Archive for the ‘Libertarian’ Category

Freelancers Shouldn’t Betray Other Gig Workers By Allying with Anti-Union Opponents of AB5 – Common Dreams

A funny thing happened after California's Assembly Bill 5, a law that strengthens the state's rules on employee misclassification, took effect on January 1. AB5 uses a three-pronged "ABC" test to clarify who counts as an employee versus an independent contractor, ensuring that companies can't skimp out on protections like paid sick days, overtime or workers' compensation. Gig workers long exploited by Big Tech celebrated a win, as correct employee classification will mean more take-home pay and the opportunity to unionize for benefits. But freelancers in creative fields like music, photography, and journalism erupted into outrage.

As it turns out, many freelancers opposing AB5 have joined forces with some strange right-wing bedfellows, and anchored their resistance to the law in solidly libertarian logic.

Those in the latter group have real reason for concern, because our corporate clients can simply blacklist in-state contractors rather than onboarding us as W-2 employees per the intention of the law. In other words, if a given company doesn't want to hire a California-based freelancer as a salaried employee, it can just stop commissioning assignments from anyone living in the state altogether. With media corporations like Vox choosing contractors located outside of California to save money and avoid regulation, according to complaints from freelancers, many California writers worry about losing income. It doesn't help that, under the legislation, writers were given a 35-article annual cap per outlet; unfortunately, journalism wages are so depressed that this number of assignments can't generate enough money to keep most of us afloat.

As a freelance writer myself, I watched eagerly to see how others in the industry would respond to this situation, which seemed like an opportunity to reckon with our financial precarity in a changing media landscape. How would we react to best safeguard our income: Organize to demand minimum rate standards per word and collectively refuse to work for less, so that we could survive on fewer but better compensated assignments? Campaign for policies like universal healthcare, free childcare, and affordable housing, which would make losing work substantially less catastrophic? Exert public pressure on the corporations that have greedily and callously dropped local contractors instead of hiring us fulltime?

As it turns out, many freelancers opposing AB5 have joined forces with some strange right-wing bedfellows, and anchored their resistance to the law in solidly libertarian logic. The American Society of Journalists and Authors and the National Press Photographers Association sought counsel from a Koch-funded, union-busting firm, the Pacific Legal Foundation, to sue California over AB5 in federal court this March.

The PLF's history includes defending private property from the Endangered Species Act and supporting landlord discrimination against renters. "ASJA and NPPA are making a huge mistake," says Larry Goldbetter, President of the National Writers Union, who says his union is the only freelancer group supporting the California law. I'm one of the few writers who vocally agrees with Goldbetter. I believe aligning with the PLF is a Faustian bargain, and an abandonment of any semblance of progressive principles. But the lawsuitand the larger movement to repeal AB5raises the question of just how committed some California freelancers are to such principles in the first place. Raising further concern is the fact that many members of two new Facebook groups, "Freelancers Against AB5" and "California Freelance Writers United," share articles from libertarian-leaning publications like The Federalist and Reason.

To what extent this attitude predated AB5 is difficult to determine. But prior to the swift, impassioned opposition to the law that coalesced online in the past few months, there existed little political organizing among freelance writers against the serious problemslow rates, bad contracts, and late paymentsthat plague our industry. In contrast to staff writers, whose unionizing efforts have recently increased, contractors tend to envision ourselves as free agents, and often to our own detriment.

Now, one of our first large-scale attempts at political mobilization, resisting AB5 (and delaying New Jersey's version, Senate Bill 4204), potentially comes at the expense of rideshare drivers, delivery people, strippers who sued to be recognized as employees, janitors, nail techs, health and childcare workers, and others who materially benefit from labor reform like AB5 and similar policies combatting misclassification.

It would be great to see more than a small handful journalists publicly and vociferously defend the portions of AB5 that help other types of gig workers.

This lack of labor solidarity is likely rooted in the ways freelance creatives understand our jobs and identities. In a bid for legitimacy, we often emphasize how our specialized, professional skills elevate us to something better than lowly employees. We have careers we've spent years building, the argument goes, while Uber drivers just have temporary, throwaway gigs. The ego-preserving myth that we're "small business" entrepreneurs rather than predominantly members of the working-class who sell our labor as piecework has its appeal.

