#but tennessee voted to do away with slavery as punishment | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

patriotsnet · 3 years ago

Text

When Did The Southern Democrats Became Republicans

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/when-did-the-southern-democrats-became-republicans/

When Did The Southern Democrats Became Republicans

Why Did The Democratic And Republican Parties Switch Platforms

Why Did the Democratic South Become Republican?

02 November 2020

Around 100 years ago, Democrats and Republicans switched their political stances.

The Republican and Democratic parties of the United States didn’t always stand for what they do today.;

During the 1860s, Republicans, who dominated northern states, orchestrated an ambitious expansion of federal power, helping to fund the transcontinental railroad, the state university system and the settlement of the West by homesteaders, and instating a national currency and protective tariff. Democrats, who dominated the South, opposed those measures.;

After the Civil War, Republicans passed laws that granted protections for Black Americans and advanced social justice. And again, Democrats largely opposed these apparent expansions of federal power.

Sound like an alternate universe? Fast forward to 1936.;

Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt won reelection that year on the strength of the New Deal, a set of Depression-remedying reforms including regulation of financial institutions, the founding of welfare and pension programs, infrastructure development and more. Roosevelt won in a landslide against Republican Alf Landon, who opposed these exercises of federal power.

So, sometime between the 1860s and 1936, the party of small government became the party of big government, and the party of big government became rhetorically committed to curbing federal power.;

Why Did Southern Conservatives Switch From Democrats To Republicans In Mid20thcentury

to this day Republicans are the party of traditional American values, the dems the party of political correctness and new morality.

When exactly between 1932 and 1960 did most conservative white southerners switch from being Democrats to Republicans?

Why did the ideology of the Democratic and Republican Parties flip-flop in between 1932 and 1960?

Did the ideologies of the Democratic and Republican Parties flip-flop because of Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt’s support of the New Deal and other welfare programs for the poor?

Republican Voters Turn Against Their Partys Elites

The Tea Party movement, which sprang into existence in the early years of the Obama administration, was many things. It was partly about opposing Obamas economic policies foreclosure relief, tax increases, and health reform. It was partly about opposing immigration when Theda Skocpol and Vanessa Williamson;interviewed Tea Party activists across the nation, they found that âimmigration was always a central, and sometimes the central, concernâ those activists expressed.

But the Tea Party also was a challenge to the Republican Party establishment. Several times, these groups helped power little-known far-right primary contenders to shocking primary wins over establishment Republican politicians deemed to be sellouts. Those candidates didnt always win office, but their successful primary bids certainly struck fear into the hearts of many other GOP incumbents, and made many of them more deferential to the concerns of conservative voters.

Furthermore, many Republican voters also came to believe, sometimes fairly and sometimes unfairly, that their partys national leaders tended to sell them out at every turn.

Talk radio and other conservative media outlets helped stoke this perception, and by May 2015 Republican voters were far more likely to say that their partys politicians were doing a poor job representing their views than Democratic voters were.

Don’t Miss: Trump Calling Iowans Stupid

What Did The Southern Democrats Want

3.9/5Southern DemocratsSouththis is here

Democratic dominance of the South originated in the struggle of white Southerners during and after Reconstruction to reestablish white supremacy and disenfranchise blacks. The U.S. government under the Republican Party had defeated the Confederacy, abolished slavery, and enfranchised blacks.

Furthermore, what do the Democrats believe in? The modern Democratic party emphasizes egalitarianism, social equality, protecting the environment, and strengthening the social safety net through liberalism. They support voting rights and minority rights, including LGBT rights, multiculturalism, and religious secularism.

Correspondingly, when did republican and democratic ideals switch?

After the end of Reconstruction the Republican Party generally dominated the North while a resurgent Democratic Party dominated the South. By the late 19th century, as the Democratic and Republican parties became more established, party switching became less frequent.

What caused the split in the Democratic Party in 1860?

The Northern Democratic Party was a leg of the Democratic Party during the 1860 presidential election. It was when the party split in two due to problems with slavery. Stephen A. Douglas was the nominee and lost to Abraham Lincoln.

A Faction Of The Democratic Party Started The Civil War

Opponents of slavery extending further into America;founded the Republican Party. They elected President Abraham Lincoln in 1860, in response to escalating tensions around slavery after the Kansas-Nebraska;Bill of 1854threatened the balance of slave states to free states.

Southern states, primarily led by Democrats, initiated secession proceedings and launched the Civil War. But historians say the party is not to blame.

The short answer is that the Democratic Party did not start the Civil War, Hunter said. The war was initiated by Southern slaveholding states seceding from the United States.

Jon Grinspan , the;Smithsonians National Museum of American History;curator of political and military history, agreed.

A splinter of a splinter of a Democratic Party really contributed to the;secession and the coming of the war, he told USA TODAY. It would be wrong to say the Democratic Party started the Civil War. It would be right to say some Democrats really contributed to the start of the Civil War.

Grinspan pointed to the small group of Northern;Democrats;that fought for the Union as evidence that the Civil War was not Democrats versus;Republicans.

Also Check: How Many Republicans Voted For Obama In 2008

You May Like: How Many States Are Controlled By Republicans

As Republicans Pushed Out Black Leaders They Attracted More White Voters

Our analysis of the data shows that the Lily-Whites were correct.

During Reconstruction, when black voters were the Republican Partys core Southern constituency, a whiter party leadership resulted in the GOP losing votes. Black voters were paying attention and punished their state GOP if black leadership declined.

However, after Southern Democrats passed legislation to disenfranchise black voters, that switched. The whiter the party leadership was, the better the GOP did in elections whether those were presidential, congressional or gubernatorial elections.

This effect was mostly driven by the states of the Outer South Arkansas, Florida, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia. In those states, as the local Republican Party became whiter, its electoral performance improved considerably although the improvement was not enough for the party to begin winning elections right away.

However, the GOP began its electoral recovery earliest in those Outer-South states. It began winning Southern elections at the presidential level in the 1950s and at the Senate and gubernatorial levels in the 1960s.

Three Factions Of Modern Republicans To Oppose This

Although conservatism is complex, it is defined well as an opposition philosophy to liberalism. Through this lens, there is a type of conservatism that stands against for;brand;of liberalism. Modern American conservatism wants to conserve, which means not being progressive on a given issue and which by its nature is not conservative. Thus we get modern social conservatism which says no to social programs and federal power, except when it upholds conservative social values.;There is also a;more liberal version that;we call libertarianism. It is against all uses of state power for any reason and is a form of radical classical liberalism, combined with;traditional classical conservatism, which is willing to use federal power to keep order, but not inherently against social programs. These factions can be said to become;allies;the conservative coalition mentioned above, although the establishment of both parties tends to favor aspects of traditional classical conservatism.

TIP: When either party uses government power, they are traditional conservatives, when either party deregulates and lets the private market and individuals handle it, they are classically liberal. More than one ideology uses classical liberalism, and more than one uses classical conservatism, as all political ideologies grow out of these foundational ideologies.

