Nebraska

The Reality Of The Next Decade: Split Government Control!

Ronald Leave a comment

It is now clear that our political system is facing a long period, probably at least a decade, of split government control on the national level!

The Democratic Party has a long term edge with the electorate, as a result of the two Barack Obama Presidential victories, with the only difference being the loss in 2012 of Indiana and North Carolina.

But with the growing Hispanic and Latino population in Arizona, Texas, and Georgia, the likelihood of those states turning “blue’ from “red” over this decade, is becoming more likely, and with that manifestation, the Electoral College situation will become much more one sided than it is now, and yet still allow for some states to wander over to the other side without affecting a Democratic victory for the White House.

Additionally, with the surprise gain in seats by the Democrats in the US Senate, only losing one state, Nebraska, and gaining Maine, Massachusetts, and Indiana in return, and more Republican seats up for reelection in 2014, the likelihood of the Senate staying majority Democratic for the long term, continues to grow.

However, with the gerrymandering of seats by Republican legislatures and Governors in 2010, even though the Democrats won more votes for the US House of Representatives, the Republicans were able to hold on to the majority, although reduced by about eight seats. The Democrats will have trouble gaining 17 seats or more because of the gerrymandering, and even if they do gain a slight edge, could easily lose it two or four years after winning the majority.

So the likelihood of a Democratic President, Democratic Senate, and a Republican House becomes more a normal situation until at least the next reapportionment of seats after the 2020 Census, and the Presidential and Congressional Elections of that year, but with the advantage that 2020 is a Presidential year, while 2010 was not.

So this means the odds of a long range stalemate and gridlock in American politics are clear cut!

A Fascinating Idea! Former Republican Senators Richard Lugar And Chuck Hagel As Secretary Of State And Secretary Of Defense In Second Obama Term!

Ronald Leave a comment

A fascinating idea has surfaced, which is very exciting in many ways.

It is clear that there will be a reshuffling of President Obama’s cabinet over the next few months, and two openings will certainly be likely in the State Department and the Defense Department.

For State, it has been suggested that Senator John Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and 2004 Democratic Presidential nominee, might take the post. Also, Susan Rice, United Nations Ambassador, is mentioned. Both would be wonderful in the position.

BUT there is a school of thought that IF President Obama wanted to show bipartisanship, he could do what Franklin D. Roosevelt did in World War II–pick Republicans who are intelligent, sane, responsible, and who are no longer serving in the Senate, to serve in his cabinet, and the State Department would offer a great location to put soon to be former Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana, an acknowledged foreign policy expert, and a man who has worked well with Obama when they were both Senators, and went off to Russia to promote the safe collection of nuclear weapons stockpiles in 2005-2006. Lugar is a wonderful statesman, and would fill the job with excellence and professionalism. And he has been, like Kerry, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman in the past, and is still the ranking member of the committee until he leaves the Senate in January.

Additionally, as suggested earlier, former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, a Vietnam War veteran and military expert, would be an excellent choice to serve in the Pentagon as Secretary of Defense. Always highly regarded and respected, Hagel would add stature to our Defense Department.

Such appointments would neutralize, to a great extent, Republican attacks on President Obama in the areas of foreign policy, national security, and defense policy.

If FDR could have Republicans Henry Stimson as Secretary of War, and Frank Knox as Secretary of the Navy in 1940 and after, why cannot Barack Obama make a smart move that would help his administration to succeed, and also promote bipartisanship, at a time when it is desperately needed?

Urgent To Defeat “Tea Party” Republicans Running For Senate—Akin, Mourdock, Fischer

Ronald 4 Comments

There are three “Tea Party” type Republicans running for Senate seats in the Midwest, who are facing tough fights by Democratic opponents, and the hope is that all three of these irresponsible Republican nominees are defeated.

The three are:

Congressman Todd Akin, challenging incumbent Senator Claire McCaskill in Missouri.

State Treasurer Richard Mourdock, challenging Congressman Joe Donnelly in Indiana.

State Senator Deb Fischer, challenging former Senator Bob Kerrey in Nebraska.

Akin, Mourdock, and Fischer represent extremism that would create more conflict and confrontation in the US Senate. And Akin and Mourdock have made outrageous statements about rape, angering any decent person who cares about women’s rights.

McCaskill has been a courageous Senator, and Kerrey was once a Presidential candidate twenty years ago, who now has been endorsed by his former Republican Senate colleague, Chuck Hagel, a true example of crossing the aisle. Both Kerrey and Hagel were outstanding US senators, and once could wish that both were still in the Senate, but now there is an opportunity to return Kerrey to the Senate.

