McCain shocks again, calls partisan gerrymandering 'wasted votes, silenced voices and hidden power' & McCain, Whitehouse Make Bipartisan Appeal To SCOTUS Against Wisconsin Gerrymandering 6&5SEP17

IT seems Sen john mccain r AZ is doing penance for his blind support of the right wing republican agenda that is partly responsible for the political and socio-economic state our nation is in. I am thankful for his change of heart and admire his courage and I hope he is able to motivate others in congress to stand for the American people and not just those who can afford to buy their politicians. Hang in there Sen mccain, and keep giving congress  hell! 
McCain shocks again, calls partisan gerrymandering 'wasted votes, silenced voices and hidden power'

Sen. John McCain has taken another surprising stance, partnering with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), to call on the Supreme Court to strike down Wisconsin’s partisan redistricting. The senators did not mince words in calling for the Supreme Court to affirm previous rulings:

In an amicus brief filed in Gill v. Whitford on Tuesday, McCain and Whitehouse argue that the redistricting map is the result of excessive partisan redistricting.

“Americans do not like gerrymandering,” McCain and Whitehouse wrote in the brief, first highlighted by The Huffington Post. “They see its mischief, and absent a legal remedy, their sense of powerlessness and discouragement has increased, deepening the crisis of confidence in our democracy."

"We share this perspective," they continued. "From our vantage point, we see wasted votes and silenced voices. We see hidden power. And we see a correctable problem.”

Wow! Sen. McCain and Sen. Whitehouse correctly calling partisan redistricting exactly what it is: “wasted votes, silenced voices” and hidden power.

Gerrymandering and partisan redistricting are the key to Republican control of the House. From the Associated Press analysis of the the 2016 election:

The analysis found four times as many states with Republican-skewed state House or Assembly districts than Democratic ones. Among the two dozen most populated states that determine the vast majority of Congress, there were nearly three times as many with Republican-tilted U.S. House districts.

Traditional battlegrounds such as Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida and Virginia were among those with significant Republican advantages in their U.S. or state House races. All had districts drawn by Republicans after the last Census in 2010.

The AP analysis also found that Republicans won as many as 22 additional U.S. House seats over what would have been expected based on the average vote share in congressional districts across the country. That helped provide the GOP with a comfortable majority over Democrats instead of a narrow one.

Even if Democrats turned out at full strength, gerrymandering would limit their chances in key districts:

Yet the data suggest that even if Democrats had turned out in larger numbers, their chances of substantial legislative gains were limited by gerrymandering.

“The outcome was already cooked in, if you will, because of the way the districts were drawn,” said John McGlennon, a longtime professor of government and public policy at the College of William & Mary in Virginia who ran unsuccessfully for Congress as a Democrat in the 1980s.

That has got to change. Kudos to Sen. McCain and Sen. Whitehouse for publicly asking the Supreme Court to strike down Wisconsin’s partisan redistricting. 

McCain, Whitehouse Make Bipartisan Appeal To SCOTUS Against Wisconsin Gerrymandering

“Americans do not like gerrymandering. They see its mischief, and absent a legal remedy, their sense of powerlessness and discouragement has increased.”

By Sam Levine

Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) asked the Supreme Court on Tuesday to uphold a lower court’s ruling that Wisconsin’s electoral maps for the state legislature were unconstitutional.

The senators made their argument in a friend of the court brief filed in Gill v. Whitford, a potentially monumental case the Supreme Court is set to hear on Oct. 3. The nation’s highest court has never said whether an electoral map, drawn by state lawmakers every 10 years ― often by the party in power ― can be unconstitutional simply for favoring one party too much over the other.

The Supreme Court could make such a determination in the Wisconsin case, which could remake American politics by requiring states to draw maps that put lawmakers in more competitive races.

In the brief, McCain and Whitehouse said the case “implicates the effective functioning of American representative democracy.”

Redrawing electoral maps to weaken the electoral influence of a particular group, often called gerrymandering, can now be done with extreme sophistication, using algorithms and complex software, the senators wrote.

