Mediaboss Marketing

Former U.S. Rep. Joe Cunningham arrives at a debate for Democrats seeking their party's nomination in South Carolina's governor's race on Friday, June 10, 2022, in Columbia, S.C. Meg Kinnard/AP hide caption

Former U.S. Rep. Joe Cunningham arrives at a debate for Democrats seeking their party's nomination in South Carolina's governor's race on Friday, June 10, 2022, in Columbia, S.C.

In South Carolina, former Congressman Joe Cunningham has won the Democratic primary for governor, according to a call by The Associated Press.

Cunningham will face incumbent Republican Gov. Henry McMaster in November who also won his Tuesday primary, according to the AP.

Voters in the deep-red state haven't elected a Democratic governor in nearly 25 years, but Cunningham has a history of upsetting the political status quo. In 2018, he flipped the state's 1st Congressional District red to blue. His tenure lasted only one term before losing to Republican Congresswoman Nancy Mace. For some, though, it's a sign that Cunningham can win against Republicans in South Carolina.

Defeating McMaster in November will be a challenge, to say the very least. He's been endorsed by former President Donald Trump and remains popular in the state where Republicans control both houses of the state legislature, both U.S. Senate seats and six out of seven seats in Congress.

"I can tell you it's gonna be a tough race," Cunningham said at a Democratic debate Friday, "but I can tell you that I am up for that challenge."

Last week, Vice President Kamala Harris appeared at a party fundraiser in Columbia, S.C., and gave Democratic voters and candidates alike an enthusiasm jolt. "Let us fight to get Democrats up and down state ballots," she said.

McMaster was the state's lieutenant governor and assumed the office of governor in early 2017 after former President Donald Trump nominated then-Gov. Nikki Haley as ambassador to the United Nations.

When it comes to the issues heading into November, Cunningham and McMaster couldn't be further apart:

A top issue for Cunningham is Medicaid expansion. South Carolina is one of just 12 states most of which are in the south that have not expanded Medicaid to individuals up to 138% of the Federal Poverty Level, or $17,774 for an individual in 2021. Doing so in South Carolina would insure approximately 100,000 additional people, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

Republicans, including Gov. McMaster, have spent years holding out against expansion. "Expanding Medicaid would cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars every year," the governor wrote on Twitter last year, "and I will fight any effort to do it here."

South Carolina has a six-week abortion ban waiting in the wings if Roe v. Wade is overturned. After receiving McMaster's signature, the law was quickly blocked by a federal court and is awaiting a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court.

After the draft opinion showing justices were leaning towards reversing Roe leaked from the high court last month, Democrats moved to make abortion a central issue of their campaigns in South Carolina. Cunningham released this ad. "The stakes in this election could not be higher," he says in the video, "because these healthcare decisions should be between women and their doctors."

The primary election falls seven years nearly to the day after nine Black church-goers were killed by a domestic terrorist in Charleston in a racially motivated mass murder.

Gun rights remain a key campaign issue for McMaster, who is endorsed by the National Rifle Association. Just last year, the governor signed a law allowing South Carolinians to openly carry their firearms, even with some law enforcement hesitation.

"Our gun violence is out of control," Cunningham said at the Democratic debate last week, touting his record of helping to push gun control legislation through the U.S. House.

This year, Gov. McMaster quietly signed a bill into law that prevents transgender students from playing girls' or women's sports.

At Friday's debate, Cunningham said that the issue should be dealt with using "compassion" and "empathy," emphasizing the importance of looking after kids' mental health.

"We need to care for our kids and send a clear message to our politicians to leave our kids alone," he said.

Acacia Squires is NPR's state government editor.

More South Carolina primary coverage

Visit link:
South Carolina governor primary results: Cunningham and McMaster - NPR

At a time when many are looking for help on raging inflation and who to blame for record-high gas prices, oversight Democrats are turning to pet collars, drawing fire from frustrated Republicans.

On Wednesday, with gas at an all-time high of $5.014 a gallon and inflation at 8.6%, the House Oversight and Reform Committees subcommittee charged with looking out for consumers will hold its first hearing of the year to discuss Serestos flea collar for dogs and cats.

On Wednesday, June 15, 2022 at 2:00 p.m. ET, Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, chairman of the Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy, will hold a hearing to examine the findings of the Subcommittees report entitled 'Seresto Flea and Tick Collars: Examining Why a Product Linked to More than 2,500 Pet Deaths Remains on the Market,' revealing that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) knew of the dangers associated with the Seresto flea and tick collar for several years, but failed to take action to protect pets and their owners, the committee announced.

