

Because of their numbers on the cross benches during the Hawke and Keating governments, the Democrats were sometimes regarded as exercising a balance of powerwhich attracted electoral support from a significant sector of the electorate which had been alienated by both Labor and Coalition policies and practices. The party's parliamentary influence was weakened in 1996 after the Howard Government was elected, and a Labor senator, Mal Colston, resigned from the Labor Party. Since the Democrats now shared the parliamentary balance of power with two Independent senators, the Coalition government was able on occasion to pass legislation by negotiating with Colston and Brian Harradine. Following the 1998 election the Australian Democrats again held the balance of power, until the Coalition gained a Senate majority at the 2004 election.

The party's integrity as a neutral third party suffered a serious blow from the resignation and defection of leader Cheryl Kernot in October 1997,[13] with revelations of her sexual relationship with Gareth Evans and her aspirations to a ministerial position in a Labor government.[14]

Under Lees' leadership, in the 1998 federal election, the Democrats' candidate John Schumann came within 2 per cent of taking Liberal Foreign Minister Alexander Downer's seat of Mayo in the Adelaide Hills under Australia's preferential voting system. The party's representation increased to nine senators.

Internal conflict and leadership tensions from 2000 to 2002, blamed on the party's support for the Government's Goods and Services Tax (GST), was damaging to the Democrats. Opposed by the Labor Party, the Australian Greens and independent Senator Harradine, the GST required Democrat support to pass. In an election fought on tax, the Democrats publicly stated that they liked neither the Liberal (GST) tax package nor the Labor package, but pledged to work with whichever party was elected to make their tax package better. They campaigned with the slogan "No GST on food".[15][not in citation given][16]

In 1999, after negotiations with Prime Minister Howard, Meg Lees, Andrew Murray and the party room Senators agreed to support the A New Tax System (ANTS) legislation[17] with exemptions from GST for most food and some medicines, as well as many environmental and social concessions.[18][19] Five Australian Democrats senators voted in favour.[20] However, two dissident senators on the party's left Natasha Stott Despoja and Andrew Bartlett voted against the GST.[21][22]

In 2001, a leadership spill saw Meg Lees replaced as leader[23] by Natasha Stott Despoja after a very public and bitter leadership battle.[24] Despite criticism of Stott Despoja's youth and lack of experience, the 2001 election saw the Democrats receive similar media coverage to the previous election.[25] Despite the internal divisions, the Australian Democrats' election result in 2001 was quite good. However, it was not enough to prevent the loss of Vicki Bourne's Senate seat in NSW.

The 2002 South Australian state election was the last time an Australian Democrat would be elected to an Australian parliament. Sandra Kanck was re-elected to a second eight-year term from an upper house primary vote of 7.3 percent.

Resulting tensions between Stott Despoja and Lees led to Meg Lees leaving the party in 2002, becoming an independent and forming the Australian Progressive Alliance. Stott Despoja stood down from the leadership following a loss of confidence by her party room colleagues.[26] It led to a protracted leadership battle in 2002, which eventually led to the election of Senator Andrew Bartlett as leader. While the public fighting stopped, the public support for the party remained at record lows.

On 6 December 2003, Bartlett stepped aside temporarily as leader of the party, after an incident in which he swore at Liberal Senator Jeannie Ferris on the floor of Parliament while intoxicated.[27] The party issued a statement stating that deputy leader Lyn Allison would serve as the acting leader of the party. Bartlett apologised to the Democrats, Jeannie Ferris and the Australian public for his behaviour and assured all concerned that it would never happen again. On 29 January 2004, after seeking medical treatment, Bartlett returned to the Australian Democrats leadership, vowing to abstain from alcohol.

Support for the Australian Democrats fell significantly at the 2004 federal election in which they achieved only 2.4 per cent of the national vote. Nowhere was this more noticeable than in their key support base of suburban Adelaide in South Australia, where they received between 7 and 31 per cent of the Lower House vote in 2001, and between 1 and 4 per cent in 2004. Three incumbent senators were defeatedAden Ridgeway (NSW), Brian Greig (WA) and John Cherry (Qld). Following the loss, the customary post-election leadership ballot installed Lyn Allison as leader and Andrew Bartlett as her deputy.

From 1 July 2005 the Australian Democrats lost official parliamentary party status, being represented by only four senators while the governing Liberal-National Coalition gained a majority and potential control of the Senatethe first time this advantage had been enjoyed by any government since 1980.

On 5 January 2006, the ABC reported that the Tasmanian Electoral Commission had de-registered that division of the party for failing to provide a list containing the required number of members to be registered for Tasmanian state and local elections.[28]

On 18 March 2006, at the 2006 South Australian state election, the Australian Democrats were reduced to 1.7 per cent of the Legislative Council (upper house) vote. Their sole councillor up for re-election, Kate Reynolds, was defeated.

After the election, South Australian senator Natasha Stott Despoja denied rumours that she was considering quitting the party.[29]

In early July, Richard Pascoe, national and South Australian party president, resigned, citing slumping opinion polls and the poor result in the 2006 South Australian election as well as South Australian parliamentary leader Sandra Kanck's comments regarding the drug MDMA which he saw as damaging to the party.[30][31][32]

On 5 July 2006, Australian Democrats senator for Western Australia Andrew Murray announced his intention not to contest the 2007 federal election, citing frustration arising from the Howard Government's control of both houses and his unwillingness to serve another six-year term.[33] His term ended on 30 June 2008.