Don’t Miss: When Did The Republicans And Democrats Switch Platforms

The Conservative Coalition Vs The New Deal Coalition

Now that we know the basics, the changes in both parties in the 1900s are perhaps best understood by examining;the Conservative Coalition;and the New Deal Coalition.

The Conservative Coalition was a coalition between the anti-Communist Republicans like Nixon and Reagan and conservative Southern Democrats. It arose to oppose FDRs New Deal progressivism, and it blocked a lot of the progressive legislation the New Deal Coalition tried to pass from the 1930s to the 1960s. The socially conservative solid south;was still its own entity. It sometimes voted;with other Democrats, and sometimes broke off into its own factions. See the 1960 election Kennedy v. Nixon v. Harry F. Byrd. The Coalition tellingly dwindled post 64 Civil Rights and ended in the Clinton era as conservative southerners became Republicans and formed;the modern construct of the Red States and the Blue States.

Meanwhile,;the New Deal coalition explains the progressive coalition of Democrats and Republicans the Conservative coalition opposed. Today the two parties largely resemble these coalitions.

The Fifth Party System And American Liberalism And Conservatism

PragerU’s “Why Did the Democratic South Become Republican?” FACT CHECKED!

In more modern times we can;to look at;the Fifth Party;System in which race, social justice, the;currency debate, religious issues like Temperance and Prohibition, and other issues of modernization seen in earlier systems had already split the parties into many factions. In this era, we;can see a telling split by comparing;the socially conservative anti-communist classical liberal Republican Hoover to;the big government pro-worker social liberal Democrat FDR;.

To fully grasp what happens from;Hoover and FDR on, itll help to quickly discuss;American liberalism and conservatism and how they;relate to other ideologies like progressivism.

Although we can see shadows of most modern political ideologies;in any age of recorded;history by looking to old nation-states like;Sparta, Athens, and Rome;or to revolutionary Britain, America, and France, American liberalism and conservatism undergo a noticeable change in the Gilded Age and Progressive era. Given this, the general;tension over social issues, and thus the use of government, can be described in modern times;as being between a few;general political ideologies:

NOTE: Many;elites are classical liberals and/or conservatives, yet most issues discussed in politics between voters are social issues . For example, almost everyone on K street and Wall Street are neoliberals and neoconservatives, yet the average voter votes on;social justice issues. Think about it.

Recommended Reading: How Many Democrats And Republicans Are In The House

The Founding Federalists And Anti

To see how the parties have evolved properly from the founders to 2016, we;can start by comparing;pre-Civil War factions such as the;founding;Federalists and Anti-Federalists;in the First Party System.

Here we can compare figures like the North Eastern Federalists Alexander Hamilton and John Adams;to the Virginian Anti-Federalists Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry to get a sense of the two general types of ideologies that color Americas future parties and factions .

Here we can see the roots of progressivism and states rights populism in the Democratic party and the roots of traditional pro-business conservatism in the Federalists. Here we can also note that, despite none of the founders supporting slavery, it is the small government mentality to Democrats that allows for slavery, while the Whig-like conservatism of the Federalists is more geared toward global trade and banking and less tolerant of the nefarious institution.

Although we can put the founders in two big tents and understand American history that way, looking;at the nuanced views;of the founders allows us to better;understand the roots of the different types of liberal and conservative / elite and populist positions that we find in each party system.

Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties.Thomas Jefferson

National debt, if it is not excessive, will be to us a national blessing.Alexander Hamilton

Compromise Of 1: The End Of Reconstruction

Hayes appointed Tennessees David Key as postmaster general, but never followed through on the promised land grant for the Texas and Pacific. Within two months, however, Hayes had ordered federal troops from their posts guarding Louisiana and South Carolina statehouses, allowing Democrats to seize control in both those states. As Floridas Supreme Court had earlier declared a Democratic victory in the 1876 gubernatorial election, Democrats had been restored to power all across the South.

The Compromise of 1876 effectively ended the Reconstruction era. Southern Democrats promises to protect civil and political rights of blacks were not kept, and the end of federal interference in southern affairs led to widespread disenfranchisement of blacks voters. From the late 1870s onward, southern legislatures passed a series of laws requiring the separation of whites from persons of color on public transportation, in schools, parks, restaurants, theaters and other locations. Known as the Jim Crow laws , these segregationist statutes governed life in the South through the middle of the next century, ending only after the hard-won successes of the civil rights movement in the 1960s.

Recommended Reading: What Year Did The Democrats And Republicans Switch

The Founding Fathers Disagree

Differing political views among U.S. Founding Fathers eventually sparked the forming of two factions. George Washington, Alexander Hamilton and John Adams thus formed The Federalists. They sought to ensure a strong government and central banking system with a national bank. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison instead advocated for a smaller and more decentralized government, and formed the Democratic-Republicans. Both the Democratic and the Republican Parties as we know them today are rooted in this early faction.

Those Racist Dixiecrats Create Mainstream Republican Policy

By the time they left the Democrats, Dixiecrats Thurmond and Representative Jesse Helms were on the fringes of their party.

But their ideas formed modern GOPs core platform.

In a campaign ad, Democrat-turned-Republican Jesse Helms said racial quotas prevented white people from getting jobs. The lie of racial quotas persists in the GOPs rejection of affirmative action. Racial quotas are illegal.

Take the idea of special interests. Heres Helms view, as a Republican:

Are civil rights only for Negroes? While women in Washington who have been raped and mugged on the streets in broad daylight have experienced the most revolting sort of violation of their civil rights. The hundreds of others who have had their purses snatched by Negro hoodlums may understandably insist that their right to walk the street unmolested was violated. Television commentary, 1963, quoted in The Charlotte Observer.

But you would think that Ted Cruz would have a clearer understanding of the connections between the Dixiecrats and the Republican Party.

Looking to do your part? One way to get involved is to read the Indivisible Guide, which is written by former congressional staffers and is loaded with best practices for making Congress listen. Or follow this publication, connect with us on , and .

You May Like: How Many States Are Controlled By Republicans

Other Factors Of Note Regarding Switching Platforms Progressivism The Red Scare Immigration Religion And Civil Rights In 54

Other key factors involve;the Red Scare , the effect of immigration, unions, and the Catholic vote on the parties.

The Republican party changed after losing to Wilson and moved away from progressivism and toward classical liberal values under Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover. In this time they also became increasingly anti-Communist following WWI . While both parties were anti-Communist and pro-Capitalist, Wilsons brand of progressive southern bourbon liberalism and his New Freedom plan and then FDRs brand of progressive liberalism and his New Deal were opposed by Republicans like Hoover due to their;use of the state to ensure social justice. Then after WWII,;the Second Red Scare;reignited the conversation, further dividing factions and parties.

Another;important thing to note is;that the Democratic party has historically been pro-immigrant . Over time this;attracted new immigrant groups like Northern Catholics ;and earned;them the support of;Unions;. Big City Machines like Tammany Hall;also play a role in this aspect of the story as well. The immigrant vote is one of the key factors in changing the Democratic party over time in terms of progressivism, unions, religion, and geolocation , and it is well suited to be its own subject.

Despite these general;truisms, the parties themselves have typically been factionalized over;complex factors relating to;left-right ideology, single issues, and the general meaning of;liberty.