Donnelly is a responsible moderate Democratic Congressman, who would be a great improvement over Mourdock although neither would fully replace retiring Republican Senator Richard Lugar, defeated by Mourdock in the Indiana Senatorial primary this past spring.

These are certainly key Senatorial races to watch on Tuesday night!

Wing Nuts Of 2010, And Now Of 2012–Lost Republican Opportunities In The Senate Then, And Possibly, Now!

Ronald Leave a comment

The Republican Party is infamous for running wing nuts for the Senate, and as a result, lost the chance for control of the US Senate in 2010.

They ran such characters as Christine O’Donnell in Delaware; Ken Buck in Colorado; Sharron Angle in Nevada; and Joe Miller in Alaska.

The first three were so whacky that the Democrats held on to the seats, and kept control of the Senate, with Harry Reid of Nevada remaining Senate Majority Leader. Lisa Murkowski won a miraculous victory in Alaska over Tea Party favored Joe Miller, keeping that seat sane and sensible, while Republican.

At the same time, Rand Paul and Mike Lee won in Kentucky and Utah, respectively, and Marco Rubio was also backed by the Tea Party, and now Paul and Rubio are likely leaders of the party in the near future, no matter how right wing they are!

Now we have in 2012 the following: Ted Cruz in Texas, backed by the Tea Party and likely to win a Senate seat; Debbie Fischer in Nebraska, who faces former Democratic Senator and Presidential seeker Bob Kerrey, who faces a tough battle; Richard Murdock, who defeated respectable conservative Richard Lugar in Indiana; and now, Todd Akin, challenging Senator Claire McCaskell in Missouri.

With the likelihood of Cruz, Fischer, and Murdock victories for the Tea Party and the right wing of the social conservatives, the only thing that may stop GOP control of the US Senate is the Todd Akin controversy, but in theory, Akin could win that race too, and with only three or four seats gain needed to win control of the Senate for the Republicans, the future makeup of the Senate is disturbing!

It should be pointed out that the Texas and Indiana seats coming up for election are already GOP seats, so only Nebraska and maybe Missouri would be gains for the Tea Party element as things stand now! But going from Kay Bailey Hutchison and Richard Lugar to Ted Cruz and Richard Murdock is a major step backward toward further deadlock, confrontation, and paralysis in a Senate already with a terrible reputation

A Liberal-Progressive Mount Rushmore And A Conservative Mount Rushmore: Who Would Be On Such Mount Rushmores?

Ronald 9 Comments

Last Friday, Joe Scarborough and MORNING JOE on MSNBC had distinguished historians assess which Presidents might be on a new, second Mount Rushmore, if such a monument were ever built.

This brought to mind the idea of who might be on a Liberal-Progressive Mount Rushmore, and who would be on a Conservative Mount Rushmore, if such were ever constructed anywhere in America.

This is mostly just interesting scholarly speculation, but here goes my suggestions for such honoring on both sides of the political spectrum.

LIBERAL/PROGRESSIVE MOUNT RUSHMORE

Robert La Follette, Sr.–Republican Governor (1900-1906) and Senator (1906-1925) of Wisconsin–Mr. Progressive of the early 20th century and 1924 Progressive Party nominee for President.

George Norris–Republican Congressman (1902-1912) and Senator (1912-1942) of Nebraska–the most creative reform figure and longevity of the first half of the 20th century, a bridge between the Progressive Era of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson and the New Deal of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Hubert H. Humphrey–Democratic Mayor Of Minneapolis (1945-1949), Senator (1949-1964, 1970-1978) of Minnesota, and Vice President of the United States (1965-1969) and Democratic Presidential nominee in 1968, who had the most creative record of promoting reform in the years after World War II throughout the 1960s.

Ted Kennedy–Democratic Senator (1962-2009) of Massachusetts, the fourth longest serving US Senator in American history, and the most creative reformer in the years from the 1970s until his death in 2009.

A possible alternative would be Democratic Senator George McGovern of
South Dakota (1922-2012), who ran for President in 1972, and was a major critic of the Vietnam War, one of the most decent men ever in American politics, serving in the Senate from 1963-1981.

CONSERVATIVE MOUNT RUSHMORE

Arthur Vandenberg–Republican Senator (1928-1951) of Michigan, who opposed the New Deal and was an isolationist in foreign policy through World War II, but then became an internationalist in support of the United Nations and President Harry Truman’s Cold War policy against the Soviet Union after World War II, and potential Presidential candidate twice.

Robert Taft–Republican Senator (1939-1953) of Ohio, son of President and Chief Justice William Howard Taft, promoted the anti labor union Taft-Hartley Act, promoted an isolationist foreign policy, and considered Mr. Conservative by his party, and a potential Presidential candidate numerous times.