Yet almost all of us, from Postmates and Doordash couriers to journalists and transcribers, work for diminishing wages and must absorb the full cost of health insurance. Most of us can't predict our income from year to year or even month to month. Some earn less than $5 per hour. But for many self-employed creatives, these realities conflict with the image of the successful professional that we like to project to the public, andlet's face itto ourselves. Clients inhabit a position of power over us, not unlike the shop floor bosses of yore, and we make allies with them at our own risk. Employers save approximately 30% in labor costs by using contractors, so it's no surprise that media companies would rather blacklist us and look to exploit labor in less regulated states than cough up money for benefits. Why not direct our mass ire at themthe entities actually withholding jobs to safeguard their own bottom lineinstead of at unions?

It would be great to see more than a small handful journalists publicly and vociferously defend the portions of AB5 that help other types of gig workers. If freelancers do win the case against labor reform in California and other states planning similar legislation, I hope we would use the political momentum to forge alliances with gig workers in different industries and stand together against corporate avarice. It's one thing to advocate improving the law; AB5 certainly needs tweaking, and jettisoning the arbitrary 35 article cap for writers is a good place to start. But it's another thing entirely to sidle up to Big Tech, Republican politicians, and firms like PLF, and to defend our work using the capitalist ethos of "individualism." The only way forward is to put solidarity before self-interest. Once we cede basic leftist values, what else will we give up?

See original here:
Freelancers Shouldn't Betray Other Gig Workers By Allying with Anti-Union Opponents of AB5 - Common Dreams

LaRose announces latest early voting numbers of 2020 primary – The Highland County Press

Ohios Presidential Primary Election is two weeks from today, Tuesday, March 3. Secretary of State Frank LaRose announced Tuesday that243,719absentee ballots have been requested by-mail or in-person and that 84,149 votes have been cast statewide.

Find out how you can vote early by visitingVoteOhio.gov.

Data was collected by the Ohio Secretary of States Office via an informal survey of Ohios 88 county boards of elections. Data as of Monday, March 2 are the following:

243,719 absentee ballots requested (203,277 by mail; 40,442 in person);

84,149 absentee ballots cast (40,442 in person, 43,707 by mail);

159,570 outstanding absentee ballots.

The ballots requested include:

138,346 Democratic;

93,519 Republican;

269 Libertarian; and

11,585 nonpartisan.

Of the ballots cast in person, so far there have been:

20,001 Democratic;

19,380 Republican;

57 Libertarian; and

1,004 nonpartisan.

Of the ballots cast in person, there have been:

21,768 Democratic;

19,380 Republican;

57 Libertarian; and

1,004 nonpartisan.

In Highland County, the breakdown includes:

251 absentee ballots requested;

238 absentee ballots cast;

13 absentee ballots outstanding;

92 Democratic ballots requested and 86 cast (55 in person, 31 by mail);

152 Republican ballots requested and 145 cast (120 in person, 25 by mail); and

Seven questions and issues ballots requested, all of which have been cast by mail.

In the 2020 presidential primary, voters across the state will have the opportunity to vote in a number of local races, as well as a total of 482 local issues and questions across 83 counties.

Read the original post:
LaRose announces latest early voting numbers of 2020 primary - The Highland County Press

New Mexico primaries are on June 2: Are you ready? Here’s what you need to know – Las Cruces Sun-News

In New Mexico, primary elections fall on June 2, 2020.(Photo: Niyazz, Getty Images/iStockphoto)

LAS CRUCES - New Mexico will be among the last four states to weigh in on the presidential primaries.

New Mexico's primary elections take place June 2, with the state's three major parties Democrats, Republicans and Libertarians selecting candidates for the Nov. 3 election.

While voters will have to wait several more weeks to mark their ballots, primary season begins in earnest next weekfor those involved with campaigns.

Besides the office of president, primary voters will select their parties' candidates for county offices, state legislatorsand for the United States Congress.

By statute, New Mexico's primary elections are limited to voters affiliated with the respective party. Independent voters, officially designated as"decline to state" in New Mexico, may not participate.