On 28 August 2006, the founder of the Australian Democrats, Don Chipp, died. Former prime minister Bob Hawke said: "... there is a coincidental timing almost between the passing of Don Chipp and what I think is the death throes of the Democrats.[34] "

On 22 October 2006, Australian Democrats Senator Natasha Stott Despoja announced her intention not to seek re-election at the 2007 federal election due to health concerns.[35] Her term ended on 30 June 2008.

In November 2006, the Australian Democrats fared very poorly in the Victorian state election, receiving a Legislative Council vote tally of only 0.83%,[36] less than half of the party's result in 2002 (1.79 per cent).[37]

In the New South Wales state election of March 2007, the Australian Democrats lost their last remaining NSW Upper House representative, Arthur Chesterfield-Evans. The party fared poorly, gaining only 1.8 per cent of the Legislative Council vote. A higher vote was achieved in some of the Legislative Assembly seats selectively contested as compared to 2003. However, the statewide vote share fell because the party was unable to field as many candidates as in 2003.

In the Victorian state by-election in Albert Park District[38] the Australian Democrats stood candidate Paul Kavanagh, who polled 5.75 per cent of the primary vote, despite a large number of candidates, and all[citation needed] media attention focusing on the battle between Labor and Greens candidates.

On 13 September 2007, the ACT Democrats (Australian Capital Territory Division of the party) was deregistered[39] by the ACT Electoral Commissioner, being unable to demonstrate a minimum membership of 100 electors.

The Democrats had no success at the 2007 federal election. Two incumbent senators, Lyn Allison (Victoria) and Andrew Bartlett (Queensland), were defeated, their seats both reverting to major parties. Their two remaining colleagues, Andrew Murray (WA) and Natasha Stott Despoja (SA), did not run for new terms. All four senators' terms expired on 30 June 2008leaving the Australian Democrats with no federal representation for the first time since its founding in 1977. An ABC report noted that "on the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) website the party is now referred to just as 'other'".[40]

The last of the party's state upper-house members, David Winderlich, resigned from the party in October 2009[41] and was defeated as an independent at the 2010 election.

In March 2012, the Australian Electoral Commission queried a Democrats submission of 550 names of purported members and proposed deregistering the party for having fewer than 500 members, the threshold needed for registration.[42] The Commission later satisfied itself that the party had sufficient membership to continue its registration.

The Democrats did not nominate a single candidate in the 2014 South Australian election, in the party's state of origin.

On 16 April 2015, the Australian Electoral Commission deregistered the Australian Democrats as a political party for failure to demonstrate the requisite 500 members to maintain registration.[3]

The Australian Democrats have said they will appeal the AEC decision, which under the legislation is reviewable.[43][44][45]

The party's original support base consisted of voters alienated by perceived unproductive adversarial conflict between the two mainstream parties and an emerging new constituency of people with a desire to participate more effectively in government and to promote concerns for environmental protection and social justice. The party aimed to combine liberal social policies with centrist, particularly neo-Keynesian economics and a progressive environmental platform.

The original agenda included interventionist economic policies, commitment to environmental causes, support for reconciliation with Australia's indigenous population through such mechanisms as formal treaties, pacifist approaches to international relations, open government, constitutional reform, progressive approaches to social issues such as sexuality and drugs, and strong support for human rights and civil liberties. Its membership largely comprised tertiary-educated and middle-class constituents. The party also appealed to voters opposed to untrammeled government power and wishing to have alternative views aired in parliaments and media.

The party has a platform of participatory democracy, with policies supporting proportional representation and citizen-initiated referenda. Many important internal issues (such as electoral preselection and leadership) are decided by direct postal ballot of the membership. Although policies are theoretically set in a similar fashion, Australian Democrats parliamentarians generally had extensive freedom in interpreting them.

However, by 1980, the Australian Democrats had employed the postal-ballot method at both national at state levels to develop an extensive body of written policy covering not only the political agendas of the day but also innovative and far-sighted policies for environmental and economic sustainability, water and energy conservation, e.g., through development of alternative energy sources, expanded public transport, etc. To the community's growing concerns about human rights, the Australian Democrats added finely detailed policies on animal welfare and species preservation. The material is available in election manifestos and copies of the party's journals, obtainable in major public libraries.

In a 2009 "rebuild" process, the party announced creation of a new policy process, attempts to improve internal communication, and envisaged development of a new party constitution.[46]

Prior to the 2013 federal election, the party, though factionally divided into two separate organisations,[47] was able to publish a comprehensive package of member-balloted policies.[48]

Support for the Democrats historically tended to fluctuate between about 5 and 10 per cent of the population and was geographically concentrated around the wealthy dense CBD and inner-suburban neighbourhoods of the capital cities (especially Adelaide). Therefore, they never managed to win a House of Representatives seat. During the 1980s, 1990s and early 2000s they typically held one or two Senate seats in each state, as well as having some representatives in state parliaments.[49]

Following the internal conflict over GST (19982001) and resultant leadership changes, a dramatic decline occurred in the Democrats' membership and voting support in all states. Simultaneously, an increase was recorded in support for the Australian Greens who, by 2004, were supplanting the Democrats as a substantial third party. The trend was noted that year by political scientists Dean Jaensch et al.[50] Elsewhere, Jaensch later suggested it was possible the Democrats could make a political comeback in the federal arena.[51]

Following Tony Abbott's displacement of Malcolm Turnbull as federal leader of the Liberal Party in 2009, the Democrats sought to attract the support of "those Liberals who no longer feel they can support their party".[52]

Of the party's nine elected federal parliamentary leaders, six were women. Aboriginal senator Aden Ridgeway was deputy leader under Natasha Stott Despoja. Ridgeway was technically leader between Stott Despoja's resignation and the appointment of Brian Greig as interim leader.

More:
Australian Democrats - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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