How The Republicans Became Socially Conservative

The Fourth;Party Republicans;began;to change when;the Progressive Republican Theodore Teddy Roosevelt broke;from the party in 1912 . Following the break, the Republicans;increasingly embraced social conservatism;and opposed social;progressivism .;From Harding to Hoover, to Nixon, to Bush they increasingly favored classical liberalism regarding individual and states rights over;central;authority. This attracted some socially conservative Democrats like states rights Dixiecrat Strom Thurmon. It resulted in a Southernization of the;Republican party and drove some progressive Republicans from the party over time.

TIP: See History of the United States Republican Party.

Don’t Miss: Number Of Gop Debates

Th United States Congress

As of September 13, 2017, 16 Senate Democrats cosponsored the Medicare for All Act of 2017. As of September 26, 2017, 120 House Democrats cosponsored the Expanded & Improved Medicare For All Act. This was all for naught, as the Republican majority made sure that the Democratic minority remained impotent.

National Democratic Redistricting Committee

On January 12, 2017, the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, a 527 organization that focuses on redistricting reform and is affiliated with the Democratic Party, was created. The chair, president and vice president of the umbrella organization is the 82nd Attorney GeneralEric Holder, Elizabeth Pearson and Alixandria Ali Lapp respectively. President Obama has said he would be involved with the committee.

Protests against Donald Trump

At the inauguration of Donald Trump, 67 Democratic members of the United States House of Representatives boycotted the inauguration. This was the largest boycott by members of the United States Congress since the second inauguration of Richard Nixon, where it was estimated that between 80 and 200 Democratic members of United States Congress boycotted.

Democratic Party PACs

In November 2018, the Democrats gained 40 seats in the House of Representatives, retaking the majority in the chamber. Nancy Pelosi was nominated to retake the speakership in January 2019.

0 notes

douglasacogan · 5 years ago

Text

"Why Shouldn't Prisoners Be Voters?"

The question in the title of this post is the headline of this New Yorker piece by Daniel Gross. The lengthy piece, which is part of the magazine's The Future of Democracy series, is worth a full read. The subheading captures the piece's themes: "Americans take for granted that they have a right to vote. The situation of people in prison suggests otherwise." Here is an excerpt:

Two centuries ago, only Connecticut barred citizens with criminal convictions from voting. The state’s constitution, which was ratified in 1818, declared that a man’s right to vote could be “forfeited by a conviction of bribery, forgery, perjury, duelling, fraudulent bankruptcy, theft, or other offence for which an infamous punishment is inflicted.” In the years before the Civil War, seventeen states joined Connecticut in passing some form of felony disenfranchisement. Then, in the decade after the abolition of slavery, while the national movement for black suffrage was building momentum, ten more states, mostly in the South, quickly adopted them. The same period saw a sharp increase, in many states, in the incarceration of African-Americans. (Although the vast majority of people in prison cannot vote, the census counts them as living where they are incarcerated, shifting political representation to the places that have prisons.)

Many state lawmakers were explicit about the racist motivations for these changes. In 1901, Alabama Democrats, who had a history of election tampering, called a convention to rewrite the state constitution. “The justification for whatever manipulation of the ballot box that has occurred in this State has been the menace of negro domination,” John B. Knox, the president of the convention, said in his opening remarks. “If we should have white supremacy, we must establish it by law—not by force or fraud.” The resulting constitution named twenty convictions, from robbery to forgery to vagrancy, that would strip men of their right to vote. The same document discriminated against black voters with poll taxes and literacy tests.

Felony-disenfranchisement laws spread across the country: by the nineteen-seventies, forty-six states had them. Massachusetts was the last state to join the group, passing a constitutional amendment in 2000 with more than sixty per cent of the vote. (The Prison Policy Initiative observed that it was “the first time that the Massachusetts constitution has been amended to take away rights from a group of people.”) Three years later, three researchers published a paper in the American Journal of Sociology showing that the most stringent of these laws were to be found in states with many potential voters of color. In Tennessee, where citizens lose the franchise for life if they are convicted of crimes such as forgery, sodomy, or receiving stolen property, a fifth of African-Americans are barred from voting, according to the Sentencing Project. (The same was true in Virginia and Alabama until recently, when the Democratic governors of those states restored the franchise to large numbers of citizens.)

Vermont and Maine, the only states that have never disenfranchised prisoners, are also the whitest states in the nation. Less than four per cent of Vermonters, and less than five per cent of Mainers, are people of color. “I do think that it’s not a coincidence that it’s only Maine and Vermont that allow inmate voting,” Emily Tredeau, a supervising attorney at the Vermont Prisoners’ Rights Office, told me. “White voters will give pause before they disenfranchise other white people.” Joseph Jackson, a formerly incarcerated activist, added, “Mainers look at Maine folks that are incarcerated as though they are not other.” (While the prison population in Maine is mostly white, it is significantly less white than the state as a whole: nearly twenty per cent of those incarcerated in Maine are people of color.)

from RSSMix.com Mix ID 8247011 https://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2020/02/why-shouldnt-prisoners-be-voters.html via http://www.rssmix.com/

0 notes

lodelss · 5 years ago

Link

The Racist Roots of Denying Incarcerated People Their Right to Vote The current debate about the voting rights of incarcerated people misses essential historical context.

“Do you want the Boston marathon bomber to vote?” is a provocative question that acts as a smokescreen concealing the real issue — why and when did America decide that people convicted of a crime should not vote? The historical context for this comes from old English common law which justified the concept of “civil death” as punishment for conviction of treason or a felony because a person committing a crime had “corrupt blood,” making the person “dead in the law.” America did not immediately adopt this position because the Constitution was silent on voting rights — it neither granted nor denied anyone the right to vote.

