ThinkProgress Logo

NEWS FLASH

North Carolina Voters Approve Marriage Inequality Amendment | After months of contentious campaigning on both sides of the issue, the Associated Press is reporting that North Carolina voters have approved Amendment One. The constitutional revision bans not only same-sex marriage, but civil unions and domestic partnerships as well. Voter turnout is expected to break 2008′s primary record of 2.1 million. Opponents received reports earlier in the day that young voters in some areas were given incorrect ballots preventing them from voting on the amendment. Conservatives are celebrating a victory, but the vote count so far seems to mirror polling that consistently found that voters were largely unaware of the full impact of the measure. The majority of people in North Carolina clearly do not support this kind of anti-gay discrimination, but misinformation won the day.

Update

Voters approved the amendment by a 61%-39% margin with all counties reporting, according to unofficial returns from the State Board of Elections.

NEWS FLASH

Colorado Civil Unions Pass Final Committee, Floor Vote Expected Tonight | The Colorado Civil Unions Act has passed its final committee hurdle, the House Appropriations Committee, with a 7-6 vote. There were concerns that the committee was wasting time on bills that won’t make it to the Senate this session and are essentially dead, but it does seem there is enough time for civil unions to proceed. The bill will have to get a House floor vote yet tonight so that it can have its final reading tomorrow, and there’s no guarantee that the controlling Republican leadership will allow it. Stay tuned.

Update

During the committee discussion, Rep. Marsha Looper (R) advanced two amendments to create extra exceptions for church-based schools and therapists to not recognize (discriminate) against civil unions. There will have to be enough Republican support to strip these amendments during tonight’s floor debate so that the bill remains identical to the Senate version, because there is not enough time in the session for the Senate to reconsider it as amended.

Economy

The Unemployment Rate Would Be A Full Point Lower Without Public Sector Job Losses

By Pat Garofalo on May 8, 2012 at 6:55 pm

2011 was a bad year for public sector employees, with an average of 22,000 public sector jobs disappearing every month. And the two years before it weren’t much better. In fact, “the last three years of job losses at the state and local government level has been the most dramatic since Labor Department records began in 1955.”

According to the Wall Street Journal, the unemployment rate would be a full point lower — at 7.1 percent — if these job losses hadn’t happened:

The Labor Department’s establishment survey of employers — the jobs count that it bases its payroll figures on — shows that the government has been steadily shedding workers since the crisis struck, with 586,000 fewer jobs than in December 2008. Friday’s employment report showed the cuts continued in April, with 15,000 government jobs lost. [...]

The unemployment rate would be far lower if it hadn’t been for those cuts: If there were as many people working in government as there were in December 2008, the unemployment rate in April would have been 7.1%, not 8.1%.

These cuts have occurred because of state budget cuts as well as budget cuts at the federal level. President Obama addressed this issue today, saying, “the only time government employment has gone down during a recession has been under me. So I make that point just so you don’t buy into this whole bloated government argument that you’re hearing.”

Justice

Far-Right Representative Comes Out In Support Of Protecting Undocumented Victims Of Domestic Violence

By Annie-Rose Strasser on May 8, 2012 at 6:30 pm

In a move that bucks the trend of many of his conservative colleagues, far-right Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) came out today in support of protecting undocumented immigrants from domestic violence. During the House Judiciary Committee mark up of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), Poe offered an amendment to ensure that undocumented people would be protected under the bill — much like the amendments added by the Senate Democrats in their reauthorization of VAWA.

Though his provisions do not go far enough, or match Democratic efforts to protect the undocumented, they may build support among Republicans, who are hoping to pass a version of VAWA that violates the confidentiality of undocumented people.

Poe, generally not a fan of the undocumented community in his home state, argued that protections for undocumented victims are necessary and humane:

POE: The concept and the law of VAWA is good public policy. It is also good public policy that we understand that in immigrant communities there is a lawless element that preys on immigrants, sometimes that lawless element is also immigrants– immigrant gangs in some instances. And they use intimidation and fear tactics and one they use many times is the concept that they can commit crimes against other immigrants–spouses, children– and if the victim dare report the crime to law enforcement, the immigrant criminal will make sure that there is a deportation proceeding that takes place.