A sign at the Doa Ana County Government Center marks an early-voting site on Friday, Nov. 2, 2018, ahead of Election Day for the general election. Wide-ranging races, including governor and the 2nd Congressional District, appear on the ballot.(Photo: Diana Alba Soular/Sun-News)

The "closed primary" law survived its most recent legal challenge before the New Mexico Supreme Courtin 2019.

2020 is a big political year. Keep up with asubscriptionto the Las Cruces Sun-News.

Tuesday, March 10 isthe date for party candidates to file petitions declaring their candidacies for local office with the Doa Ana County Clerk's office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.

In the event an office's jurisdiction straddles multiple counties, the candidate files in the county of their residence.

Filing day for write-in party candidates is March 17.

Candidacies for statewide and federal offices were certified in February, although petitions for presidential candidates are accepted by the New Mexico Secretary of State's office through March 30, according to the office'scandidate information guide.

Click here to read the 2020 primary election candidate guide.

Independent and minor party candidates do not participate in the June 2 primaries, but to run in the general election in November they must circulate petitions and declare candidacy at their county clerk's officeon June 25.

The SOS received candidate filings for statewide and federal offices from candidates in February.

Voters must be registered as Democrat, Republicanor Libertarian to participate in the primaries,and registered voters cannot switch partiesduring same-day voter registration.

Voters can check their registration status and make changes online at http://www.NMvote.org.

Voter registration for the primaries closes on May 5.

To be legally eligible to vote, you must:

Online registrants will be asked to providethe last four digits of their Social Security numbers. If the registrant has a New Mexico-issued driver's license or state ID, the state will verify your information through the state Motor Vehicle Division.

In the event the state cannot verify that information, a follow-up letter is sent to the registrant.

If registering by mail,applicants registering for the first time need to include a copy of at least one of the following:

IDrequirements via mail

Note: A current valid photo identification card from a post-secondary educational institution in New Mexico, when accompanied by a current student fee statement that shows the student's address, is also acceptable.

If you register for the first time by mail and do not include a copy of one of the documents above, you will be required to present it when voting for the first time.

Voters filling out ballots at the Doa Ana County Government Center during the primary Election Day. Tuesday June 5, 2018.(Photo: Josh Bachman/Sun-News)

A qualified elector may register or update voters' registrationin person at the county clerks office, or designated alternative voting locations, immediately prior to voting from when early voting begins on May 5 through May 30, 2020.

If you've seen a voter registration table at events such as farmers' markets or county fairs, then you have met a "Voter Registration Agent."

Authorized VRAs can assist you in completing and filing your voter registration, and are required to issue a receipt with their voter registration number. That number should also appear on the registration form.

Doa Ana County voters can complete their ballot at any one of 40 voting locations in the county. A complete list of locations is available on the county Bureau of Elections website,www.DonaAnaCounty.org/elections/vcc.

When you check in at the location and confirm your identity, you will be issued the ballot appropriate for your party affiliation.

If you're not in Doa Ana County, check with your county clerk's office

Early voting begins on May 5 at theDoa Ana County Clerk's office, 845 N. Motel Blvd. in Las Cruces, during business hours Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. On May 30, the Saturday prior to the election, this location will also be available for voting from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.

Starting May 16, early voting will be available at seven locations in the county from Tuesday through Saturday, 11 a.m. to 7 p.m.

The last day for early voting will be Saturday, May 30.

A sign in the Doa Ana County Government Center on Monday, Aug. 20, 2018.(Photo: Diana Alba Soular / Sun-News)

Voters can request an absentee ballot in advance, either at the county clerk's office or an early voting location prior to Election Day. There is also an online application at the New Mexico Secretary of State's website, which will require confirmation of the voter's identity.

The ballots may be turned in at voting locations or to the county clerk's office beginning May 5.

The last day to request an absentee ballot is Friday, May 29.

Absentee ballots are provided with two envelopes. The ballot is to be inserted into the inner envelope, which is then enclosed in an outer envelope requiring the voter's signature. The ballot can be mailed or turned in at a voting location or the county clerk's office; but it has to be in the envelopes, and the envelopes need to be filled out correctly.

The ballots must be turned inby 7 p.m. on June 2.

Click here for more information about absentee voting by mail.

Voters cannot bring an unmarked absentee ballot to a polling place and complete it there.

Falsifying information on absentee ballots is a fourth-degree felony.