Before the Civil War, as a Brennan Center report shows, voting rights and the loss of those rights weren’t linked to convictions. America did not incarcerate in large numbers, and states that adopted broad felony disenfranchisement did so after establishing full white male suffrage by eliminating property tests. After the Civil War, places like Louisiana granted poor illiterate whites the right to vote while denying poor illiterate Blacks the right to vote by basing the right on whether your grandfather could vote, hence the term “grandfathered in”. In 1787, the Constitution considered Black people as three-fifths of a human being. Blacks voting was not an issue. Then came the Civil War and the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments. Enslaving people, except as punishment for a crime, was illegal. Birthright U.S. citizenship was established, explicitly including freed enslaved people. Black men got the right to vote. Over 2,000 Black men were elected to government offices, and they began purchasing or homesteading property and voting. America responded. The exception in the 13th Amendment allowing slavery as punishment for a crime was paired with “Black Codes,” which basically criminalized Black life. Blacks convicted under Black Code laws were leased out to do work, providing cheap labor to boost the South’s faltering economy. In 1850, 2% of prisoners in Alabama were non-white. By 1870, it was 74%. At least 90% of the “leased” prison laborers were Black. In the 15 years between 1865 and 1880, at least 13 states — more than a third of the country’s 38 states — enacted broad felony disenfranchisement laws. The theory was simple — convict them of crimes, strip away the right to vote, imprison them, and lease them out as convict labor and Blacks would be returned to a condition as close to slavery as possible. No one tried to hide the intent of these laws. In 1894, a white South Carolina newspaper argued that amendments to the voting laws were necessary to avoid whites being swept away at the polls by the Black vote. In 1901, Alabama amended its Constitution to expand disenfranchisement to all crimes involving “moral turpitude” — a vague term that was applied to felonies and misdemeanors. The president of that constitutional convention argued that manipulating the ballot to exclude Blacks was justified because of the need to avoid the “menace of Negro domination,” especially since Blacks were inferior to whites. It wasn’t just the South. In 1874, New York was the only state that required property ownership for Blacks to vote. This law clearly violated the 15th Amendment prohibition on race-based voting restrictions. A governor-appointed “Constitutional Commission” finally struck down the property law while, simultaneously, quietly amending the New York Constitution to impose felony disenfranchisement. New York could not prevent Blacks from voting because of poverty, so it found a solution in the criminal legal system. What is the result of this history? Black Americans of voting age are more than four times as likely to lose their voting rights than the rest of the adult population. One of every 13 Black adults is disenfranchised. In some states like Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, and, until recently, Florida, one in five Blacks have been disenfranchised. In total, 2.2 million Black citizens are banned from voting. Thirty-eight percent of the disenfranchised population in America is Black. The two states that allow people in prison to vote are Vermont and Maine, the two whitest states in the country. In many other states, incarcerated people are stripped of their vote but remain counted as part of the populations of the (often very white and rural) districts where they are locked up, boosting the electoral advantage of those districts. A 2003 study found that the larger the state’s Black population, the more likely the state was to pass the most stringent laws that permanently denied people convicted of crimes the right to vote. America is isolated on this issue — and not in a good way. South Africa, Canada, Ireland, and Spain allow everyone in prison to vote. Germany disenfranchises for certain offenses like treason, but only for a maximum of five years. Finland and New Zealand disenfranchise only for election offenses and only for a few years beyond completion of a sentence. In France, only election offenses and abuse of public power warrant disenfranchisement. When we compare America to the other heirs of the English legal tradition, one thing becomes clear: The only reason our practice resulted in racial disparity is that we designed it that way. Why aren’t we asking why countries around the world handle this issue so differently? Doesn’t revoking voting rights of people in prison unnecessarily strip them of dignity and make rehabilitation that much more difficult? Justifications offered now regarding disenfranchisement ignore the undeniable fact that the practice in America is clearly connected to an attempt to deny Blacks full rights as citizens. We cannot change what happened in the past, but we are better than that now — we can fix it now. Restoration of voting rights to people in prison is a concept we should all support. It is consistent with whom we claim to be.

Published May 3, 2019 at 03:45PM via ACLU http://bit.ly/2VdoKdr

#IFTTT #Blogger

0 notes

nancydhooper · 6 years ago

Text

The Racist Roots of Denying Incarcerated People Their Right to Vote

The current debate about the voting rights of incarcerated people misses essential historical context.

from RSSMix.com Mix ID 8247012 https://www.aclu.org/blog/voting-rights/racist-roots-denying-incarcerated-people-their-right-vote via http://www.rssmix.com/

0 notes

patriotsnet · 3 years ago

Text

What Did Radical Republicans Stand For

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/what-did-radical-republicans-stand-for/

What Did Radical Republicans Stand For

Road To The Presidency

What Do Democrats Stand For?

At the Republican presidential convention the same year in Chicago, the delegates were divided into three principal camps: the Stalwarts , who backed former president Ulysses S. Grant; the Half-Breed supporters of Maine Sen. James G. Blaine; and those committed to Secretary of the Treasury John Sherman. Tall, bearded, affable, and eloquent, Garfield steered fellow Ohioan Shermans campaign and impressed so many with his largely extemporaneous nominating speech that he, not the candidate, became the focus of attention. As the chairman of the Ohio delegation, Garfield also led a coalition of anti-Grant delegates who succeeded in rescinding the unit rule, by which a majority of delegates from a state could cast the states entire vote. This victory added to Garfields prominence and doomed Grants candidacy. Grant led all other candidates for 35 ballots but failed to command a majority. On the 36th ballot the nomination went to a dark horse, Garfield, who was still trying to remove his name from nomination as the bandwagon gathered speed.

Radical Republicans Battled President Andrew Johnson

Following the assassination of Lincoln, the Radical Republicans discovered that the new president, Andrew Johnson, was even more forgiving toward the South. As might be expected, Stevens, Sumner, and the other influential Republicans in Congress were openly hostile to Johnson.

Johnson’s policies proved to be unpopular with the public, which led to gains in Congress for the Republicans in 1866. And the Radical Republicans found themselves in the position of being able to override any vetoes by Johnson.

The battles between Johnson and the Republicans in Congress escalated over various pieces of legislation. In 1867 the Radical Republicans succeeded in passing the Reconstruction Act and the Fourteenth Amendment.

President Johnson was eventually impeached by the House of Representatives;but was not convicted and removed from office after a trial by the U.S. Senate.

The Radical Republicans Take Control

Northern voters spoke clearly in the Congressional election of 1866. Radical Republicans won over two-thirds of the seats in the House of Representatives and the Senate. They now had the power to override Johnson’s vetoes and pass the Civil Rights Act and the bill to extend the Freedmen’s Bureau, and they did so immediately. Congress had now taken charge of the South’s reconstruction.

Don’t Miss: What Cities Are Run By Republicans

How Successful Was Radical Reconstruction

Reconstruction was a success in that it restored the United States as a unified nation: by 1877, all of the former Confederate states had drafted new constitutions, acknowledged the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments, and pledged their loyalty to the U.S. government.

What Were The Goals Of Reconstruction For Radical Republicans

They wanted to prevent the leaders of the confederacy from returning to power after the war, they wanted the republican party to become a powerful institution in the south, and they wanted the federal government to help african americans achieve political equality by guaranteeing their rights to vote in the south.

Don’t Miss: Do Republicans Vote In The Democratic Primary

How Did Reconstruction Start

The period after the Civil War, 1865 1877, was called the Reconstruction period. Abraham Lincoln started planning for the reconstruction of the South during the Civil War as Union soldiers occupied huge areas of the South. On December 18, 1865, Congress ratified the Thirteenth Amendment formally abolishing slavery.

Why Did The Radical Republicans Eventually Abandon Reconstruction

Slaves had little rights or opportunities, such as the freedom of assembly or the right to an education. Why did the Radical Republicans eventually abandon Reconstruction? Reconstruction was no longer progressing as they had hoped. Northerners were outraged at the Souths secret attempt to expand slavery.

Don’t Miss: Should Republicans Vote On Super Tuesday

Radical Republicans And Reconstruction

These policies were not severe enough for the Radical Republicans, a faction of the Republican Party that favored a stricter Reconstruction policy. They insisted on a dramatic expansion of the power of the federal government over the states as well as guarantees of black suffrage. The Radicals did consider the Southern states out of the Union. Massachusetts senator Charles Sumner spoke of the former Confederate states as having committed suicide. Congressman Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania went further, describing the seceded states as conquered provinces. Such a mentality would go a long way in justifying the Radicals disregard of the rule of law in their treatment of these states.