Barry Goldwater–Senator (1952-1964, 1968-1986) of Arizona, succeeding Robert Taft as Mr. Conservative, and 1964 Republican nominee for President, becoming the hero of conservatives long term, and having an effect on President Ronald Reagan.

Ronald Reagan–Republican Governor of California (1966-1974), and President of the United States (1981-1989), after a career as a movie actor, influenced by the principles and ideas of Barry Goldwater, who he publicly backed in a famous speech in 1964.

The author welcomes commentary on these selections!

A Doomsday Scenario: A Possible 269-269 Electoral College Tie For The Presidency!

Ronald Leave a comment

All serious judgment about the Presidential Election of 2012 demonstrates that President Barack Obama should have no problem winning the Electoral College, since he won nine “swing states” in 2008, and is expected to win a majority, if not all, of those nine states again.

But a doomsday scenario has emerged, of what COULD happen if everything went awry!

And that doomsday scenario would lead to a 269-269 Electoral College tie, when 270 electoral votes are needed to win the election, no matter what the total popular vote is!

This 269 electoral vote total for Obama assumes he would win one of the five Nebraska electoral votes as he did in 2008,. when he won the Second Congressional District around Omaha. Nebraska and Maine are the only two states that allow splitting of electoral votes, although such an idea has been broached before, but not adopted elsewhere.

Without Nebraska’a one electoral vote of five, Obama could lose to Mitt Romney 270-268!

This whole scenario is based on the idea that Obama loses Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Indiana, and New Hampshire, all of which he won in 2008, while keeping Pennsylvania, Iowa, New Mexico, Colorado and Nevada.

This whole scenario is a long shot, but with a country so evenly divided in Congress, who can say that it is not a possibility, as terrible as it sounds!

And if a tie developed, the House of Representatives in January would pick the President, with each state having one vote, so which party controlled the new House and had at least 26 state delegations of their party would choose the President, while the Senate would pick the Vice President, with each state having one vote, but a 50-50 tie a potential in the Senate. Imagine if that happened, and if 25 states had a Republican majority in their House delegation, and the other 25 states had a Democratic majority in their House delegation, keeping in mind that seven states have only one House member–Vermont, Delaware, Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana and Wyoming!

What a mess, but again the likelihood is quite low of such a scenario occurring!

Retention Of Democratic Controlled Senate Likely, With News Of Bob Kerrey Running And Olympia Snowe NOT Running

Ronald 1 Comment

The news that former Nebraska Senator Bob Kerrey has decided to run for Ben Nelson’s Senate seat in Nebraska, and that Olympia Snowe has decided to retire from her Maine Senate seat are two good omens for the Democrats keeping control of the US Senate.

Kerrey was the only Democrat who would have been able to retain the Senate seat given up by conservative Democrat Ben Nelson.

With Snowe, a moderate Republican, retiring due to the exasperation at the lack of compromise in the Senate, it is nearly impossible for any Republican to take the seat from her, as Maine is a clearly blue state which accepted two moderate Republican Senators (Snowe and Susan Collins), but will not accept a Tea Party type similar to Governor Paul LePage for the Senate seat, and there seem to be no other types except Tea Party available to run for the GOP in Maine.

So the odds of a Democratic Senate in 2013 have been much improved by these events!

The Keystone Pipeline Controversy: Crucial Issue For America’s Future

Ronald Leave a comment

The issue of promoting domestic sources of energy in a world where America depends too much on foreign sources of oil has led to the promotion by the Republican Party of the proposed Keystone Pipeline from Canada down to Texas as a major solution that must be approved by the federal government before it can move ahead.

But it is not all that easy and settled that the Keystone Pipeline is a good direction for American energy and the American environment.

Here are the facts:

The Pipeline would go from Alberta, Canada through Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Iowa, and Texas.

The chance of greenhouse gas emissions and oil spills in sensitive areas is worrisome, plus the reality of a seismic zone with earthquake activity as high as 4.3 magnitude in 2002.

The danger to one of the largest water supplies, the Ogallala Aquifer, a major fresh water source, which spans eight states, provides drinking water to 2 million people and $20 billion in agriculture in the major area of the Farm Belt, could devastate the Midwest economy and deny safe drinking water in case of a disaster similar to the Gulf Oil Spill.

The danger to the environment would include harm to migratory birds and other wildlife, and far more devastating damages from tar sands oil which is more polluting than regular petroleum, and could cause long term damage for centuries, all in the name of profit over safety.

The Republican Governor of Nebraska, Dave Heineman, has opposed the project because of concern as to its effect on Nebraska economically and environmentally. He has signed legislation to divert the pipeline away from sensitive areas in the state, because of concern over its long range impact. So it is not just Democrats who are concerned over the project.