Under New Mexico law, a voter's caregiveror immediate family membermay deliver that voter's absentee ballot to the county clerk in person or by mail, but the voter must sign the outer envelope.

In 2019, New Mexico lawmakers passeda "tuneup" of state election laws, including some changes to the Absent Voter Act which regulates absentee voting.

Under the statute, applications for mailed ballots require the applicant's printed name, registration address and year of birth. Lawmakers alsoadded languageconcerning online applications for mailed ballots, requiring the voter to provideall the information required for a paper form, including a New Mexico driver's license number or state identification card number.

Absentee ballots have prompted questions and court filings since the 2018 election, in which more than 8,500absentee ballots were determinativefor the U.S. House seat in New Mexico's second congressional district.

The Republican candidate in that race, Yvette Herrell, impounded the county's absentee ballots and conducted an audit which identified some irregularities. Herrell did not contest the election in court, but in recent campaign ads for the 2020 primaryshe has claimed "on Election Day, we won, but the Democrats took it away."

More:Yvette Herrell ad claims Democrats 'took' the election away from her in 2018

Per theDoa Ana County Clerk's office,required voter registration information is verified before an absentee ballot is issued. When absentee ballots are received, they are scanned but not counted before Election Day. The ballots are qualified by the Absent Voter Board, an appointed body that may not include more than two judicial members from the same political party.

The volunteer board may begin qualifying ballots as early as the Thursday before Election Day, examining outer envelopes to check for voters' signatures. Absentee voters also are provided with an inner "secrecy envelope."

The state Republican Party filed suit last November accusing the county of improperly qualifying absentee ballots, and seekinga declaratory judgment by the court on the interpretation of the law.

Algernon D'Ammassa can be reached at 575-541-5451,adammassa@lcsun-news.comor @AlgernonWrites on Twitter.

Read or Share this story: https://www.lcsun-news.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/03/08/new-mexico-primary-2020-voter-guide-what-you-need-know/4954364002/

See the original post:
New Mexico primaries are on June 2: Are you ready? Here's what you need to know - Las Cruces Sun-News

Heres a list of write-in candidates for Inland races on March 3 ballot – Press-Enterprise

A list of certified write-in candidates for Californias March 3 primary election was released Friday, Feb. 21, by Secretary of State Alex Padillas office.

The list includes candidates seeking offices representing parts of the Inland Empire. Voters have to write in each candidates name and if that candidate is one of the top two vote-getters, he or she will advance to the Nov. 3 general election and be listed on the November ballot.

Ballots with write-in candidates take longer to count, and write-in candidates votes will not be included in the initial results posted on the Secretary of States website after polls close March 3.

Heres a look at the write-in candidates for offices in Inland areas:

CONGRESS

8th Congressional District (High Desert, Lake Arrowhead, Running Springs, Inyo and Mono counties): J. Green of San Bernardino, no party preference. Website: http://www.jgreenuscongress2020.org.

31st Congressional District (Colton, Fontana, Grand Terrace, Loma Linda, Redlands, Rialto, Rancho Cucamonga, Upland, San Bernardino): Eugene Weems of Highland, no party preference. Website: http://www.eugeneweems.com.

36th Congressional District (the Pass, Hemet, San Jacinto, Coachella Valley, Blythe): Gina Chapa of Indio, Democrat.

41st Congressional District (Riverside, Perris, Moreno Valley, Jurupa Valley): Anza Akram of Riverside, no party preference.

STATE SENATE

25th Senate District (Claremont, Upland, La Verne, Monrovia, San Dimas, Pasadena, Glendora, Glendale, La Canada Flintridge): Kathleen Hazelton of Upland, Republican; Evan Wecksell of Sunland, Libertarian. Website: http://www.evan4senate.com.

31st Senate District (Riverside, Corona, Norco, Moreno Valley, Eastvale, Jurupa Valley, Perris): Rod D. Taylor of Norco, Republican; John K. Farr of Corona, Libertarian

Read the original post:
Heres a list of write-in candidates for Inland races on March 3 ballot - Press-Enterprise

How New Is the Oren Cass Approach? – National Review

(Pixabay)The public-policy expert has some interesting ideas. But they arent necessarily new ones.

