Yesterday, the West Virginia House of Delegates voted to kill a effort to put a statewide constitutional amendment on the ballot by a vote of 68-30. The Republicans attempted to discharge the bill from committee, but it was blocked from consideration. The House also blocked the move last year. Folks at Fairness West Virginia say they are confident the Senate will do the same in the coming days, but the right-wingers are planning a rally at the statehouse tomorrow, so everyone's staying alert. This follows the Iowa legislature defeating discharge petitions on the same issue two weeks ago and the New Hampshire House voting down efforts last week to put an amendment on the ballot and to repeal the state's duly-passed law. Sometimes these legislative victories don't get enough attention, but they're important.
This morning in Maryland, the Attorney General, Doug Gansler (D) has posted his long-awaited opinion on whether same-sex marriages performed out of state should be recognized in Maryland. Maryland currently limits marriages performed in the state to opposite-sex couples. The Maryland Court of Appeals is hearing a case on this issue. In it, he said:
...the Court of Appeals, when it ultimately rules on this question in a particular case, will likely apply the principle that a marriage that is valid in the place of celebration is valid in Maryland. The opinion reaches this conclusion in light of the evolving state policy, reflected in anti-discrimination laws, domestic partner laws and other legislation, that respects and supports committed intimate same-sex relationships...
The Court of Appeals would start from the general principle that a marriage that is valid in the place of celebration remains valid in Maryland. There is an exception to that rule if the particular marriage is contrary to a strong State public policy. A statute that limits marriage in Maryland to opposite-sex couples could be said to embody a policy against same-sex marriage. However, there are many restrictions in the State's marriage statutes and and the Court of Appeals has not construed the public policy exception to encompass all those restrictions. For example, it has recognized common law marriages from other states, although there is no common law marriage in Maryland, and has recognized a Rhode Island marriage between an uncle and a niece, although a statute prohibits marriage between an uncle and a niece in Maryland. Indeed, the public policy exception is a very limited one that the Court has seldom invoked.
While the matter is not free from all doubt, in our view, the Court is likely to respect the law of other states and recognize a same-sex marriage contracted validly in another jurisdiction. In light of Maryland's developing public policy concerning intimate same-sex relationships, the Court would not readily invoke the public policy exception to the usual rule of recognition.
He also wrote that the General Assembly, Court of Appeals, or state agencies (when acting within their jurisdiction) could take steps to recognize such marriages. In DC, the City Council and Mayor enacted legislation recognizing same-sex marriages from out-of-state, while in New York, Gov. Paterson instructed state agencies to do the same, although Gansler wrote that that situation is not analogous because Paterson was complying with a state court decision, while there is no such decision in Maryland. We'll have to wait and see what happens in Maryland.
The entire opinion is posted here. The Attorney General's opinion is not legally binding, but advisory. I'll post more legal interpretation if it comes.
(This is one of the key battlegrounds moving forward into future elections. Right now, it's a still-fragmented multi-front battle, but that only makes the need for national attention and federal action all the more apparent. - promoted by Paul Rosenberg)
Following an historic turnout in the 2008 election comes a flurry of election reform agendas from both sides of the battle over voting rights. Since November 4, some state lawmakers have seized on the success of early voting and Election Day Registration (EDR) as models for facilitating voter registration, while others appear to have been threatened by the heightened turnout and inspired to introduce restrictive voter ID and proof-of-citizenship bills for the 2009 legislative session.
Following what appears to be significant progress this year in closing participation gaps among historically underrepresented young and minority voters, we review Election Day stories in states with voter ID and EDR laws, and preview next year's legislative battle for election reform.
This morning I'm driving my wife over to the Charles Town (WV) Courthouse so she can cast her early vote for Obama. My son and I have been over there to vote already, but this is the first opportunity Elly has had outside of her teaching schedule. The fact that West Virginia has early voting is something we are very happy about... it gives us a chance to put in some campaign time on election day supporting others in getting out the Obama vote.
Maybe someone out there who knows the inner workings of EMILY's List can explain to me why this group has not put money behind Becky Greenwald, the Democrat challenging loyal Republican foot-soldier Tom Latham in Iowa's fourth Congressional district.
I have been going over the list of Democratic women running for Congress whom EMILY's List is supporting, with a particular focus on the six challengers most recently added to this group in early August. I do not mean to knock any of those candidates, and I recognize that every race has its own dynamic.
However, after comparing Greenwald's race to those of other candidates, I remain puzzled that EMILY's list is not more involved in IA-04.