The Koch Brothers, deeply involved in conservative causes, are a major influence on convincing the Republicans in Congress to pressure Barack Obama to agree to the project as part of a tax deal extension for the bulk of 2012, which means “blackmail” is being utilized in reality.

The idea of major employment growth is belied by the facts that only a few thousand permanent jobs would be created, having a negligible effect on the unemployment rate.

The effect on the entire energy picture in America would also be negligible, hardly a blip in the entire controversy over becoming less dependent on foreign oil. It is simply an attempt to force the pipeline on America despite its insignificant impact on both jobs and energy supply.

President Obama wants to delay the project decision moving forward to 2013, but it could become a hot political issue in 2012, and is a controversy which needs a lot more exposure and discussion before an agreement that could harm the long range future of the nation.

Time For Reality Check On Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment And Third Party Potential For Success In Presidential Elections

Ronald Leave a comment

Unfortunately, many Americans, probably a vast majority, live with a false set of facts about American government, as it stands under the Constitution. There is a major need for a reality check!

Many people, including Republicans in Congress, seem to think that a balanced budget amendment will solve our economic problems, when there is absolutely no chance of that occurring! Any constitutional amendment required a two thirds vote of the House of Representatives, followed by a two thirds vote of the US Senate, and then a majority vote in each of the two houses in three fourths or 38 of the 50 states, with the only exception being Nebraska, which only has a one house or unicameral legislature.

We are not ever going to bring about 290 out of 435 votes in the House of Representatives and 67 out of 100 votes in the Senate for such an amendment! Only 36 proposed amendments have EVER achieved this two thirds vote, and the number of failed amendments is in the hundreds over our history!

But notice, even with 36 amendments making it through the Congress, we have only 27 amendments, telling us that NINE amendments failed to gain a three fourths support of state legislatures. Another way to put it is that IF there is a one vote majority in one of the two houses of the state legislatures against an amendment in just THIRTEEN states at a minimum, the amendment fails to be added to the Constitution.

There is no realistic possibility of a balanced budget amendment EVER making it into the Constitution, no matter what politicians say! And were it to happen, it would create a strait jacket, paralyzing us in a time of economic collapse, war, or natural disaster, no matter what limitations are put into such an amendment. It is time for serious minded people to give up the idea that such an amendment will EVER pass, and instead, take responsibility for the fact that the federal government IS necessary, and that we are all going to have to pay more taxes, whether we like it or not, and that it is PATRIOTIC to pay our fair share, including the super wealthy being thankful for their good fortune, and paying the tax level they used to pay from the 1940s through the 1970s, and certainly at the least, the levels of the Bill Clinton years in the White House!

It is also time for “dreamers”, who have the view that a serious third party movement could lead to the election of a President, to get a reality check as well!

Our electoral college system, which can only be changed by a constitutional amendment, which is not going to happen either, prevents a third party candidate from winning, with Theodore Roosevelt performing the best as a third party candidate of the Progressive Party in 1912, but only winning six states and 88 electoral votes, about a third of what is needed to win the White House. The only reason even he did that well was that he was a former President and extremely popular. Such a scenario will NEVER happen again, particularly with the 22nd Amendment, which limits Presidents to two complete terms in office, something not existing in 1912, when Theodore Roosevelt ran for what would have been a third, but non consecutive term as President.

Even if such a thing could happen, a third party candidate without major party backing would have an impossible situation gaining support to govern effectively, as indeed, independent Governor Jesse Ventura of Minnesota discovered in his term from 1999-2003!

For good or for bad, we are stuck with the two party system, and we will be electing a Democrat or a Republican for the Presidency for the long term future!

So forget the constitutional amendment route for a balanced budget, and ignore the thoughts of a third party movement electing a President, and instead accept the reality of the American future–we need to work within the system and just pick better people for public office, as we always have the right to do by voting and organizing, and stop hating our government, which with its faults, is still essential and necessary in our daily lives, as much as we would wish otherwise in our dreams!

More On Hispanic And Latino Numbers In American Population! And The Shift In African American Population!

Ronald Leave a comment

The Census Bureau informs us that Hispanics and Latinos have not just become one out of every six Americans, a total of 50 million in the population in 2010.

They have also become the largest minority group in 191 of the country’s 366 metropolitan areas!

Even in states such as Nebraska and Oklahoma, they have had a growing impact!

A 42 percent increase in their numbers is astounding, at the same time that many African Americans are migrating back to the South after a century of leaving the South for the North!

And the number of white Anglos have fallen in all metropolitan areas, and have seen, for instance a drop in Las Vegas from 60 percent to 48 percent!

So the political effects will be major in scope in coming years, including the reapportionment battle in many state legislatures, which will have a long range effect on the fortunes of the Republicans and the Democrats!