“This new breed of ‘bulk’ partisan gerrymandering distorts statewide votes, systematically diluting the effect of votes based on political affiliation and leading to the election of congressional and state legislative delegations that do not represent the will of the voters,” they wrote. “This practice violates ‘the core principle of republican government, namely, that the voters should choose their representatives, not the other way around.’”

Both Republicans and Democrats have benefitted from gerrymandering, the brief notes. The progressive Brennan Center for Justice estimates that gerrymandering accounts for 16 or 17 current Republican seats in the House of Representatives. 

In a 2004 case called Vieth v. Jubelirer, the court ruled 5-4 not to strike down Pennsylvania’s congressional maps as an unconstitutional gerrymander, and four justices wrote the Supreme Court couldn’t even hear the case. Despite voting with the majority, however, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that he believed a standard for determining whether a map was unconstitutional could in fact exist. Because of that opinion, Kennedy is being closely watched in the Wisconsin case and the plaintiffs are hoping he sees a standard that he likes.

The brief argues the court does not need to establish a comprehensive test in the Wisconsin case about gerrymandering. But it says that affirming the ruling of the lower court that the maps in that case were unconstitutional would send a strong signal about the Supreme Court’s attitude on the issue.

“The district court’s test provides a workable framework for distinguishing between district maps drawn based on legitimate political considerations and those constituting unlawful partisan gerrymandering,” the brief says. “Beyond remedying the constitutional violations present in this case, affirming the district court’s decision will send a clear message that partisan gerrymandering will not be tolerated.”

In a separate brief filed Tuesday, 65 current and former state lawmakers (26 Republicans and 39 Democrats) from eight states also asked the Supreme Court to uphold the lower court’s decision and say Wisconsin’s map was unconstitutional.

In the brief from McCain and Whitehouse, the senators noted that gerrymandering weakens confidence in the electoral system.

“Americans do not like gerrymandering. They see its mischief, and absent a legal remedy, their sense of powerlessness and discouragement has increased, deepening the crisis of confidence in our democracy. We share this perspective,” they wrote. “We see wasted votes and silenced voices. We see hidden power. And we see a correctable problem.”

More than three dozen current and former Republican lawmakers have signed onto briefs urging the court to say the Wisconsin maps were unconstitutional. The Republicans ranged across the political spectrum and included House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows (S.C.), former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Ohio Gov. John Kasich.

This article has been updated with more information about which GOP lawmakers have signed onto briefs. 

Action Alert: Keep Fighting, Senate votes against chained CPI & 5 Places Where You Should Never Give Your Social Security Number 28MAR13

THANK GOD for +Sen Bernie Sanders I VT, who, along with Sens +Tom Harkin D IA, +Mazie Hirono D HI and +Sheldon Whitehouse D RI got a non-binding resolution passed by the Senate on 22MAR13 rejecting tying Social Security benefit increases to chained CPI. They showed the moral courage and leadership the nation needs on this critical issue standing up for retirees and veterans and their survivors and have sent a clear message to +Pres Obama and the Congressional leadership that the budget will not be balanced on the backs of the people. Please click the link and tell Pres Obama to drop his Social Security chained cpi proposal! AND here is a good article from +Adam Levin about when NOT to give out your Social Security number, from +HuffPost Tech  

attribution: REUTERS

Sanders wins on chained CPI, for now.

Sen. Bernie Sanders offered one of the more useful amendments to the budget passed by the Senate this weekend, an amendment to block cuts in benefits for Social Security and disabled veterans by means of a chained CPI.

Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Mazie Hirono (D-HI) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) joined Sanders in sponsoring the amendment, which passed by voice vote Friday night, putting the Senate on record against changing how cost-of-living increases are calculated in a way that would result in significant cuts. Sanders reacted to the vote:

“This is a strong signal that when push comes to shove the Senate is going to oppose any effort to balance the budget on the backs of seniors, disabled veterans and their survivors,” Sanders said after the vote.