While an important issue, Republicans said the subcommittee should first address what is hurting people the most.

Rep. Michael Cloud (R-TX), the top Republican on the subcommittee, told Secrets: Democrats are barking up the wrong tree and holding a hearing on pet collars. We need to use the committees resources to conduct oversight of the many Biden-made crises impacting Americans everyday lives.

He added: Americans are suffering from 40-year high inflation, record-breaking gas prices, an ongoing border crisis, and out-of-stock baby formula. Republicans have conducted oversight and called for hearings on these issues, but Democrats refuse to do the same.

Rep. James Comer (R-KY), the full committee's top GOP dog, added: The Oversight Committee under Democrat leadership has gone to the dogs. Democrats have not held a single hearing on record inflation or rising gas prices, but theyve managed to find time to hold a hearing this week on pet collars. Americans are paying more for just about everything because of President Biden and Democrats out-of-control government spending. Its past time for this committee to get back to its mission and deliver accountability and solutions for the American people.

In its defense, the subcommittee has been probing a report of dog deaths and the collar for over a year. It plans to hear from two former dog owners and the Center for Biological Diversity, which recently received internal Environmental Protection Agency emails suggesting the government tried to quiet the pet scandal.

Republicans, meanwhile, are eager to focus on high gas prices and inflation, which Democrats and the Biden administration have failed to curb.

Oversight committee Republicans had some fun with the issue this week, quizzing the public on Twitter over the focus of Democrats.

What do you think Committee Democrats are holding a hearing on this week? the group asked. Most, 89.1%, chose the right answer, dog collars, prompting Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) to tweet: Considering this Committee has spent their time examining the Washington Football Team, environmental justice, the so-call assault on voting rights in Texas, baby playsets, and birthing while Black, I'd say the answer is Pet Collars.

Continued here:
GOP: Democrats choose Fido and Muffy over inflation-shocked public - Washington Examiner

Recently, a California man seeking to murder Justice Brett Kavanaugh was found hiding outside the judge's home with a pistol, a knife, and an array of tactical gear. After being taken into custody, the man claimed he was planning to assassinate the justice in response to the recently leaked opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Womens Health Organization. This near-tragedy is a predictable endpoint of Democrats yearslong campaign to undermine the independence of the court through fear, coercion, and intimidation.

For several years, Democrats have threatened both individual justices and the court as a whole. In March 2020, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) sought to stir up a mob against Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh ahead of the decision in another abortion-related case, saying, I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You wont know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions. The would-be assassin took Schumers words to heart.

Since the May leak of the Dobbs opinion, Democrats have become even more reckless. Liberal groups published the home addresses of conservative justices online and encouraged protesters to gather there. Washington Democrats didnt even feign concern: Then-White House press secretary Jen Psaki refused to condemn this dangerous behavior, expressing sympathy for those who were targeting justices residences and saying that she [didnt] have an official U.S. government position on where people protest. It was a new low for the White House: They plainly refused to speak out against protests that sought to interrupt the work of another branch of government.

In response to rapidly multiplying threats after the Dobbs leak, the Senate quickly passed a bill authorizing additional security for Supreme Court justices. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) refused to move on it the bill has sat on her desk for over a month. Her motive is clear: She is supportive of Democrats who tried to exert pressure on Supreme Court justices in the hopes that one of them would change their vote in Dobbs. She gleefully encouraged the tactics of intimidation and fear that culminated in the assassination attempt against Justice Kavanaugh. Even after the killers plot was foiled, she claimed that Supreme Court justices were safe and not under threat. A credible threat against the life of a justice evidently was not cause for Speaker Pelosis alarm.

Encouraging threats against individual justices is just one front in the Democrats yearslong pressure campaign against the court. They are willing to blow up the Supreme Court as we know it to ensure that it will not stand in the way of their radical agenda. Many Democrats have come out in favor of court-packing, seeking to expand the number of seats on the Supreme Court so that Democrats are able to appoint a majority of justices. President Joe Biden, notably, has refused to come out against such an idea and appointed a presidential commission to study such a proposal. And the Dobbs leak itself, presumably intended to ignite liberal outrage and pressure conservative justices not to overturn Roe, is a brazen attack on the courts institutional norms. The Democrats goal is clear: Do whatever is necessary to ensure that the court will not stop its constitutionally dubious schemes.

