The Democratic National Committee voted on Saturday to significantly curtail the power of superdelegates and make presidential caucuses more accessible.
The reform package, pushed by DNC Chairman Tom Perez and allies of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, among others, passed overwhelmingly despite objections from a vocal minority of its membership at the DNC’s summer meeting two years after the process started.
“Today is a historic day for our party. We passed major reforms that will not only put our next presidential nominee in the strongest position possible, but will help us elect Democrats up and down the ballot, across the country.” said Perez.
The change will prohibit superdelegates from voting for president at the party’s 2020 convention, unless the outcome is already assured or it deadlocks, which hasn’t happened in decades. The vast majority of superdelegates sided with Hillary Clinton over Sanders in their primary fight two years ago.
The new rules will also make caucuses more accessible by requiring state parties to accept absentee votes, addressing concerns that the caucuses are less democratic than primaries because they require people to physically attend the events in order to participate in the presidential nominating process in their state.
Critics of the new reforms argued that it would disenfranchise party leaders and create tension between Democratic lawmakers and their constituents while others argued it gave Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist, undue influence over the DNC.
The guys of Full Frontal Freedom understand the importance of motivating the LGBT community to vote in midterm elections, so they asked all of the hottest gay YouTubers to come tell us how much they love to vote!
GET OUT AND VOTE!
Special thanks to all the boys who made the video.
Colby Melvin on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/ColbyJ88 or on twitter and Instagram @colbymelvin
The Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee has scheduled the markup for ENDA (The Employment Non-Discrimination Act) two weeks to the day that the Supreme Court ruled against the Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Proposition 8.
This will be first planned committee vote on the embattled bill in the Senate in more than a decade. The last time ENDA came up before committee was in the spring of 2002, under the committee leadership of the late Sen. Edward Kennedy.
All 12 Democrats on the committee are co-sponsors of the legislation, as is one of the 10 Republicans.
Said Heather Cronk co-director of GetEqual:
“We’re thrilled that Senator Harkin has scheduled a committee vote on ENDA for July 10, and we look forward to Majority Leader Reid keeping his promise to move swiftly on scheduling a full Senate vote on ENDA. We believe there’s no reason to keep LGBT Americans at risk of being fired simply because of who they are or who they love, so we will keep pressure on Senator Reid to call a vote soon.” (also, here’s the link to reid saying a vote would come “soon”:
“I look forward to taking up the Employment Non-Discrimination Act soon, to prohibit such job discrimination across the nation,”
ENDA has been introduced in every Congress since 1994.
Similar legislation has been introduced without passage since 1974 when Rep. Bella Abzug (D-NY) introduced H.R. 14752, the “Equality Act”, which would have added sexual orientation to the protected classes specified in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibited discrimination in employment and access to public accommodations and facilities.
In the early 1990s, gay rights organizations decided to focus only on employment.
Rep. Gerry Studds introduced the Employment Non-Discrimination Act on June 23, 1994
The Illinois House Executive Committee late Thursday tonight advanced SB-10, or the Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act, passed by the Senate last week, in a 6-5 vote. Tuesday’s vote was split along party lines. GOP lawmakers opposed the measure despite its endorsement by state Republican Party Chairman Pat Brady
Sponsoring Rep. Greg Harris, D-Chicago, said the bill is needed “because we need to treat all Illinois families equally under the law” but the status of people in civil unions is often misunderstood and has created a seperate and unequal status.
Kellie Fiedorek, an official with the anti-gay group Alliance Defending Freedom, argued against the bill. She said it failed to protect the religious freedoms of all Illinoisans because it “advances religious intolerance and discrimination towards Illinois citizens with sincerely held religious beliefs.”
Under the measure, marriage in Illinois would be allowed between two people rather than only a man and a woman. Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn has vowed to sign the legislation, a move that would make Illinois the 10th state in the nation to allow same-sex marriage. The Senate passed the legislation with only one Republican vote on Valentine’s Day.
President Barack Obama is urging the Illinois General Assembly to legalize gay marriage in his home state of Illinois according to the Chicago Sun-Times.
“While the president does not weigh in on every measure being considered by state legislatures, he believes in treating everyone fairly and equally, with dignity and respect.
