Expand or End One-Party System

The states in which state legislature is controlled by one party and governor from the very same party. Red is Republican and Blue is Democratic.

The article, “Campaigning to Extend, or End, One-Party Rule,” from the New York Times, is about the danger of having one-party or good that can come from one party. The Democrats have won control of Minnesota’s state government by flipping both the legislative chambers, pushing through tax increases on the wealthy, accepting Obama’s Medicaid expansion for the lower class and approving same-sex marriage. Now the Republican candidate is campaigning brutally to show that the Democrats are overreaching in Minnesota. The trend toward a one-party control, causes states to become extreme and become the testing grounds for the specific party’s policies, for example, the policies the Democrats passed in Colorado and the Republicans passed in Wisconsin. Some say a divided government with two parties is better, others say this will cause a gridlock or government shutdown. Some say that one-party rule will prevent extreme policy making and allow full control of a state, and others argue that this will be unbalanced and result in out of control spending.

This article talks about the two-party system and how people believe that it should stay this way or become a one-party system. Democrats and Republicans are campaigning to become their state legislature representative so that there party can have control of states so they can be the majority party. Currently, 23 states are Republican and 13 are Democratic and this shows the most amount of states being under one-party since the last six decades.They are using resources for get-out-the-vote and are phone banking and canvassing, like House of Representative Joe Radinovich of Minnesota. The ones who campaigning to extend one-party rule think it prevents a gridlock and allows changes to made for the better because the party is actually given a chance to do so instead of being stuck in gridlock, like the government shutdown in 2011. The two-party system, however, prevents one party from having too much control and from spending too much money.

Senate Campaigning

Picture

Senate Races: Where Outside Groups Spend Their Money, this article from the New York times talks about the spending in the senate race by Outside Groups. The outside group that spends the most money in the Senate race is television. According to the Federal Election Commission data, television ads are able to reach voters better than online ads. They spend about $11 on just digital forms this year, this includes online ads, social media. PACs also spend tons of money trying to help elect their candidates.  From Oct. 10, television represented 82% of independent expenditures in Senate general election contests that were reported to the FEC., an increase from 75% in 2010.The outside groups have also put more emphasis on get-out-the-vote operations, which represented less than 3 percent of outside spending in Senate races in 2010 and has increased to more than 4 percent in both the 2012 and 2014 Senate contests. The amount of that spending in Senate races comes from groups supporting Democrats, $8.7 million compared with $709,000 by Republican groups. Spending on mail and phone banking however is starting to decrease.

This article talks about the campaign strategies and the amount of money spent in Senatorial elections. It talks about the FEC, which an agency that regulates campaign finance legislation. And PACs, Political Action Committees, which are meant to raise money privately to influence elections and get their candidate in office. The Get-out-the-vote, GOTV, is a political activity that is meant to increase the number of votes cast in an election, and money is targeted towards this help a candidate. Media coverage is an influencing component in races and so candidates have money specifically for television and the internet so they make independent expenditures, ads that support or defeat a candidate in an election.

Senate Poll

Polling Data

Poll	Date	Sample	MoE	Cornyn (R)	Alameel (D)	Spread
RCP Average	9/11 - 10/2	--	--	51.0	31.3	Cornyn +19.7
Rasmussen Reports	10/1 - 10/2	840 LV	3.5	50	29	Cornyn +21
CBS News/NYT/YouGov	9/20 - 10/1	4177 LV	2.0	55	35	Cornyn +20
Texas Lyceum*	9/11 - 9/25	666 LV	3.8	48	30	Cornyn +18

All Texas Senate - Cornyn vs. Alameel Polling Data

According to Real Clear Politics, John Cornyn has 51% of the votes and the other competitor, David Alameel (D) has 31.3%. According to the Texas Lyceum 48% of the people would vote for Cornyn and 30% for David Alameel. And according to the Rasmussen Reports latest polls, 50% voted for Cornyn and 29% for Alameel.

The Senator John Cornyn of Texas seems to be in a safe place and has a very high chance of getting re-elected. All three polls show a pretty strong lead with about 50% of the voters voting for him. Not only does he have the advantage of being a Republican in a Republican state, but he is also the incumbent.

Voter Fraud

Kris Kobach

The article, “Kris Kobach Pushed Kansas to the Right. Now Kansas Is Pushing Back.” was posted on The New York Times. The Supreme Court ruling is initiating a national debate over voter ID and voter fraud. There is no candidate that better defines this moment of politicized voting like Kris W. Kobach the Secretary of State. He has made his office a place for illegal immigration and restrictive voting. He has been the conservative voice on voter issues and helped states create laws on needing proof of citizenship, helped with a national hunt for double registration people and kept a Democratic candidate on ballot in order to help Pat Robert, Kansas’s Republican senator. Kris faces a difficult re-election because the people believe the Republican party has gone too far. Kris Kobach has had a great influence in many states by raising concern about the illegal immigrants steal elections. This has lead policies that decrease the turnout of people voting Democratic. He is proud of the fact that noncitizens are not a part of the voting process because of the law on paper checking. Interstate Crosscheck, another program compares voter registrations from other states to find evidence of double voting, but has come up short in finding significant voter fraud.

The article talks about the voter fraud and voter ID laws and programs being passed. It also talks about the effect laws and programs will have on the voter turnout.  Democrats say that these restrictions are meant to fight allegations of fraud are actually end up suppressing voter turnout. The check for double registration would also cause voter disenfranchisement in Kansas because many people cannot vote because they could not find their proof of citizenship. For example, senior citizens who cannot find their birth certificate and no longer have a driver’s license because they cannot drive now cannot vote even if they have voted before and want to vote.