Take all of these together individual threats against justices, a refusal to provide additional security resources for them, talk of court-packing, and the Dobbsleak itself and it becomes clear that Democrats are engaged in a systematic campaign to bend the court to their will. An independent and strong Supreme Court plays a vital role in our constitutional system of government. It is the protector of our constitutional rights and a bulwark for liberty. Attacks on the court are attacks on the very foundations of our nation. It is deeply disappointing, if not surprising, that Democrats have gone to great lengths to sully such a venerable institution. Perhaps Wednesdays attack will chasten Democrats who have taken part in this un-American behavior. But I wont be holding my breath.

Harmeet Dhillon became the RNC committeewoman from California in 2016. Prior to that, she was the vice chairman of the California Republican Party and chairman of the San Francisco Republican Party.

Read the original:
Democrats' attacks on the court - Washington Examiner

To the editor:

You want to know whos pro-life? Democrats.

Dont confuse forcing girls and women to give birth with measures that help all Americans live and thrive.

American life expectancies continue to fall. Americans live shorter lives than residents of all European countries, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Australia, Chile and dozens more. High homicide rates, lack of universal healthcare, and high COVID deaths contribute to our lower life expectancies.

Democrats are PRO all the things that would allow Americans to live longer and healthier lives. They are PRO universal healthcare, PRO childhood immunizations, PRO COVID vaccines, PRO clean air and clean water. They are PRO gun safety regulations, assault weapon bans and safer schools.

Americans can choose longer, healthier lives for themselves and their children at the ballot box.

Susan McGuire

Bokeelia

The rest is here:
Democrats are the 'Pro-Life Party' | News, Sports, Jobs - Pineisland Eagle - Pine Island Eagle

An effort to be more inclusive or the federal government being too nosy? Democrats and Republicans took starkly contrasting views Tuesday of proposed legislation that would put voluntary questions about sexual orientation and gender identity on federal demographic surveys.

The Democratic-controlled U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Reform approved a bill requiring federal agencies that collect demographic data through surveys to ask about sexual orientation and gender identity, but no one would be required to give the information nor would they be penalized for refusing to do so.

Supporters of the legislation said it could help provide much better data about the LGBTQ population nationwide at a time when views about sexual orientation and gender identity are evolving and as right-wing extremists are firing up anti-LGBTQ rhetoric online.

U.S. Rep. Carolyn Maloney, the committees Democratic chair, said the measure would help make data collection as inclusive as possible.

By including this, we can ensure that our policies are more equitable and inclusive of the constituents we serve, said Maloney of New York.

Republican committee members called the measure government intrusion and overreach at its most personal.

We should be alarmed by this attempt by the federal government to gather such sensitive data, said Republican U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona.

Republican committee members proposed amendments that would require the legislation to offer a definition of sex, only allow people to answer such questions about themselves and would limit the questions to adults only. Biggs also proposed an amendment that would require data collection of people in the U.S. illegally, in a discussion that referenced then-President Donald Trumps failed effort to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.

All of the Republican amendments were voted down.

The legislation was debated at a time when the Census Bureau separately is requesting $10 million to study over several years the best ways to ask about sexual orientation and gender identity for its annual American Community Survey, and as President Joe Biden declared June as LGBTQ Pride Month. It also is taking place as some Republican-dominated state legislatures have restricted what can be discussed about sexual orientation and gender identity in schools and banned transgender girls from competing in girls sports.

Some federal agencies already ask about sexual orientation and gender identity, but they are limited primarily to health and criminal justice surveys. The once-a-decade census and several Census Bureau surveys give same-sex couples a chance to answer if they are in a marriage or domestic partnership. But that omits LGBTQ people who are single or not living in the same household with their partner, and for the gender question, male and female are the only options.

The online Household Pulse Survey is the only Census Bureau survey that asks these questions, but it is categorized as experimental and may not meet some of the quality standards for the nations largest statistical agency.

Several Democratic House members on Tuesday also urged the directors of the Office of Management and Budget and the Census Bureau to add a category of Middle Eastern and North African, also known as MENA, for the once-a-decade census and other federal surveys.

The Census Bureau recommended adding a MENA category to the 2020 census, but the idea was dropped by the Trump administration.

Decades-old Office of Management and Budget standards have designated Middle Eastern and North African residents as white. Adding a separate MENA category would help guarantee that residents with roots from this region get federal resources and produce more accurate data, said the letter to OMD Director Shalanda Young and Census Bureau Director Robert Santos.

Since members of the MENA community trace their roots to either the Middle East or North Africa, OMBs standards fail to capture the lived experience of many community members, the letter said.

___

Follow Mike Schneider on Twitter at https://twitter.com/MikeSchneiderAP

Follow this link:
Democrats, GOP take contrasting views on LGBTQ survey bill - KRON4