As he has said, his personal view is that it’s wrong to prevent couples who are in loving, committed relationships, and want to marry, from doing so. Were the President still in the Illinois State Legislature, he would support this measure that would treat all Illinois couples equally.” – White House spokesman Shin Inouye
While Obama rarely gets involved in statehouse battles, he has voiced support for gay marriage measures in the past year, issuing–through his re-election campaign–statements of support for gay marriage ballot questions up last November in Maine, Maryland and Washington and has “evolved” greatly on the subject. And while Obama has voiced support for state same-sex marriages as long as DOMA stays on the books in Washington D.C. these marriages are separate and not equal because they are not recognized by the Federal Government.
The Illinois General Assembly is poised to take up the measure to legalize gay marriage as early as this week in Springfield.
Is it considered an oxymoron in this day and age to support a gay republican running for political office? The question is coming up more and more as time passes, likely a result of our country’s evolution of acceptance of gays, the question becomes even more pertinent to address. Some often find the correlation if they were asked the same question about an African American, Hispanic American or any other racial/ethnic minority. The concept seems odd to even suggest to some but I want to keep an open mind.
This question came about (again) as I was reading about Kevin James, the openly gay candidate running for Los Angeles County Mayor. The article touches on many of the conclusions that I have. One is that LGBT lean more Democratic. That’s probably because the democratic party doesn’t demonize us and try to strip us of our constitutional rights. They don’t spend millions in ads vilifying us or backhandedly support dangerous laws in other countries. Second is that James would appeal to republicans and could be used to further advance a political stronghold. Could this lead to acceptance of LGBT?
We know of Log Cabin Republicans and even more recently more LGBT politicians like House Representative Mike Fleck (R-Pa) that are both gay and republican. But let’s not kid ourselves here. The republican party has drastically changed in the last decade and for at least the past 50 years or so have become an extremely conservative party. It doesn’t help when they endorse candidates that have blatantly been anti-LGBT and anti-equality and don’t openly challenge anti-LGBT stances.
And that’s what brings the biggest reluctance for me. These potential leaders currently support a party in which, as a group, do not support equal rights. We’ve seen a very stubborn non-bargaining side to this era of republican that value where policy is more important than the people those policies are meant to govern. Where someone’s faith (or lack thereof) is seen as an attribute or a hindrance We’ve seen a push for more church in our state of government rather than a more fair and derisive separation.
And Democrats are not perfect either. They’ve been laxed in enforcing policy and demanding respect but Democrats aren’t actively trying to strip American citizens of their rights.
Some feel that it may become a conflict within the LGBT community. Because LGBT has become a buzzword in which anyone that identifies with our group gets our support regardless of their political affiliation, philosophies, ideology, etc.,. In contrast the same can negatively be said about the word republican especially after this election season. So no matter how moderate a republican is many within our community won’t ever support or vote for them.
Thus ideal is much like the notion that African Americans only voted for President Obama because he is an African American. I’ve experienced this many times when someone on twitter or in public assume that was the reason I voted for him and it’s not. His strive for education, fairness, the middle class, foreign policy and support of equal rights is why I support and voted for President Obama.
So I guess that’s my answer. That I support those that support equality above all else, regardless of political affiliation, That treating others fairly and equally with the same rights will always be urgent. All the other aspects like government spending, foreign policy, etc.,. comes next. Reviewing a candidate’s policies should be routine and never assumed because of political affiliation. That’s who gets my vote.
“Like every other group, we must be judged by our leaders and by those who are themselves gay, those who are visible. For invisible, we remain in limbo–a myth, a person with no parents, no brothers, no sisters, no friends who are straight, no important positions in employment. A tenth of a nation supposedly composed of stereotypes and would-be seducers of children–and no offense meant to the stereotypes. But today, the black community is not judged by its friends, but by its black legislators and leaders. And we must give people the chance to judge us by our leaders and legislators. A gay person in office can set a tone, can command respect not only from the larger community, but from the young people in our own community who need both examples and hope.