Whether that is true or not, that they are able to succeed in that, victims fear that. They fear the deportation because of being a victim. Public policy should be, in this country, that if you are a victim of crime, that should be paramount to us as a nation, as opposed to allowing intimidation and fear from those who wish to prey on immigrants to keep them from reporting crime. When crime is committed it effects our entire community and it effects our social stability. So I’m a supporter of VAWA.

Watch it:

Poe has been an outspoken advocate for victims of domestic violence, and has previously sponsored an international Violence Against Women Act.

Economy

Nearly Two-Thirds Of Private-Sector Jobs Added In Last 50 Years Came Under Democratic Presidents

By Travis Waldron on May 8, 2012 at 5:45 pm

Republicans have made a show of their supposed job creation efforts over the past three years, decrying “job killing” regulations and taxes on “job creators.” They have a web site — 4jobs.gov — devoted to their job creation agenda and have even named legislation the JOBS Act. They have also slammed President Obama, saying that he fails to understand the type of environment the private sector needs to spark job growth.

Despite the GOP’s big talk, historical data shows that private sector job creation is better when a Democrat occupies the White House. Since President John F. Kennedy took office in 1961, in fact, nearly two-thirds of the 66 million private sector jobs added to the economy have come under Democratic presidents, Bloomberg reports:

The BGOV Barometer shows that since Democrat John F. Kennedy took office in January 1961, non-government payrolls in the U.S. swelled by almost 42 million jobs under Democrats, compared with 24 million for Republican presidents, according to Labor Department figures.

Democrats hold the edge though they occupied the Oval Office for 23 years since Kennedy’s inauguration, compared with 28 for the Republicans. Through April, Democratic presidents accounted for an average of 150,000 additional private-sector paychecks per month over that period, more than double the 71,000 average for Republicans.

After the economy added more than 20 million jobs under President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, it fared much worse under his successor, Republican George W. Bush, who added just 1 million jobs in eight years. Bush had the “worst track record for job creation since the government began keeping records,” according to the Wall Street Journal. The private sector continued to shed jobs in the opening months of the Obama presidency, but as of April, those jobs have all returned.

Republicans, for all of their hatred of government, actually have a slightly better record than Democrats when it comes to creating public sector jobs. Under Obama, local, state, and federal governments have shed more than 600,000 jobs, making the Great Recession the first in modern history in which the public sector lost jobs. Had those jobs been maintained, the unemployment rate would be 7.1 percent, a full point lower than it is now.

NEWS FLASH

Documenting The Agony Of Family Rejection: ‘It Could Happen To You’ | The Family Acceptance Project has extensively documented the severe consequences when parents and other family members condemn a child for being gay or trans. Because of marriage inequality, these rejections can impact an individual’s partner as well, particularly in emergency situations. One year ago, Shane Bitney Crone lost the love of his life, Tom Bridegroom, in an accidental fall. The two had bought a house and started a business together. Bridegroom’s family was not accepting at all, and when he died, they cut Bitney off entirely, with threats of violence if he even tried to attend his partner’s funeral. He has documented the agony of his love’s death and the aftermath in a poignant video, and is calling on everyone to support #EqualLoveEqualRights:

Politics

Mysterious Mitt: 5 Big Issues Romney Is Ducking

By Igor Volsky on May 8, 2012 at 5:45 pm

On Tuesday, the Republican National Committee’s National Hispanic Outreach Director claimed that Mitt Romney’s “still deciding what his position on immigration is,” kicking off a firestorm of criticism from reporters and bloggers wondering how the GOP’s presumptive nominee — a man who had been running for office for the last 18 years — had no defined view on immigration. The campaign walked back the remarks minutes later, linking to a page on the Romney campaign site touting his harsh immigration proposals.