The amendment, like the entire bill, isn't binding. But it is a statement from the whole Senate, and particularly the core group of liberal sponsors, that the president's offer of using Social Security and veterans benefits cuts to cut a grand bargain deal is not acceptable to them. According to Sanders, a typical 65-year-old retiree would lose more than $650 a year by their 75th birthday and more than $1,000 a year by their 85th under the chained CPI. It would also cut the benefits of more than 3.2 million disabled veterans receiving disability benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs, and more than 350,000 surviving spouses and children.

Send an email to the White House telling President Obama to give up the chained CPI cuts to Social Security and veterans.

ORIGINALLY POSTED TO JOAN MCCARTER ON MON MAR 25, 2013 AT 09:33 AM PDT.

ALSO REPUBLISHED BY THE DEMOCRATIC WING OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, IN SUPPORT OF LABOR AND UNIONS, SOCIAL SECURITY DEFENDERS, AND DAILY KOS.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/25/1196829/-Senate-votes-against-chained-CPI#

5 Places Where You Should Never Give Your Social Security Number

Every time you go to a new doctor or dentist and they give you a clipboard brimming with documents to fill out and sign, notice how they always ask for your Social Security number? Do you dutifully give it up? Did you ever wonder if they really need it?

I once asked a doctor why he wanted it. His response: "I don't really know. I guess it's because we've always asked for it." (In actuality, most doctors ask in case your insurance doesn't pay the entire invoice and/or to fill out a death certificate if you die. Offer a next of kin who knows the number instead, and your phone number for billing issues.)

Almost every day somebody asks for your Social Security Number and, like the Grand Marshal of a parade throwing rose petals or candy to the crowd, you probably give it up without giving it a second thought -- because that's what you've always done.

So, the next time someone asks you for your Social Security number, reflect on this: In December, the Army announced that hackers stole the Social Security numbers of 36,000 visitors to Fort Monmouth in New Jersey, including intelligence officers. Cyber activists took control of the CIA's website. The private information, including some Social Security numbers, of celebrities and political leaders including FBI Director Robert Mueller and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were exposed.

The sensitive data of First Lady Michelle Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and Attorney General Eric Holder, recently were posted on a website for the world to see.

Hackers even listened in on a phone call in which the FBI and Scotland Yard were discussing the criminal investigation against those very same hackers!

And these incidents are only the crumbs on top of the coffee cake when you consider that hackers and thieves have improperly accessed more than 600 million consumer files since 2004.

The moral to these horror stories is that if your Social Security number is stored on any computer anywhere, hackers will find a way to access it, or a compromised or disgruntled employee may well walk out the door with it. If your doctor, gym, or child's grade school claims otherwise, that their security systems can protect your private data better than the CIA, FBI and Scotland Yard, to quote Monty Python: "Run away!"

Your identity is your biggest asset, and your Social Security number is the key to your personal kingdom. With it an identity thief can wreak havoc, hijacking your old credit accounts, establishing new ones, buying cars and houses, committing crimes, even obtaining medical products and services while pretending to be you, endangering not just your credit and your reputation, but also your life.

Consumers whose Social Security numbers are exposed in a data breach are five times more likely to become fraud victims than those who aren't, according to the latest identity fraud report by Javelin Strategy & Research.

"Just say no," should be your motto here. For better or worse, you are the gatekeeper. The person most responsible for shielding your Social Security Number is you. Therefore, your mission is to limit, as best you can, the universe of those who gain access to it.

Here's a short list of companies and organizations that have absolutely no business requesting your Social Security number:

1. Anyone who calls or sends you an official-looking email, who texts you a link to any site or designates a number to call where you are asked to confirm your SSN. If they call, check the credit or debit card that is the subject of the communication, call the customer service number listed on the back, and ask for the security department. If they email or text, do the same, or go directly to the institution's website (provided you know who they are). Make sure you type the correct URL, and make sure that the page where you are asked to enter your information is secure. Only provide personal information if you're the one who controls the interaction.