The first gay people we elect must be strong. They must not be content to sit in the back of the bus. They must not be content to accept pablum. They must be above wheeling and dealing. They must be–for the good of all of us–independent, unbought. The anger and the frustrations that some of us feel is because we are misunderstood, and friends can’t feel that anger and frustration. They can sense it in us, but they can’t feel it. Because a friend has never gone through what is known as coming out. I will never forget what it was like coming out and having nobody to look up toward. I remember the lack of hope–and our friends can’t fulfill that.
I can’t forget the looks on faces of people who’ve lost hope. Be they gay, be they seniors, be they black looking for an almost-impossible job, be they Latins trying to explain their problems and aspirations in a tongue that’s foreign to them. I personally will never forget that people are more important than buildings. I use the word “I” because I’m proud. I stand here tonight in front of my gay sisters, brothers and friends because I’m proud of you. I think it’s time that we have many legislators who are gay and proud of that fact and do not have to remain in the closet. I think that a gay person, up-front, will not walk away from a responsibility and be afraid of being tossed out of office. After Dade County, I walked among the angry and the frustrated night after night and I looked at their faces. And in San Francisco, three days before Gay Pride Day, a person was killed just because he was gay. And that night, I walked among the sad and the frustrated at City Hall in San Francisco and later that night as they lit candles on Castro Street and stood in silence, reaching out for some symbolic thing that would give them hope. These were strong people, people whose faces I knew from the shop, the streets, meetings and people who I never saw before but I knew. They were strong, but even they needed hope.
And the young gay people in the Altoona, Pennsylvanias and the Richmond, Minnesotas who are coming out and hear Anita Bryant on television and her story. The only thing they have to look forward to is hope. And you have to give them hope. Hope for a better world, hope for a better tomorrow, hope for a better place to come to if the pressures at home are too great. Hope that all will be all right. Without hope, not only gays, but the blacks, the seniors, the handicapped, the us’es, the us’es will give up. And if you help elect to the central committee and more offices, more gay people, that gives a green light to all who feel disenfranchised, a green light to move forward. It means hope to a nation that has given up, because if a gay person makes it, the doors are open to everyone.”
PLEASE EVERYONE get out and vote and make our voices heard.
Vote for Gay Politicians. Vote for gay friendly politicians. Vote Democrat.
First Lady Michelle Obama drew in a crowd of over 7,000 supporters at Cincinnati’s Duke Energy Center despite the grey and drizzly weather. The First Lady visited Cincinnati and rallied the crowd to get out and vote early and to prepare for a hard-fought campaign as she helped kicked off Ohio’s month of early voting.
Said the First Lady:
“There going to be plenty of ups and down for the rest of the way, you can count on that…I want you to remember that what we do for the next 35 days will make the difference between waking up on November 7 and wondering ‘Could I have done more?’ or feeling the promise of four more years.
Are we going to turn around and go back to the same policies that got us into that hole in the first place, are we going to sit back and watch everything that we fought for and worked for to just slip away, or are we going to keep this country moving forward,”
After an international outcry, the Ukrainian parliament has cancelled at the last-minute a vote on legislation that would ban any Ukrainian citizen from speaking out favorably about homosexuality much like the draconian “gay propaganda law” that was recently passed in St. Petersburg, Russia.
Law 8711 would have made it illegal to “spread homosexuality” by “holding meetings, parades, actions, demonstrations and mass events aiming at intentional distribution of any positive information about homosexuality” and impose heavy fines and up to five years imprisonment.
Key European governments, the European Parliament and even Sir Elton John denounced the law, with the governments of Ireland and Argentina issuing statements as late as Thursday. The United States, while not part of the European Union did not comment on the law.
According to Andre Banks, co-founder and executive director of AllOut.org.“More than 120,000 All Out members spoke out against this horrendous legislation and pushed it to the top of Europe’s diplomatic agenda. The message of our growing global movement is simple – everyone should be able to live openly and love who they choose. That call has been echoed by the European diplomatic community who played a critical role in blocking the progress of the gay gag law. Above all, this is a victory for our partners in Ukraine. Together we are sending a strong message to the other governments of Eastern Europe.”
The move to cancel the bill is seen as a huge victory for its opponents and leaves only a small window in September for it to be reconsidered before the dissolution of the current sitting Ukrainian Parliament.
The Ukraine is currently attempting to join the European Union. The EU’s human rights standards would expressly clash with Law 8711.
