Mediaboss Marketing

Members of the City Councils Progressive Caucus and liberal activists converged on the steps of City Hall to argue that the NYPDsnew policy of issuing summonses instead of making arrests for possession of small amounts of marijuana does not go far enoughand to push a new bill that would require cops to identify themselves upon making a stop and to explicitly request permission before searching a citizen.

Mayor Bill de Blasios left-leaning allies in the Council argued that the new protocol for civilians caught carrying 25 grams or less of marijuana does nothing to end disproportionate stops and searches of minorities. Studies have shown that whites are more likely to use marijuana, but nonwhites account for roughly 86 percent of weed-related arrests.

Theres nothing progressive with replacing one form of discrimination with another. Were replacing racially discriminatory arrests with racially discriminatory summonses. So it may be progress, but it aint progressive, said Councilman Ritchie Torres, a co-sponsor of the Right to Know Act.

We cannot improve police-community relations without first improving the on-the-ground interactions between police and civilians. And so we are introducing legislation that would bring greateraccountability, that would bring greater transparency, greater constitutionality to the day-to-day interactions between officers and civilians, he added.

Mr. Torres and the bills otheradvocates stressed that the law would not apply to cases where an officer already has a warrant or has probable cause to suspecta crime, and claimed that it simply affirms Fourth Amendment protections of privacycomparing it to the Supreme Court-mandated Miranda Rights which police are required to read upon making an arrest.

Were not creating a new right, were affirming a right that has existed in our constitution and our legal tradition, said Mr. Torres.

Curiously, Mr. Torres praised Mr. de Blasios and Mr. Brattons new approach to marijuana just three days ago.

By implementing a new policy of issuing a summons rather than arresting New Yorkers for possessing small amounts of marijuana, the mayor and commissioner have taken a significant step towards ensuring fewer New Yorkers face the consequences that arrest records bring, Mr. Torres said on November 10 in a joint statement with Councilmen Carlos Menchaca, Donovan Richards and Antonio Reynosoall of whom came out today in support of the Right to Know Act. We commend the Mayor and Commissioner for this move, and we will continue to monitor its implementation Todays announcement will make substantial progress towards rebuilding that relationship.

The Right to Know Act islargely identical to provisions Councilman Brad Lander proposed as part of last years Community Safety Act, which established an inspector general to oversee the NYPD and created new legal limitations on the use of stop-and-frisk. Mr. Landers recommendations, however, were left on the cutting room flooruntil now.

Mr. Torres said the bill had 22 of the 26 votes it would need to pass the Council and make it to Mr. de Blasios desk.The mayor and the police department did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

More here:
Progressives Push Consent as Antidote to Racial Bias in Drug Stops

The big post-election consensus is that Democrats believe, asTheNew York Timesput it, they were missing a broad economic message to enthuse supporters and convert some independents.

So what would that missing narrative be? The point of a narrative is to give people an explanation of what they are experiencing that includes what is wrong, who is responsible, and what we can do about it.

Take a look at two explanations of whats happening that are very similar but different in important ways.

The first, from Republican message guru Frank Luntz, writing inThe New York Times: [F]rom the reddest rural towns to the bluest big cities, the sentiment is the same. People say Washington is broken and on the decline, that government no longer works for them only for the rich and powerful.

The second, from Democratic message advisors James Carville and Stan Greenberg, along with Page Gardner: People believe that the rich are using their influence to rig the system so the economy works for them but not the middle class.

The big difference here is how the common sentiment among Americans that the rich call the shots is framed to suggest a solution. By focusing on the government, Luntz sets up the Republican push for limited government. Or as successful Iowa Republican Senate candidate Joni Ernst said in a debate, When Washington is picking winners and losers, its almost always our Iowa middle-class families that lose.

For Carville, Greenberg, and Gardner, the focus is on the economy being rigged. Or as one ad for Oregons Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley said, It is Jeff leading the fight to hold Wall Street and big banks accountable when they prey on working families and small businesses.

Merkley won and so did Ernst. The explanation, according to progressive pundits, is that Democrats like Merkley who used a populist message which means they connected peoples economic concerns to the rich and powerful who are responsible were successful while Dems who ran away from that message lost. As someone who has been leading theProgressive Economic Narrative(PEN) project, I really wanted to believe that. But as it seemed too easy, I decided to look at some campaigns and see whether it was spin or the truth. It turns out to be the truth.

The first case I looked at was Minnesota Democrat Al Frankens campaign. After eking out a victory in the great Democratic year of 2008, Franken won handily this year, even as Republicans took over the Minnesota House of Representatives. Imagine my smile when I quickly found Franken ads based on the key value statement in ourProgressive Economic Narrative, We all do better when we all do better. This was also a key theme of Minnesotas great progressive senator, Paul Wellstone.

Frankens progressive populism makes a key distinction when he uses the key word in that values phrase, all. As he says in another ad, I work for all Minnesotans. Wall Street wasnt happy about that. But I dont work for Wall Street. I work for you.

Follow this link:
Progressives overlooked winning formula: How Democrats can rebound in 2016

Progressives Launching State-Focused Group To Combat ALEC
Progressives Launching State-Focused Group To Combat ALEC.

By: Aboshihata

Originally posted here:
Progressives Launching State-Focused Group To Combat ALEC - Video

Here #39;s Why Dems Lost big, UK May End Free Speech, Proof Progressives Think You are Stupid

By: The Live Show

See the article here:
Here's Why Dems Lost big, UK May End Free Speech, Proof Progressives Think You are Stupid - Video

The Congressional Progressive Caucus is laying out what it wants from President Barack Obama on immigration executive action, including shielding 7 million undocumented immigrants from deportation a larger figure than the White Houses expected plans would cover.

Democratic Reps. Raul Grijalva of Arizona and Keith Ellison of Minnesota say in a memo that Obama should act swiftly and comprehensively. We should not force deserving individuals and families to wait any longer.

Story Continued Below

The 7 million figure comes from a pair of calculations by the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank in Washington that focuses on immigration.

(From POLITICO Magazine: No surrender on immigration)

About four million undocumented immigrants could be shielded from deportations if Obama extended his executive action to parents or spouses of U.S. citizens, green card holders, and young immigrants whose deportations have been deferred under a 2012 Obama program. An additional 3 million could come with various changes to that 2012 directive, called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, that would broaden the number of immigrants eligible for that program. One example is getting rid of age limits under DACA to qualify, an immigrant must have been younger than 31 as of June 15, 2012 under current requirements.

But Grijalva and Ellison want the administration to consider other factors as well. For instance, the CPC leaders believe that immigrants who wouldve qualified for legalization under a Senate-passed immigration last year should qualify, as well as immigrants who have lived here for three or more years and regularly employed workers.

The program should take into consideration those aspiring citizens who have contributed to their communities and have established a strong work history, regardless of familial ties, Grijalva and Ellison said.

(Also on POLITICO: The GOP plan for Lynch: It's all about immigration)

Obama has pledged to act unilaterally on immigration by the years end, after delaying the executive action under pressure from Senate Democrats anxious about losing their majority.

Read the original post:
Progressives push Obama to shield more immigrants