President Johnsons Reconstruction plan had been proceeding well by the time Congress convened in late 1865. But Congress refused to seat the representatives from the Southern states even though they had organized governments according to the terms of Lincolns or Johnsons plan. Although Congress had the right to judge the qualifications of its members, this was a sweeping rejection of an entire class of representatives rather than the case-by-case evaluation assumed by the Constitution. When Tennessees Horace Maynard, who had never been anything but scrupulously loyal to the Union, was not seated, it was clear that no Southern representative would be.

What Northerns And Southerns Thought of the Civil War

This article is one of many of our educational resources on Reconstruction.

What Was The Radical Republicans Plan

Republicans need to ‘grow a back bone, stand up to corporate America: Sen. Cruz

The Radical Republicans reconstruction offered all kinds of new opportunities to African Americans, including the vote , property ownership, education, legal rights, and even the possibility of holding political office. By the beginning of 1868, about 700,000 African Americans were registered voters.

Recommended Reading: How Many Seats Do The Republicans Control In The Senate

The National Endowment For The Humanities

Stevens carried the resolutely determined spirit of a fighter with him throughout his life.

Illustration adapted from Matthew Brady photograph / The Granger Collection, New York

In 1813, a young Thaddeus Stevens was attending a small college in Vermont. This was well before the time when good fences made good neighbors. Free-roaming cows often strayed onto campus. Manure piled up. Odors lingered. Resentment among students festered. One spring ;day, Stevens ;and ;a friend borrowed an ax from another students room and killed one of the cows, and then slipped the bloody ;weapon back into the unsuspecting classmates room.;

When the farmer ;complained, the school refused to let the wrongly accused man graduate. Stevens, unable to stomach this injustice, contacted the farmer on his own, fessed up, and ;made arrangements to pay damages. The farmer ;withdrew his complaint, and, within a few years, Stevens paid the farmer back. In gratitude, the farmer sent Stevens a hogshead of cider.

The anecdote demonstrates early on in his life Stevenss basic characterhis rashness, his inconsistencies, his convictions, and his tenacity.

Future president James Buchanan worked with Stevens on a case being tried in York. During a break, Buchanan attempted to persuade the rising attorney to get involved in politicson the side of the Jacksonian Democrats. Stevens declined, as he was still in search of the political party that best matched his beliefs.

Steve Moyer is managing editor of Humanities.

What Are The Four Powers Of The President As Outlined In Article 2

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all

Don’t Miss: What Major Cities Are Run By Republicans

Understanding The Old Confederate Anti

The following paragraph is meant to illustrate the logic of the old Confederates, this is not my stance, this is just an example of the type of justification an anti-Radical Republican like Clymer might have given ,

The Rich Elite Radical Republicans want;Black suffrage;so they can;make African Americans;THE EQUALS of the poor white man . Those newly granted votes will;be used to assert the Republican ideology, to ensure their rule, and to punish the south. With that the Republican elite will rule both the negro and the poor white man, stripping their liberties one-by-one. Their radical reconstruction policy and call for Negro suffrage;isnt a compromise like the three-fifths or the other compromises their social policy is just a thinly veiled;attempt at taking control away from the states and ensuring Republican control of the central government.

So, like it was with states rights and individual liberty being a justification for slavery pre-Civil War, the post-War logic of the Confederates is a little hard to grapple with today.

With that said, even if their logic was valid, doesnt it make the;modern Democratic Party, who had;93% of the black vote under Obama, into the Rich Elite Radical Social Liberal of today?

Even by the old logic of the anti-Radical-Republican of the 1860s, the parties switched.

Reconstruction: A State Divided

Find Louisiana State Museum on Facebook

Find Louisiana State Museum on Twitter

2016 Sunset Report

Introduction Reconstruction I Reconstruction II

The Freedmen’s Bureau

Reproduced from Frank Leslie’s Illustrated Newspaper

The Black Press Louisiana had the first black newspaper in the South, L’Union, and the first black daily in the nation, the New Orleans Tribune. Working along with other groups and institutions, the free black press strove to give voice to and unite the desires of Louisiana African Americans.

L’Union May 12, 1864 Loaned by Gaspar Cusachs

L’Union was founded in 1862 and circulated as a biweekly and triweekly. Published primarily in French, the paper ran a few issues in English beginning in 1863. Dr. Louis Charles Roudanez was L’Union’s primary financier and Paul Trévigne its editor. Both men were prominent leaders in Louisiana’s civil rights movement, and under their direction, the paper primarily spoke for Louisiana’s established community of free people of color, although also for slaves and newly freed blacks. The paper suspended publication on July 19, 1864.

Louis Charles Roudanez c. 1870 Reproduced from R. L. Desdunes, Nos Hommes et Notre Histoire

The Riot in New Orleans Harper’s Weekly This image illustrates the violence in the Mechanics’ Institute during the riot

Carpetbag c. 1870

Hon. John Willis Menard, Colored Representative from Louisiana in the National Congress December 27, 1868 Reproduced from Frank Leslie’s Illustrated Newspaper

Recommended Reading: What Republicans Are Running For President

What Group Opposed Lincolns Plan

The Radical Republicans opposed Lincolns plan because they thought it too lenient toward the South. Radical Republicans believed that Lincolns plan for Reconstruction was not harsh enough because, from their point of view, the South was guilty of starting the war and deserved to be punished as such.

Who Uses Radical Republicans

The Radical Republicans played an important role in US history, and they are widely referenced in formal discussions of the Civil War and Reconstruction.

Contemporary liberal and progressive American politicians who push strongly for reforms and champion racial equality may be compared to the Radical Republicans, despite the irony that historic Democrats variously opposed the empowerment of black Americans.

Alternatively, members of the modern conservative Republican Party who are particularly vehement about their political ideologies may be called Radical Republicans, though their positions may far from resemble their partys historic ones.

Outside of the United States, a Radical Republican Party existed in early 20th-century Spain, and is used in the context of Spanish history as well.

Don’t Miss: Are There More Democrats Or Republicans In Us

What Were Abraham Lincolns Plans For The South

In December 1863 Lincoln announced a general plan for the orderly Reconstruction of the Southern states, promising to recognize the government of any state that pledged to support the Constitution and the Union and to emancipate enslaved persons if it was backed by at least 10 percent of the number of voters in the

Andrew Johnson: Impact And Legacy

What Do the Republicans Actually Stand For?

For the most part, historians view Andrew Johnson as the worst possible person to have served as President at the end of the American Civil War. Because of his gross incompetence in federal office and his incredible miscalculation of the extent of public support for his policies, Johnson is judged as a great failure in making a satisfying and just peace. He is viewed to have been a rigid, dictatorial racist who was unable to compromise or to accept a political reality at odds with his own ideas. Instead of forging a compromise between Radical Republicans and moderates, his actions united the opposition against him. His bullheaded opposition to the Freedmen’s Bureau Bill, the Civil Rights Act of 1866, and the Fourteenth Amendment eliminated all hope of using presidential authority to effect further compromises favorable to his position. In the end, Johnson did more to extend the period of national strife than he did to heal the wounds of war.