But this episode is just the latest in a series of instances in which the candidate and his campaign have been unsure, uncertain, or unwilling to articulate a clear stance on an important policy issue for fear of offending a particular political demographic. It’s a careful dance that many politicians practice, but something in which Romney has engaged in with greater frequency than most:

– VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT: As Congress considers a re-authorization of the Violence Against Women Act, Romney has claimed that he wasn’t “familiar with” the measure, said that he “supports it” and “hopes it can be reauthorized without turning it into a political football.” Conveniently, he has not specified if he supports House Republicans in their quest to exclude LGBT people, immigrants, and Native Americans from protections.

– EQUAL PAY: Although Romney later promised to preserve the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, his campaign was initially unsure if Romney supported the measure, telling Huffington Post journalist Sam Stein, “Sam, we’ll get back to you on that.” In a follow-up interview with ABC’s Diane Sawyer, Romney refused to say if he would have signed the 2009 law.

– PAYROLL TAX HOLIDAY: In December of 2011, as the two chambers of Congress debated different versions of a bill to extend the payroll tax cut, Romney wouldn’t say if he sided with the House or Senate, dismissing the issue as an “internal battle.” “I’d like to see this payroll tax holiday extended,” Romney said, without saying for how long. He downplayed the debate as being “deep in the weeds” and offered only platitudes about hoping that the House and Senate “come together” to “get the job done.” “I’m not going to throw gasoline on what is already a fire,” he added.

– MISSISSIPPI PERSONHOOD: Romney repeatedly refused to take a position on Mississippi’s proposed personhood amendment, which voters overwhelmingly defeated in November. A campaign spokesperson told the New York Times, “Mitt Romney is pro-life,” but pointedly “declined to answer questions on personhood specifically, or on his stance toward various forms of birth control.” Only after the measure failed did the campaign claim that Romney “believes these matters should be left up to states to decide.”

– AFGHANISTAN: Romney’s electoral strategy seems to be to pander to those Americans that want to get out of Afghanistan, while also aiming to please those who want to stay — all by washing his hands of the entire decision and leaving it up to U.S. military commanders in Afghanistan. “I would listen to the generals,” Romney said on Newshour in November, “then of course I would pursue that course.” As the New York Times recently observed, “Mr. Romney has said repeatedly that he wants to bring troops home as soon as possible, but with the significant caveat that such a drawdown takes place when ‘our generals think it’s O.K.’ or ‘as soon as that mission is complete.’”

We’ll update the list as the situation warrants.

Climate Progress

Heartland-Gate Day 5: Green Coalitions Dump Institute, Forbes Slams Anthony Watts of WattsUpWithThat

By Joe Romm on May 8, 2012 at 5:32 pm

Conservation Hawks: “We condemn the intellectually bankrupt and morally bereft Heartland Institute.”

It is the fifth day of the Heartland Institute’s online offensive comparing people who accept climate science with serial killers and mass murderers. The billboard is down, but the radical climate deniers of Heartland have explicitly refused to apologize for the ad. Worse, they’ve kept the more offensive hate speech on their website.

Unsurprisingly, corporate sponsors have started to flee, senior staff have left, partnerships have started to crumble, and all but the most extreme anti-science deniers have condemned Heartland. But as we’ll see, the origins of this smear go back many years for both Heartland and its long-time partner, Anthony Watts of the blog WattsUpWithThat.

First, Heartland has been quietly dropped from two significant coalitions with top environmental organizations, Climate Progress has learned. Under pressure from Forecast the Facts and Greenpeace, insurers who funded Heartland’s Washington DC vice president, Eli Lehrer, ceased their support and helped to convince Lehrer to leave the organization. With Lehrer’s departure, the Heartland Institute has been excised from the websites of two green coalitions:

The Smarter Safer Coalition, an effort to reform the National Flood Insurance Program by top insurers, environmental organizations including American Rivers, the Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation, Environmental Defense Fund, Defenders of Wildlife, Ceres, and the Nature Conservancy, alongside conservative groups such as the Competitive Enterprise Institute, American Conservative Union, and Americans for Tax Reform

The Green Scissors Campaign, an initiative to reduce anti-environmental government spending with Friends of the Earth and Taxpayers for Common Sense.