Oren Cass, formerly a domestic-policy adviser to the 2012 presidential campaign of Mitt Romney and a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, has launched a new organization, American Compass. Cass told the Washington Post that its goal is to think about what the post-Trump right-of-center is going to be. This debate is ongoing; Casss contributions to it will be familiar to readers of National Review.

Yet some of Casss immediate claims are worth questioning. Cass bemoans a purported domination of conservatism and the Republican Party by a market fundamentalism in many cases, held entirely in good faith; in some cases, more as a matter of political convenience. He also accuses conservatives of having for decades outsourced their economic thinking to libertarians such that libertarianism is now part of the prevailing orthodoxy (along with a progressive economics that is, he says, its mirror image).

The notion that libertarians have largely controlled the Right probably comes as a surprise to libertarians, who have watched helplessly over the past few decades as government has grown, debt and deficits have expanded, and the Federal Register accrues more pages (even as one of the consistent priorities of what Cass calls the inchoate earthquake of the Trump administration has been a concerted effort to fight this last trend).

Market fundamentalism, then, is a curious choice of villain. Few could survey the actual policy achievements of elected Republicans over the past few decades and claim they reflect that wholesale. Republicans during George W. Bushs presidency may have cut taxes, but they also increased spending (as have Trump-era Republicans), added a new federal agency, expanded an existing federal entitlement, and increased federal involvement in education. Bush himself proclaimed that we have a responsibility that when somebody hurts, government has got to move, imposed unilateral tariffs (as President Trump has done), and spearheaded the TARP bailout of the financial industry, sacrificing free-market principles to save the free-market system, in his words.

President George H. W. Bush famously raised taxes and was never fully on board with what he had called President Reagans voodoo economics. The degree to which Reagan himself was on board with what became known as Reaganomics is the subject of some debate, largely due to his utility as a totem for both sides of this argument. But he did intervene in the economy specifically in behalf of Harley-Davidson. And libertarian economics had very little sway in the actual policy of the Republican Party before Reagan. If Casss dispute is instead with conservative rhetoric irrespective of its purported practitioners actions, then he ought to make that clear. (Few would contest that many elected Republicans have been hypocrites in this regard.)

Some of the participants on Casss side of this argument, which is ongoing, sometimes act as though the very idea of government involvement in the economy were both brand new and some incredible panacea for our ills. The truth, toward which Cass gestures when he writes that he seeks to reassert ideas like these [that he proposes] for a conservative coalition that once understood them intuitively, is that skepticism of the free market has a long history within the conservative tradition. Before neoconservative became a dirty word, neoconservatives, such as Irving Kristol, were offering Two Cheers for Capitalism. As far back as 1957, National Review itself dissented from the market fundamentalism of Ayn Rand in Atlas Shrugged, via Whittaker Chamberss famous review. Just a decade ago, there were the reformocons, who sounded a lot like Cass and company do now in arguing for modest federal support for families and middle-income earners. When these groups made arguments in public, John Galt did not take over the transmission, nor did some Cato Institute grandee keep them from making their points. What Cass seeks to reassert never really left, even if its perceived relative strength has waxed and waned.

This may all seem like angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin stuff. Indeed, much of this debate has the character of a think-tank panel that has spilled out into the real world (Casss specific chosen antagonist in his National Review article is a vice president of the Heritage Foundation). But it is easier to act as though we simply havent tried certain things instead of admitting that we have tried some, and that sometimes they do work, but sometimes they dont. Cass would have a better case that our existing government policy has been inadequate than that we do not have one at all. And why has it been inadequate? Libertarian-leaning economists have had plenty to say about that: in public choice (Buchanan), the distribution of economic information (Hayek), monetary theory (Friedman), and more.

I do not invoke the celebrated insights of some libertarians merely to reject the very idea that the government has a place in the modern economy. I happen to agree with the argument Cass makes in his book The Once and Future Worker that it is foolish to devote immense federal resources to promoting higher education while leaving all other post-high-school paths to a hodgepodge of mostly state-based and private programs. Yet federal economic intervention is hardly the herald of something entirely new, either in the economy as a whole or on the right. A compass can help you find your way, but its even more useful if you know where you already are.

Here is the original post:
How New Is the Oren Cass Approach? - National Review