A few weeks ago, we asked some of our favorite activist friends if they had any friends in West Virginia, and man, did they deliver. Now we just need one more favor from you - to let us know if you have any leftie buddies in Hawaii, North Dakota or Oklahoma who'd like to help liberals organize over a few drinks.
In late April, as we moved closer to Drinking Liberally's 5th anniversary this Thursday, May 29th, we noticed just how close we were to hitting all 50 states, with, until recently, only 4 states left: the Aloha State (HI), the Peace Garden State (ND), the Sooner State (OK) and the Mountain State (WV). With that in mind, we made it our May goal to create Living Liberally chapters in all 50 states by May 29th, and simultaneously celebrate our 5th anniversary and a truly 50-bar strategy. We started by asking you to help us out with West Virginia.
Today, we have not just one, but two new West Virginia chapters soon to officially enter into the network, that will both hold their first meetings in the next few weeks - one in the state capital of Charleston, and one in Martinsburg.
That only leaves three states left - and we're going to have to ask again - know any liberals in Hawaii, North Dakota or Oklahoma?
Please don't make Howard Dean take back his words:
My curiosity got the better of me today and I went over to DemConWatch and counted up how many superdelegates have endorsed from each state or territory. A moving target, of course; the map already needs an update!
Here's the map:
Click to enlarge.
The color of the state shows the margin among declared superdelegates only. The size of the circles is proportional to the superdelegate lead in a given state.
Below, a comparison to the pledged delegate map, some trivia and an update to the county-by-county results map.
Corporate media coverage of the 2008 presidential election has been rightly criticized for its inept analyses, frequent miss-readings of public sentiment, deep bias toward the status quo, and lazy habit of exploiting at-hand narratives that, in the end, are more like tales from another planet.
The progressive movement is all about the restoration of popular democracy, but the corporate media's acceptance of elite quasi-democracy remains a powerful obstacle. This is nowhere as apparent as in its discussion, or lack of a discussion, about racism, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
It is, maybe, the elite media's worst habit. They create or reinforce a public opinion environment and then step out of that environment and pretend they are covering something they themselves have not helped create. If politics is theatrical melodrama, it is as though they write the script, shape the action on stage, and then retreat to the audience and cover events as though they had no role in the production.
The West Virginia vote and the ongoing euphemism "white working class voters" is another telling episode from 2008, Act I.
Update 9--Childers Wins MS-01: The AP and MSNBC just called MS-01 for Childers. That's pretty cool. We are going to win everywhere in November. Landslide city.
Update 8--Very close in Mississippi: Republican Davis closes to only 700 votes, but most of the remaining counties are Democratic, especially the 85%+ Dem county of Prentiss.
Update 7--Narrow Growing Democratic lead in MS-01: Comparing the primary and general election results in the foursix ten multi-precinct counties where 90% or more precincts have returns, Democrat Childers is doing better in three of the fourfour of the sixseven of the nine seven of ten. That is a pretty good sign, though not enough to call the race yet. Almost, however.
Update 6--Kleebn wins Nebraska Senate primary: Even though only 5% is reporting, Scott Kleeb is ahead by an absurd amount in the Nebraska Senate primary. Pretty easy to call an election when someone is ahead by 50%. I won't update this one anymore.
Update 5--McCain still only at 76%: McCain is only at 76% in West Virginia, which is pretty much what he did in Indiana. Kind of funny that about one-quarter of the Republican electorate is still voting against McCain, more than three months after Super Tuesday. Pretty funny.
Update 4--Deceptive margin in MS-01: Childers is well ahead in MS-01 right now, but SSP reports that he is running about even with his results from the primary. So, it still looks like it will be a very close result in MS-01.
Update 3--Tee vee watching is painful: Election nights are the only nights I watch tee vee news. Its pretty painful, as TPM shows, but I did learn that Obama is wearing a flag pin now. I guess the key is just to attack him from the right.
Update 2--Other Dems Still on Ballot: The reason the numbers don't add up to 100% in West Virginia is because the other Democrats are still on the ballot. In particular, Edwards is probably getting a decent percent, and would have been strong here if he was still in the campaign.
Update--Clinton Wins West Virginia: Everyone calls West Virginia for Clinton. No surprise. Let's see what the various final margins will be. Exit poll can be found here. Quick extrapolation from the gender numbers indicates 65%--32%.
As Matt noted below, Obama is going to get crushed in West Virginia tonight. In fact, crushing victories look par for the course the rest of the way out:
Current polling projects that Obama only needs 42.5 superdelegate endorsements between now and June 3rd in order to clinch the nomination on June 4th, at least according to his campaign's count.