2. Public schools: Your utility bill confirms your address. Your email and phone number give them channels to contact you in an emergency. Asking for your Social Security number is overkill.

3. Little League, summer camp and the like: For the same reasons as school, a Social Security number should never be required by these groups. If they ask for your child's birth certificate, show it to them, don't leave it with them unless they can prove they will protect it. And even then, can you really believe them? If you use credit to pay for the activity, the organization may need your Social Security number. If you pay for it upfront or with a direct debit to your bank account or credit card, they don't. Period.

4. Supermarkets: A frequent shopper card is neither a loan, nor a bank account. It's merely a tool grocery stores use to track your purchases, primarily for marketing purposes. Regardless, many supermarket chains request customers' Social Security numbers on their application forms. Refuse.

5. Anybody who approaches you on the street, whether it's a cellphone company salesman offering a free T-shirt or someone running a voter registration campaign: Never, ever give your SSN. If you want an ill-fitting T-shirt festooned with corporate logos, buy one. If you want to register to vote, go to your county board of elections in person.

This is the short list. There are plenty of other organizations that should never get your Social Security number, and if you know one that I've left out, please leave it in the comments.

Don't just hand it over your Social Security number to anyone. Once you realize how often you are asked for it, you may be surprised. It happens all the time. So, the next time someone does, as they inevitably will, here's how to handle it:

1. Take a minute and think. Maybe they ask for SSNs blindly, because everyone else does, or because that's how they've always done it. Maybe they actually need it. See if their reason sounds legitimate. (Update: For example, Credit.com's Credit Report Card does ask for your SSN in order to generate your credit score and credit report summary -- an industry standard -- but the information is fully encrypted with a bank level authentication process.)

2. Negotiate. There are many different ways to identify you without a Social Security number, including your driver's license or account number. Fight to use those instead.

3. If you must share your Social Security number, do so, but make sure the people taking it down have strong security measures in place to protect it. That said, you only have their assurance and frankly, in light of the mistakes people make and the sophistication level of hackers, who really knows if they can protect it?

If all this sounds like a giant pain in the neck, you're right. It is. In the midst of our busy lives, we shouldn't be the only ones concerned with protecting our most valuable identity asset, but it is what it is. Until somebody creates a Silver Bullet for identity theft, we are forced to take matters into our own hands.

Don't be passive; ask the companies and nonprofit groups with which you do business how they plan to protect you. Do they password protect and encrypt all the personal information they collect? Do they have strict controls on who has access to computers containing your Social Security number, and do they keep this sensitive data off laptops, tablets and hard drives that are easy to steal or lose?

Like the doctor I met, many companies collect Social Security numbers they don't need because they're operating on autopilot. They've always done it, and their colleagues at other companies do it, so the practice continues and spreads on the strength of simple, dumb inertia. I believe that we are smarter than that. By demanding that companies do a better job protecting our personal information, and refusing to hand out our Social Security numbers like candy at a parade, we can force them to get smarter, too. And if they don't think we're serious about this and the government doesn't finally force them off their Social Security number addiction, it is highly likely that the ultimate regulator of the American economic system, class action attorneys, will be knocking on their door

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-levin/identity-theft_b_2967679.html?utm_hp_ref=daily-brief?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=032813&utm_medium=email&utm_content=BlogEntry&utm_term=Daily%20Brief

TELL YOUR SENATORS: Tax Wall Street speculation 14MAR13

IT has been the right time to tax wall street ever since they found the money to increase the already obscene pay/compensation packages for ceo's and corporate board members. The majority of the American people expressed their support for taxing wall street with the reelection of Pres Obama. Now, finally, two Senators, Tom Harkin D IA and Sheldon Whitehouse D RI have introduced the Wall Street Speculation Tax because wall street traders are realizing huge profits on high volume speculative trading while the 99% still struggle with the recession, brought to us by , you guessed it, wall street speculators! Click the link to sign on supporting this tax and e mail your Senators at http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

My e mails to Senators Warner and Kaine at the bottom of this post. From HuffPost.....
Air traffic controllers and pre-school teachers are being furloughed or laid off. Mental health programs, scientific research, Hurricane Sandy relief, and unemployment benefits are being slashed -- all thanks to the sequester.