According to leaked documents, Lehrer brought about $700,000 a year into the Heartland Institute for his Center on Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate, including the majority of Heartland’s corporate funding. The insurers who announced their departure from Heartland include the Association of Bermuda Insurers and Reinsurers, XL Group, Renaissance Re, Allied World Assurance, and State Farm Insurance.

Corporate sponsors of the Heartland Institute who have resisted calls to end their financial support include Microsoft, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Comcast, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Heartland’s seventh climate-denier conference will take place in Chicago in two weeks.  To add your voice to the petition calling on corporations to end support for the Heartland Institute, click here.

I don’t know what is more amazing, truly, that the Heartland organization collectively ever thought this major messaging campaign was a good idea — or that they refuse to apologize or take down any of the absurd attacks on climate scientists and reporters from their website.

Every day, new groups condemn Heartland. Conservation Hawks, Inc., “a group of hunters and anglers working to defend America’s sporting heritage,” released a powerful statement condemning Heartland, which concluded:

Read more

Justice

Romney Immigration Adviser’s Organization Comes Out Against Rubio’s Watered-Down DREAM Act

By Amanda Peterson Beadle on May 8, 2012 at 5:20 pm

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), a potential vice president contender and Mitt Romney supporter, is pushing a version of the DREAM Act that would not offer immigrant students a direct path to citizenship. But Romney immigration adviser Kris Kobach, who wrote Arizona’s extreme anti-immigrant laws while he was senior counsel at the legal arm of the anti-immigrant Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), declared the proposed bill to be unacceptable.

And FAIR, where Kobach continues to serve as “of counsel” of their legal arm, is opposing Rubio’s bill as well, deriding the idea as a political gimmick:

Although Rubio denies that his plan is amnesty, it would allow illegal aliens who arrived in the United States prior to age 16 to gain legal status and remain in the U.S. indefinitely. Rubio has also indicated that his DREAM Act would not preclude beneficiaries from gaining citizenship at some future time.

Rubio’s efforts have one clearly stated objective. Republicans believe that introducing their own version of the DREAM Act will help attract Latino voters.

There is an obvious split in the Republican party over immigration policy, and at some point, Romney will have to decide if he stands by his harsh anti-immigrant positions during the GOP primary or if he will try to Etch-a-Sketch them away to appeal to more moderate voters.

Election

Sen. Claire McCaskill Getting Beefed Up Security After Tea Party Activist Declares ‘We Have To Kill The Claire Bear’

By Alex Seitz-Wald on May 8, 2012 at 5:15 pm

Sen. Clarie McCaskill (D-MO)

Police are assigning extra security to Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) after a Tea Party activist declared at a rally last week, “We have to kill the Claire Bear ladies and gentlemen.” The rally was hosted by the group Tea Party Express, which is endorsing McCaskill challenger Sarah Steelman (R), who was in attendance at the rally.

Scott Boston, a St. Louis Tea Party activist, said, “She walks around like she’s some sort of Rainbow Brite Care Bear or something but really she’s an evil monster.” “We have to kill the Claire Bear,” he added.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that local police are performing more patrols around the senator’s house at the request of the Capitol Police, and that she now has extra security at public events.

Steelman has not made a public comment condemning Boston’s comments, despite being present at the event supporting her, and neither have McCaskill’s other GOP challengers, Rep. Tod Akin (R-MO) or John Brunner. Boston later said he did not intend the comment to be a threat.

In a statement provided to ThinkProgress, Missouri Democratic Party spokesperson Caitlin Legacki, said, “The kind of language in this threat is totally unacceptable and needs to be immediately renounced by Todd Akin, John Brunner and Sarah Steelman.”

“What makes America different from the rest of the world is that we settle our political disagreements without threats of violence. Akin, Brunner and Steelman need to make it crystal clear to their supporters that this kind of language will not be tolerated in any venue under any circumstances. If they refuse to do so, these three candidates are sending a clear message that they endorse the kind of inflammatory language that could lead to violence, or something worse,” Legacki said.

Update

Huffington Post gets a comment from McCaskill’s opponent, Sarah Steelman: “I may disagree with the words Mr. Boston chose in his statement, but I understand his frustration and I emphatically support his right to express his views”

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up