'
The Clinton campaign count doesn't help her that much, as Obama only needs 35.8% of the remaining superdelegates, Edwards delegates, and Michigan delegates in order to secure the nomination. It buys her time, but really only until June 15th, and does not change the outcome. Don't expect superdelegates to accept what will be a clearlybogus argument on the popular vote, either. And, as a final problem, one of her pledged delegates switched to Obama today.
Ah, I'll miss the nomination at a glance series. What are your predictions for tonight?
I need a friend in West Virginia...somebody I could have a beer with.
It's been nearly five years since we started drinking liberally in a backyard in Hell's Kitchen. In May, 2003, a few weeks after Mission Accomplished, progressives weren't very hopeful...and we regularly heard the joke: "Guess liberals need a few beers to dull the pain."
Our response: "No, we need a few beers while we organize." From the start, our social club wasn't about sharing depression -- it was about sharing ideas, energy and commitment.
People are now Drinking Liberally all over the country, and it spreads because local liberals grab hold and make it happen....sometimes in the unlikeliest of areas.
Our fifth chapter, beating out such liberal hotbeds as Boston and Austin, was Boise, Idaho, leading Atrios to demand of his readership why Idaho had a chapter and Philadelphia didn't. (A Philadelphia group launched within 24 hours of that blog post; the Boise chapter still meets, and has been visited by their Mayor.)
Salt Lake City -- in a deep red state not known for liberals or drinks -- has a booming chapter. There are two clubs in South Dakota, and three in Mississippi. The Idaho Falls chapter (it always comes back to Idaho) has been involved in local anti-war activism, as have our Wyoming groups.
So...what's the matter with West Virginia?
Actually: West Virginia, North Dakota, Oklahoma and Hawaii. Those are the four hold-out states left as we reach our five-year mark, with no spots for liberals to congregate and organize over a few drinks. But not for long.
Drinking Liberally turns 5 on May 29th. We're kicking off our anniversary month with a Living Liberally fundraiser this Saturday, May 10th, in New York City, honoring CREDO / Working Assets and their political director Becky Bond (with Open Lefters Matt Stoller and Mike Lux on the host committee). During the course of the month, we'll be launching a new website and new tools.
And we're going to hit all 50 states for the first time. If I have to raise a pint in North Dakota myself, we're going to do it.
But I'm hoping I won't have to travel to North Dakota (at least not this month). The 240+ chapters that exist weren't started by me -- they were started by you -- liberals that wanted to gather, build community, share stories and a few pitchers. And now we need you to help realize the social parallel to Dean's 50-State Strategy: our own 50-Bar Strategy, promoting democracy one pint at a time.
I got a call today from Mark Levine, the election protection attorney for Donna Edwards and one in whom I have a good amount of trust, and he told me about a brewing problem in West Virginia which will probably end up disenfranchising thousands of Obama voters. Here's the nub of the issue. West Virginia has an open primary, which means you can vote even if you are an independent. However, if you are a Democrat or a Republican, you are automatically given a normal ballot in a primary. If you are an independent, you are pointed to a touch screen device which does not list a Presidential choice.
If you are an independent, you have the option of requesting a Democratic or Republican ballot so you can vote in the Presidential primary, but you have to request it. And unless you know to request it, you will end up with no vote in the Presidential primary. The Secretary of State has decided not to inform people of this fact, which will leave potentially thousands of voters in West Virginia who came to vote for Obama without a choice.
Independents, in other words, are being disenfranchised. There's a full press release on the flip.
Back on Friday evening, I argued, in a fashion that would have made Michel Foucault proud, that there is no objective, "true," delegate count, but instead only the power each campaign possessed to make its delegate count a reality. In other words, the truth of delegate counts and the power over the selection and credentialing of, not to mention rule making for, delegates are interchangeable concepts. As such, my new goal in delegate counting is not to determine the "true" delegate count, but instead to accurately determine the delegate count being argued for, and kept by, both the Obama and Clinton campaigns. From that point, we will see who has enough power over the process in order to make their delegate count a reality.
Which leads to the following, dueling projections:
Democratic Nomination Delegate Projection
Type
Obama
Clinton
Edwards
Remaining
50% + 1
Obama Count
2,155
2,013
18
230
2,208
Clinton Count
2,070
1,999
37
310
2,208
The disparity in the "remaining" column in the two counts comes from the argument over Florida and Michigan. The Clinton campaign count currently leaves 45 Michigan pledged delegates (all PLEO and at-large), 21 Michigan superdelegates, and 14 Florida superdelegates in the undetermined column. The 45 Michigan pledged delegates will be determined at the state party convention on May 17th, and will allow Clinton to gain some ground in her count. The rest of the "remaining" column in both counts are non-add-on superdelegates from outside Florida and Michigan.