Meanwhile, Wall Street speculators just had their best week ever. That's right: ever.

Working families shouldn't be forced to shoulder the burden of economic recovery. Wall Street's reckless behavior got us in this mess -- it's time they paid to clean it up and started creating real jobs for American workers.

Tell Congress: Pass the Wall Street Speculation Tax and put Americans back to work.

Here's how: A Wall Street speculation tax -- as small as three pennies on every $100 traded on Wall Street -- would raise $352 billion over 10 years. That's one-third of what the sequester is set to cut, and more than enough to put millions of middle-class Americans back to work right now.

And here's the good news: Sens. Tom Harkin and Sheldon Whitehouse have introduced a bill to do just that.

This isn't a radical idea. A tax on high-volume trading funded millions of jobs during the Great Depression, and set the stage for decades of economic growth. Today, six in 10 Americans support taxing Wall Street to pay for jobs programs. Even George W. Bush's FDIC appointee, Sheila Bair, supports the tax.

The American people and economists agree: it's time to tax Wall Street. Tell Congress to get it done.

Sign the petition to Tax Wall Street Speculation.

Thanks for all that you do.

-ML

Michael Langenmayr, Political Director
Democracy for America

Democracy for America relies on you and the people-power of more than one million members to fund the grassroots organizing and training that delivers progressive change on the issues that matter. Please Contribute Today and support our mission.

Paid for by Democracy for America, http://www.democracyforamerica.com/?t=3&akid=2880.629511.AsStEA and not authorized by any candidate. Contributions to Democracy for America are not deductible for federal income tax purposes.

MY E MAIL TO SENATORS MARK WARNER D VA AND TIM KAINE D VA

Senators Tom Harkin and Sheldon Whitehouse have introduced legislation, The Wall Street Speculation Tax, to tax the huge profits Wall Street speculators are realizing from high volume speculative trading. These are the same people who brought is the great recession of 2008, now they are profiting from it while the vast majority in the nation remain mired in the recession, dealing with high unemployment, underemployment, stagnant wages and funding cuts for vital social safety net programs. This isn't a radical idea. A tax on high-volume trading funded millions of jobs during the Great Depression, and set the stage for decades of economic growth. Today, six in 10 Americans support taxing Wall Street to pay for jobs programs. Even George W. Bush's FDIC appointee, Sheila Bair, supports the tax. I expect you to sponsor, support and vote for this legislation.

Democrats incensed with White House over Social Security, Medicare 8JUL11

THERE can not be any caving to the gop / tea-baggers this time, maybe Pres Obama hasn't learned anything from the last budget negotiations but the rest of us did. The gop / tea-bagger agenda is to provide more wealth and power, more economic and political control to the rich, to corporate America, to wall street and to the financial industry, and to do so on the backs of the retired, the poor, the disabled, the working and middle classes of this country. Their greed and lust for more wealth and more power will not be satisfied until the nation becomes a Third World economy governed as a plutocracy. This may sound extreme to some until one considers the state of our union after the bush era tax breaks and their extension, the corporate welfare policies of the government, and the unrelenting assaults on Social Security, Medicare, basic government services and the government funded social safety net. Let the republicans and tea-baggers make all the accusations about class warfare they want, it is a battle they started and it is one the Republic can't afford the Democrats and Pres Obama loose.