The Supreme Court

The Supreme Court Justices

According to article in the New York Times, The Supreme Court made their latest campaign finance decision. The five judges appointed by the Republicans voted for the RNC, Republican National Committee. The four judges that were appointed by the Democrats disagreed with this. The judges created a 5-to-4 split which showed that they were partisan. The Supreme Court is divided because of political parties and this reflects the partisan polarization in the Congress, electorate and with the Justices. The eventual retirement of Justice Kennedy, a Republican, will move the court to be either Republican dominant or Democrat because right now Kennedy is the ideological center. The changes that have created a partisan split are due to the fact that the President cares more about the ideology, they became better at finding nominees who will vote according to their ideology, and party affiliation has now become the way people’s views and decisions can be predicted. Candidates now have to go through extensive vetting and grooming. Also they are often affiliated with either conservative or liberal lawyer networks instead of the neutral bar associations. The people who work with the justices also add to the partisan behavior. When hiring their 4 recent law students they now consider not only grades and recommendations but political marker. This increases the partisan polarization.

The Supreme Court Justices are partisan. Since the president appoints them, they have been known to pick justices that share their ideology. The article also talks about how vetting, extensively looking into their lives, now includes whether they will vote conservatively or liberally. It also mentioned that Justice David Souter was the last to be appointed that was an exception to this pattern. The political ideology affects the ruling in many cases. The conservatives won 10 of the case, such as the decision that struck down the core service of the Voting Rights Act. The liberals won 6 cases, such as the ruling that made a requirement for the federal government to give benefits to same-sex couples.

Senator John Cornyn

Picture Source

Interest Groups

Senator John Cornyn raised $15,407,375 in the 2009-2014 Cycle Fundraising Campaign Committee. His funding mainly comes from Large Individual Contributions. The Securities and Investments industry raised him a total $1,192,798 where a $1,036,798 came from Individuals. Since 2012 the Security and Investments Committee has become the biggest source of political contributions and John Cornyn received the third largest sum from this industry.

The Senator’s rating from the National Right to Life Committee, a pro-life committee, is 100%. And due to this stance on abortion the NARAL Pro-Choice America gives him a rating of 0%. The NARAL Pro-Choice America, committee that works to oppose the restrictions on abortion and make it more accessible, gives the Democratic Senator Mark Begich of Alaska a 100% rating.

Abortion Clinics

Protestors

Washington Post recently posted an article titled, “Texas ruling cancels dozens of abortions that had been scheduled”. Clinics that provide abortions quickly made calls to cancel or reschedule the appointment due to a decision made by a panel of federal judges. The decision they made, led to 13 clinics across the state of Texas to close all of a sudden. The clinics did the not meet with the provision of a state law that required the abortion clinics to be able to comply with building and equipment standards that would qualify them to be ambulatory surgical centers. The provision of the state law was being blocked by a lower court till Thursday; after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, that included a three-judge panel, ruled that the law needs to be upheld and enforced. This inconvenienced the clinics and the women going there for their abortion and this is the second time clinics in Texas have been closed. Last year a law, known as HB2, that imposed the new restrictions on the providers and clinics of abortion was temporarily derailed by a filibuster from Senator Wendy Davis until Thursday. Most clinics state that they closed because complying with the HB2 is expensive and sometimes impossible; leaving only a handful of clinics open.

The Roe v. Wade (1973) Supreme Court decision legalized abortion in the nation. The HB2 law is taking away women's constitutional right to an abortion by limiting the access. The closing clinics has been happening across the nation and many legal battles are being fought over it, and a lot of people expect the Supreme Court to make a case soon about whether the law is violating rights of women. The article talks about the law not being in effect till the federal judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals decided it needed to be upheld. The Court of Appeals decision overcame the Senator’s filibuster, an action that obstructs the process of a legislative assembly simultaneously does not infringe the required procedures, and this forced clinics to follow the standards or shut down.

Cornyn's Committees

The board of the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary

Senator John Cornyn is a committee member on the The United States Senate Committee on Finance. The Committee on Finance deals with taxation and other revenue measures, United State’s bonded debt, customs, the deposit of public money, health programs provided by Social Security Act and national social security, trade agreements, import and tariff quotas, and transportation of dutiable goods. The chairman is Ron Wyden and the Ranking Member is Orrin G. Hatch and 22 other members, including Chuck Grassley (IA) and Mike Crapo (ID). The legislation H.R. 5021 which is Highway and Transportation Funding Act of 2014 became Public Law No: 113-159 on 08/0814, and is meant to provide the funding needed to preserve America’s transits and highways.

He is also a committee member on The United States Senate Committee on The Judiciary. This committee deals the hearings conducted prior to the Senate votes on the confirmation of federal judges, including Supreme Court Justices nominated by president. It also has jurisdiction over matters that deal with federal criminal law and immigration law, human rights, antitrust law, intellectual property law and internet privacy. as well as human rights, immigration law, intellectual property rights, antitrust law, and Internet privacy. The Chairman is Patrick J. Leahy and the Ranking Member is Chuck Grassley and 16 other members, including Dianne Feinstein (CA). The legislation is S.J.RES.19 A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to contributions and expenditures intended to affect elections and last action was on 9/11/14 and has only been introduced. The Constitutional Amendment states that the authorization of Congress and the states to regulate and set reasonable limits on the the spending and raising of money by candidates and others to help influence elections. The legislation grants Congress and states the power to use by the appropriate legislation and to know the difference between people and corporation or other artificial entities made by law, including the prohibition of such entities spending money to influence elections and declares that nothing in the amendment can be used to grant Congress or states the power to curtail the freedom of press.