Most importantly, Johnson’s strong commitment to obstructing political and civil rights for blacks is principally responsible for the failure of Reconstruction to solve the race problem in the South and perhaps in America as well. Johnson’s decision to support the return of the prewar social and economic systemexcept for slaverycut short any hope of a redistribution of land to the freed people or a more far-reaching reform program in the South.

Don’t Miss: Who Raises Taxes More Democrats Or Republicans

What Did The Radical Republicans Stand For

Radical RepublicansRepublican

The Radical Republicans believed blacks were entitled to the same political rights and opportunities as whites. They also believed that the Confederate leaders should be punished for their roles in the Civil War.

Additionally, what were three policies that the Radical Republicans proposed for reconstruction? On the political front, the Republicans wanted to maintain their wartime agenda, which included support for:

Protective tariffs.

Liberal land policies for settlers.

Federal aid for railroad development.

Thereof, what was the Radical Republicans plan?

The Radical Republicans‘ reconstruction offered all kinds of new opportunities to African Americans, including the vote , property ownership, education, legal rights, and even the possibility of holding political office. By the beginning of 1868, about 700,000 African Americans were registered voters.

Did the radical Republicans favored emancipation?

Radical Republican. Radical Republican, during and after the American Civil War, a member of the Republican Party committed to emancipation of the slaves and later to the equal treatment and enfranchisement of the freed blacks.

Which Republican President Inspired The Teddy Bear

Theodore Roosevelt, a Republican U.S. president from 1901 to 1909, inspired the teddy bear when he refused to shoot a tied-up bear on a hunting trip. The story reached toy maker Morris Michtom, who decided to make stuffed bears as a dedication to Roosevelt. The name comes from Roosevelts nickname, Teddy.

Republican Party, byname Grand Old Party , in the United States, one of the two major political parties, the other being the Democratic Party. During the 19th century the Republican Party stood against the extension of slavery to the countrys new territories and, ultimately, for slaverys complete abolition. During the 20th and 21st centuries the party came to be associated with laissez-fairecapitalism, low taxes, and conservative social policies. The party acquired the acronym GOP, widely understood as Grand Old Party, in the 1870s. The partys official logo, the elephant, is derived from a cartoon by Thomas Nast and also dates from the 1870s.

Recommended Reading: Will Any Republicans Vote To Remove Trump

Or Use Our Power Search Technology To Lookfor More Unique Definitions From Across The Web

What does RADICAL REPUBLICAN mean?

Radical Republican

The Radical Republicans were a faction of American politicians within the Republican Party from about 1854 until the end of Reconstruction in 1877. They called themselves “Radicals” and were opposed during the war by the Moderate Republicans, by the Conservative Republicans, and by the pro-slavery Democratic Party. After the war, the Radicals were opposed by self-styled “conservatives” and “liberals”. Radicals strongly opposed slavery during the war and after the war distrusted ex-Confederates, demanding harsh policies for the former rebels, and emphasizing civil rights and voting rights for freedmen.During the war, Radical Republicans often opposed Lincoln in terms of selection of generals and his efforts to bring states back into the Union. The Radicals passed their own reconstruction plan through Congress in 1864, but Lincoln vetoed it and was putting his own policies in effect when he was assassinated in 1865. Radicals pushed for the uncompensated abolition of slavery, while Lincoln wanted to pay slave owners who were loyal to the union. After the war, the Radicals demanded civil rights for freedmen, such as measures ensuring suffrage.

What Brought Reconstruction To An End

Compromise of 1877: The End of Reconstruction The Compromise of 1876 effectively ended the Reconstruction era. Southern Democrats promises to protect civil and political rights of blacks were not kept, and the end of federal interference in southern affairs led to widespread disenfranchisement of blacks voters.

Read Also: How Many Republicans Voted To Impeach

What Did Radical Republicans In Congress Think About President Johnsons Reconstruction Plan Answer Choices

0 notes

patriotsnet · 3 years ago

Text

Which Four Republicans Voted For Resolution Today

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/which-four-republicans-voted-for-resolution-today/

Which Four Republicans Voted For Resolution Today

Democrats Will Face Difficult Choices As They Work To Transform The Budget Framework Into Detailed Antipoverty And Climate Legislation

[email protected]

WASHINGTON—The Senate passed a early Wednesday, the first step in an arduous process designed to allow Democrats to push through a sweeping package of education, healthcare, climate and other provisions without GOP support.

The party line vote, 50-49, came just before 4 a.m., one day after the Senate passed a roughly $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure package. It is an initial victory for President Biden and congressional Democrats who are seeking to pass as much of their legislative agenda as possible this year, before next year’s midterm elections overtake Capitol Hill.

Senate Democrats “just took a massive step towards restoring the middle class of the 21st century,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said after the vote. “What we’re doing here is not easy. Democrats have labored for months to reach this point. And there are many labors to come. But I can say with absolute certainty that it will be worth doing.”

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said the blueprint was “full of reckless taxing and spending.”

But Democrats, who have slim margins in both chambers, will face difficult choices and negotiations, as they work to transform the budget framework into detailed legislation.

House Passes Resolution Officially Condemning Trump’s Racist Attack On Congresswomen As It Happened

Key adviser tries to deny Trump’s tweets were racist

Trump responds: ‘I don’t have a racist bone in my body’

Maanvi Singh in San Francisco , Tom McCarthy and Joan E Greve in New York

Wed 17 Jul 2019 01.11 BST First published on Tue 16 Jul 2019 13.55 BST

01:11

Here’s a summary to end the day:

Sabrina Siddiqui

Reporting on the House resolution that just passed, Sabrina Siddiqui writes:

The measure, which formally rebuked the president’s comments as “racist”, was approved on a mostly partisan-line vote of 240 to 187.

The vote came days after Trump’s tweets about four newly elected Democratic lawmakers – Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan – sparked a widespread uproar. Ocasio-Cortez, Pressley and Tlaib were all born in the US, while Omar is a naturalized American citizen who arrived in the country at a young age as a Somali refugee.

“Every single member of this institution, Democratic and Republican, should join us in condemning the president’s racist tweets,” the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, said on the House floor.

“To do anything less would be a shocking rejection of our values and a shameful abdication of our oath of office to protect the American people.”

Here’s a video of the debate, as it happened:

All But 5 Republicans Vote To Dismiss Trump Impeachment Trial On Constitutional Grounds

All but five U.S. Senate Republicans voted in favour of an effort to dismiss Donald Trump’s historic second impeachment trial on Tuesday, making clear a conviction of the former president for “incitement of insurrection” after the deadly Capitol siege on Jan. 6 is unlikely.

While the Republicans did not succeed in ending the trial before it began, the test vote made clear that Trump still has enormous sway over his party as he becomes the first former president to be tried for impeachment. Many Republicans have criticized Trump’s role in the attack — before which he told his supporters to “fight like hell” to overturn his defeat — but most of them have rushed to defend him in the trial.