Since it is one of the few times I have been able to apply Michel Foucault to something outside of academia, I am enjoying this new post-modern delegate counting that eschews a belief in an objective delegate reality. Even so, I do actually have a personal preference on how Michigan and Florida should be decided. If I were in charge, I would seat Florida's pledged delegates as is, and seat the pledged delegates from Michigan Clinton 73-55 Obama. From that point, I would strip both states of their superdelegates. This way, the voters of the two states are not punished, but the superdelegates who are responsible putting both states in this mess are. I actually think that this should become the standard punishment for states that flout the primary calendar: keep the pledged delegates, but strip the superdelegates with no possibility of reinstatement. I also really like the idea of superdelegates whining that they should be seated at the convention. That would be an hilarious press conference.
With Clinton + Edwards coming within four delegates of Obama, the possibility of a convention fight looms. In order to avoid fights at the credentials committee, rules committee, or floor of the convention, it is important for Obama to secure the as many of the 28 remaining uncommitted delegates from Michigan as possible, and to improve on the delegate projections for states and territories yet to hold nominating contests. It is also important that the remaining superdelegates commit to a candidate, just as almost every primary voter or caucus goer has already had to commit to a candidate. I still don't see a way for Clinton to pass Obama, short of Edwards moving his delegates to her in a block. Remarkable that Edwards still has an important role to play in the campaign, even at this late date.
Is it April 9th where you are? I think it might be April 10th where I am, but I'm not sure. Anyway, here are the latest polling averages are delegate projections:
The "vacant" column indicates three superdelegates-to-be who have endorsed Obama, but whom are not technically superdelegates yet (vacant Illinois DNC spot, vacant SEIU DNC spot, vacant MD-04 congressional spot). The Michigan and Florida columns add in the superdelegates who have declared, but leave the rest undecided (or, more accurately, "undetermined.") Since we know that Michigan and Florida will be seated, but we just don't know who those delegates will be, that seems like a reasonable way to include those delegations in the count for now.
It may seem strange to be posting a delegate count update from Israel, but people are even talking about it over here. This is a truly global primary.
* = The 14 Iowa delegates for Edwards might switch at the March 15 county caucuses.
The polling that led me to conclude Clinton faces an insurmountable pledged delegate deficit has swung even further in favor of Obama. On March 4th, Obama has pulled slightly closer in Ohio (7.0% down from 7.3%), and slightly further ahead in Texas (1.6% up from 1.0%). Rhode Island is unchanged, while Clinton has pulled closer in Vermont (21.4% down from 25.0%). Obama has pulled nine points closer in Pennsylvania, and seven points further ahead in North Carolina. While West Virginia off-sets most of these gains for Obama, even favorable delegate projections for Clinton show losing eight net pledged delegates between now and May 13th.
Pro-Clinton Delegate Projections, Based On Current Polling
State
Date
Obama
Clinton
P. Delegates
Clinton Poll Margin
P. Delegates
Jun 7
1,193.5
1,033.5
3,253
--
Ohio
Mar 04
65
76
141
+7.0%
Rhode Island
Mar 04
8
13
21
+13.5%
Texas P
Mar 04
63
63
126
-1.0%
Texas C
Mar 04
38
29
67
--
Vermont
Mar 04
9
6
15
-21.4%
Wyoming
Mar 08
7
5
12
--
Mississippi
Mar 11
18
15
33
--
Iowa*
Mar 15
7
7
14
--
Pennsylvania
April 22
75
83
158
+5.0%
Guam
May 03
1
3
4
--
Indiana
May 06
41
31
72
-15.0%
North Carolina
May 06
65
50
115
-14.0%
West Virginia
May 13
9
19
28
+21.0%
Total
NA
407
399
778
--
A deficit of 168 pledged delegates after West Virginia is untenable. Obviously, Clinton needs to change the direction of the campaign, because current delegate math indicates virtually no way for her to win.
Do you live in a safely Democratic Congressional district? Are you eager to add to the Democratic Congressional majority? Want to tie down incumbent Republican resources in a top Democratic House pick-up opportunity?
Adopt our district!
It doesn't matter if you've ever stepped foot in the district before or not, we welcome you here in West Virginia's Second Congressional District.