(Brendan Smialowski - BLOOMBERG) Long-simmering tensions between the White House and congressional Democrats on how best to address the country’s debt boiled over on Friday, with leaders and rank-and-file members alike fuming at reports that President Obama is mulling cuts to Social Security and Medicare as part of a bipartisan debt-limit deal.
“What I’ve heard from people you might not expect to hear it from ... is if they bring to the Senate a [deal] that really comes down heavy on working families and children and the elderly and they expect me to matter-of-factly vote for it, they’ll have another thing coming,” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Friday morning.
In a Friday afternoon press conference, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), emerging from what she called a “lively” House Democratic Caucus meeting, declared that Democrats “would not reduce the deficit or subsidize tax cuts for the rich on the backs of America’s seniors.”
But Pelosi appeared to crack the door for a deal, after she met with Vice President Joe Biden and President Obama at the White House Friday.
“I’m still optimistic that we can find a place that we can come together,” she said. “It has to be reflective of our values because ten years of a budget has a very serious impact on the future.”
Sanders, one of the Senate’s most liberal members and a vocal opponent of the inclusion of entitlement cuts in any debt-limit deal, spoke out against the proposed cuts on a conference call with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).
The call included speakers representing more than 300 liberal organizations, including national labor unions, the National Organization for Women, MoveOn.org and the Alliance for Retired Americans.
“There’s been very little conversation between the White House and the Senate about this, and I think they’re making a grievous mistake if they think they can just present anything to us and assume that because we’re Democrats, we’ll go along with what the president has capitulated to,” Whitehouse said.
The Rhode Island Democrat added that as Obama prepares to hold a second meeting with congressional leaders on Sunday that “it’s important in the next several days to send as strong a signal down Pennsylvania Avenue as we can.”
Furthermore, liberal and labor groups said Friday that they, too, are mobilized to deliver that signal on the 2012 campaign trail. Max Richtman, the acting CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security, said that his group is readying a TV ad for late next week and is preparing to deliver nearly 700,000 petitions to the White House next week voicing opposition to any changes to seniors’ cost-of-living adjustments..
“We’re devoting more resources to this than we ever have before,” Richtman said.
The anger among Democrats surged after the news leaked mid-week that President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) were attempting to craft a sweeping deal that could cut as much as $4 trillion from the deficit by reforming Social Security, heretofore a sacred cow to liberal Democrats, and overhauling the tax code, likely lowering overall rates but also raising some revenue. But Boehner said Friday there was “no imminent deal” leading up to a weekend summit with the president.
The White House and Congressional leaders must reach a deal by Aug. 2 to extend the borrowing power of the U.S. government or it will default, according to Treasury officials.
Some House Democrats are taking a “once bitten, twice shy” approach to the current dilemma. They point to the White House’s handling late last year of a deal that extended the Bush-era tax cuts — a move that especially chagrined liberal members, who felt the package was unduly generous to higher earners — and worry that they will again be asked to provide the votes for a final deal to which they haven’t really contributed.
And more than one month after House Democrats won a special election in upstate New York that largely hinged on House Republicans’ plans to overhaul Medicare, some Democrats and interest group leaders are renewing their argument that, as Whitehouse said Friday, “the public is with us on this.”
“I just have two words I hope people will keep in mind: Kathy Hochul,” said NOW President Terry O’Neill, referring to the Democrat who prevailed in the New York special election.
“I think that there was a lot of unhappiness on the Democratic side when (reports that Social Security may be on the table) came out, and from what I understand, it blindsided the leadership. They didn’t really realize it was coming out,” said Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.).
“And there’s all kinds of theories as to why it came out. Some people think it wasn’t the president; it was some of his people wanting to position themselves or whatever. But it wasn’t a good thing.”
Democratic members and aides described a growing sentiment among the caucus to put pressure on the House Republican majority to pass any debt-limit deal on their own if it goes too far in cutting spending and if it overhauls entitlement programs.
“I feel that they have the majority here and they need to come across with 218 votes for whatever deal that’s cut,” said Engel, who was one of the 112 Democrats that opposed last year’s tax-cut package.
“I don’t think that we should let any of them get off the hook and provide the votes to pass it. This is their baby — let them put up the votes....If it’s going to be too lopsided on the cutting side, yeah, I think we should reject it.”
Read more on PostPolitics
Republicans rebel on debt deal
In debt talks, Obama offers Social Security cuts
Bachmann weighs whether to sign “cut, cap, balance pledge”

By Felicia Sonmez  |  01:14 PM ET, 07/08/2011