“I think this was indicative of where a lot of people’s heads are,” said South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, after the vote.

Read more: Democrats deliver Trump impeachment article to U.S. Senate

Late Tuesday, the presiding officer at the trial, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., was taken to the hospital for observation after not feeling well at his office, spokesman David Carle said in a statement. The 80-year-old senator was examined by the Capitol’s attending physician, who recommended he be taken to the hospital out of an abundance of caution, he said.

The vote means the trial on Trump’s impeachment will begin as scheduled the week of Feb. 8. The House impeached him Jan. 13, just a week after the deadly insurrection in which five people died.

House Republicans Voted Against Giving Medals To Officers Who Responded To Jan 6 Riot

The House passed a bill Tuesday to award the Congressional Gold Medal to all law enforcement officers who defended the Capitol during the Jan. 6 riot, with 21 Republicans opposing the bill.

Why it matters via the Washington Post:“he vote underscored the still-lingering tensions in Congress amid efforts by some GOP lawmakers to whitewash the events of that day.”

Stay on top of the latest market trends and economic insights with Axios Markets. Subscribe for free

The measure passed the House with a bipartisan vote of 406-21.

Details: The four medals awarded under the bill — one of the highest civilian honors — would be displayed in the Capitol Police and Metropolitan Police headquarters, Smithsonian Institution and the Capitol building.

The bill names the three law enforcement officers who died following the attack, and singles out U.S. Capitol Police officer Eugene Goodman, who lured a mob away from members of Congress.

The resolution recognizes their actions as an example of “the patriotism and the commitment of Capitol Police officers, and those of other law enforcement agencies, to risk their lives in service of our country.”

The Republicans who voted against:

Rep. Thomas Massie

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene

Rep. Andy Harris

Four Tennessee Republicans Vote Against Removing Slavery From The State Constitution

National Post

On the matter of removing ‘slavery’ as punishment from the state’s constitution, four Tennessee senate Republicans took exception.

Members Joey Hensley, Janice Bowling, Brian Kelsey, and Frank Nicely on March 15 voted against a bill put forward by Democrat Sen. Raumesh Akbari that would remove a constitutional clause allowing slavery as punishment for a crime.

“Slavery and involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted , are forever prohibited in this state,” states Article I Section 33 of the Tennessee constitution.

With Akbari’s bill, voters will have the option to remove that section and instead amend the constitution to make clear that slavery and involuntary servitude is banned throughout Tennessee.

A line in the bill further states, at the request of the Department of Correction, that “nothing in this section shall prohibit an inmate from working when the inmate has been duly convicted of a crime”.

Video: Kielburgers to testify at Commons committee

cbc.ca

To make changes to the Tennessee constitution, the bill must pass two general assemblies each in the house and senate, first by a majority, then by two-thirds. Tennesseans will then vote in a ballot measure to ultimately decide whether to ratify the proposed amendment in a gubernatorial election.

Hensley said, “I didn’t think it was necessary because the constitution already says slavery will be forever prohibited.”

‘racist Tweets’: House Passes Resolution Condemning Trump’s Attack On Congresswomen

Senator and presidential candidate Kamala Harris of California says she has also been told, “Go back to where you came from.”

Kamala Harris

I’ve personally been told, “go back to where you came from.” It is vile, ignorant, shallow, and hateful. It has to stop. pic.twitter.com/t1oAD7s5Od

And several other lawmakers have had the same racist trope lobbed at them. HuffPo asked dozens of lawmakers, both Democratic and Republican, whether they’ve ever been told to “go back.”

Nearly every minority lawmaker said yes. Every white lawmaker said no.

“I’ve been told many times to ‘go back to China,’ even though I’m of Japanese descent, because people are prone to stereotypes,” Rep. Mark Takano said. “Asian Americans, among other minority groups, often experience the feeling that they don’t belong in this country.”

“Way, way back when, somebody yelled that. Not lately,” said Sen. Mazie Hirono . “However, the president seems to be resurrecting that.”

Rep. Ruben Gallego remembers hearing the taunt throughout his life, starting when he was a young boy.

“At the age of six, my family and I were in a mall, and these two old ladies next to my family and my three sisters said, ‘Go back to Mexico.’ I think I heard it all the time in high school from every kid who hated me,” he said. “I heard it when I was in the Marine Corps. I heard it when I left the Marine Corps. I heard it in Arizona. I can’t even count the times I’ve heard it.”

23:43

23:14

July 16, 2019

With Some Republicans On Board Us House Democrats Press Forward On Impeachment Vote

6 Min Read

WASHINGTON – With at least five Republicans joining their push to impeach President Donald Trump over the storming of the U.S. Capitol, Democrats in the House of Representatives stood poised for a history-making vote to try to remove the president from office.

With eight days remaining in Trump’s term, the House will vote on Wednesday on an article of impeachment accusing the Republican of inciting insurrection in a speech to his followers last week before a mob of them stormed the Capitol, leaving five dead.

That would trigger a trial in the still Republican-controlled Senate, although it was unclear whether enough time or political appetite remained to expel Trump.

Democrats moved forward on an impeachment vote after a effort to persuade Vice President Mike Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution to remove Trump was rejected by Pence on Tuesday evening.

“I do not believe that such a course of action is in the best interest of our Nation or consistent with our Constitution,” Pence said in a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Despite the letter, the House passed a resolution formally calling on Pence to act. The final vote was 223-205 in favor.

While that was occurring, Trump’s iron grip on his party was showing further signs of slipping as at least four Republicans, including a member of the House leadership, said they would vote for his second impeachment – a prospect no president before Trump has faced.

Related Coverage

Democrats Use Video Of Capitol Attack To Remind Senators Of Purpose Of Impeachment

Senators were brought back to the day of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol when Tuesday’s Senate trial opened with a 13-minute video containing clips from that day, from the president’s exhortation at a rally near the White House that his followers should go to the Capitol to the ensuing attack.

The video included footage of rioters breaking windows and chanting “stop the steal” as they disrupted the process to certify the 2020 presidential election results, falsely believing Trump’s claims that President Joe Biden won due to widespread fraud.

Members of Congress were shown in the video being escorted out. One clip showed the moment a Capitol Police officer shot Ashli Babbitt, the 35-year-old woman who had joined the rioters trying to get into the House chamber.

The clips were followed by Trump’s words on social media, directing the rioters to “go home with love and in peace.”

“Senators, the president was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives on Jan. 13 for doing that. You ask what a high crime and misdemeanor is under our Constitution? That is a high crime and misdemeanor. If that’s not an impeachable offense, then there is no such thing,” said House impeachment prosecutor Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md.

‘Dad, I don’t want to come back’:Rep. Jamie Raskin, in tears at trial, recounts daughter’s fear during Capitol riot

“They don’t need to show you movies to show you that the riot happened here. We will stipulate that it happened, and you know all about it,” he said.

House Votes To Remove Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene From Committee Assignments

Ahead of the vote, Greene spoke on the House floor: “none of us are perfect.”

House removes Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from committee assignments

The House approved a resolution Thursday that removes embattled GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from her assigned committees.

The final vote tally was 230-199 and 11 Republicans voted in support of the resolution: Reps. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, John Katko of New York, Nicole Malliotakis of New York, Fred Upton of Michigan, Carlos Gimenez of Florida, Chris Jacobs of New York, Young Kim of California, Maria Salazar of Florida, Chris Smith of New Jersey and Mario Diaz Balart of Florida.

Greene, a vocal supporter of Trump’s unsubstantiated claims of election fraud, has been condemned by Democrats and many Republicans for embracing numerous conspiracy theories in videos and social media activity before she took office this year.

In posts and videos from 2018 and 2019 reviewed by CNN, Greene appeared to endorse violence against prominent Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and suggested that the Sandy Hook and Parkland shootings were staged “false flag” operations. They have since been taken down.

MORE: House to vote to strip GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of committee roles, Hoyer says

Greene defended herself in a speech ahead of the vote and expressed regret over some of her past remarks — which some viewed as doing too little, too late.

House Votes To Establish Capitol Riot Commission Over Republican Opposition

The House of Representatives voted Wednesday to set up an expert commission to investigate the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol. But a majority of Republicans voted against the commission ? part of a broader effort from the party to distance itself from an attack encouraged by its own leader, then-President Donald Trump.

The bill passed 252 to 175, with 35 Republicans joining Democrats to support the commission in spite of GOP leaders’ opposition.

The bipartisan vote sets up a showdown with the Senate, where Republicans led by Sen. Mitch McConnell may filibuster the bill because the investigation would probably not look great for the Republican Party.

The bill would establish a “National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex,” with five members appointed by Republicans, five by Democrats, and a final report due to the White House and Congress by the end of the year.

The panel’s appointees would have to come from outside of government and have “national recognition and significant depth of experience” in fields like public service, law enforcement, technology and counterterrorism.

The bill was written by House Homeland Security Committee Chair Bennie Thompson and the committee’s top Republican, Rep. John Katko .

Trump, too, has insisted the commission is a sham because it does not deal with unrelated matters.

“There was no issue on his part,” Thompson said. “But, I guess that’s politics.”

Elise Foley contributed reporting.

Republicans Vote Against Honoring Capitol Police For Protecting Congress

House voted 413-12 to award congressional gold medals to all members of Capitol force for their efforts on 6 January

Last modified on Thu 18 Mar 2021 13.26 GMT

A dozen Republicans voted against a resolution honoring US Capitol police for their efforts to protect members of Congress during the insurrection on 6 January.

The House voted 413-12 on Wednesday to award congressional gold medals, Congress’s “highest expression of national appreciation”, to all members of the Capitol police force.

The Republicans who opposed this honor included Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Matt Gaetz of Florida and Thomas Massie of Kentucky. They and other opposing members said they had problems with the text of the legislation.

Massie told reporters he disagreed with the terms “insurrection” and “temple” in the legislation.

The resolution said: “On January 6, 2021, a mob of insurrectionists forced its way into the US Capitol building and congressional office buildings and engaged in acts of vandalism, looting, and violently attacked Capitol police officers.”

It also named the three officers who responded to the attack and died shortly after – Capitol police officers Brian Sicknick and Howard Liebengood and Metropolitan police department officer Jeffrey Smith – and said seven other people died and more than 140 law enforcement officers were injured.

How Any 4 Republicans Could Control Trump’s Impeachment Trial: Analysis

PoliticsTrump impeachmentDonald TrumpSenateSusan Collins

The Senate’s impeachment trial of President Donald Trump on Tuesday made clear how just four—any four—Republican senators could steer the proceedings in whatever direction they please. That includes deciding whether to hear from witnesses.

Last-minute alterations were made to a resolution put forward by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell that will govern the trial’s proceedings only after some Republicans voiced their concerns to leadership.

Under the original text, impeachment managers and the defense would’ve each had 24 hours to make opening remarks over the course of two days, resulting in four straight 12-hour days. It would’ve also excluded the evidence gathered in the House’s investigation from automatically being entered into the record. The revisions resulted in allowing each side three days for remarks and will automatically include the House evidence.

“Senator Collins and others raised concerns about the 24 hours of opening statements in 2 days and the admission of the House transcript in the record,” Annie Clark, a spokesperson for Sen. Susan Collins , told Newsweek in a statement. “Her position has been that the trial should follow the Clinton model as much as possible. She thinks these changes are a significant improvement.”

The modifications preceded House impeachment managers and Trump’s defense team debating the resolution and Democratic amendments to it that ultimately failed.

Tlaib: Trump’s Tweets And Words Part Of ‘racist Xenophobic Playbook’

In more tweets later Tuesday morning, Trump denied that his earlier tweets were racist, saying Congress should instead be taking action on “the filthy language” by the congresswomen.

…..Congresswomen, who I truly believe, based on their actions, hate our Country. Get a list of the HORRIBLE things they have said. Omar is polling at 8%, Cortez at 21%. Nancy Pelosi tried to push them away, but now they are forever wedded to the Democrat Party. See you in 2020!

— Donald J. Trump July 16, 2019

Later, at a Cabinet meeting in the White House, Trump was asked where he thought the congresswomen should go. “It’s up to them,” he said. “Go wherever they want, or they can stay, but they should love our country. They shouldn’t hate our country.”

Asked Monday whether he was concerned that his comments were being called racist, the president said, “It doesn’t concern me, because many people agree with me.”

Here Are The 4 Republicans Who Voted To Condemn Pres Trump’s Tweets

While Tuesday’s vote largely fell along party lines — 235 Democrats voted “Yea” and 187 Republicans voted “Nay” — four Republicans and one independent voted in favor of the resolution.

Save

The House voted 240-187 on Tuesday night to officially condemn racist language from President Donald Trump in a motion that was supported by four House Republicans.

Trump on Sunday directed a series of tweets at Democratic Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, Illhan Omar and Ayanna Pressley, saying the four congresswomen of color should “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”

Ahead of Tuesday’s resolution, different members of Congress, including some Republican lawmakers, criticized the President’s rhetoric and condemned it as racist, but Trump has stood by the attacks, saying, “I don’t have a Racist bone in my body!”

While Tuesday’s vote largely fell along party lines — 235 Democrats voted “Yea” and 187 Republicans voted “Nay” — four Republicans and one independent voted in favor of the resolution.

It Wasnt The First Filibuster Of The Year And It Wont Be The Last

Senate Republicans on Friday killed an effort to create an independent, bipartisan commission to investigate the violent insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. The House last week passed the measure 252-175, with every Democrat and 35 Republicans voting in favor. Friday, just six Senate GOP members joined every Democrat in support of the commission — leaving the Senate six votes shy of the required 60 votes to advance the measure to the Senate floor.

True, Democrats could amend the bill to try to secure more Republican support. But few expect many Republicans to budge. That means the commission idea is probably dead.

Here are four takeaways from the failure to establish the commission.

1. Not every crisis compels Congress to act

Lawmakers create independent commissions to advance their electoral interests. As Jordan Tama argued here at TMC earlier this year, commissions enable lawmakers and party leaders to respond to political pressure for action after a crisis. Commissions can generate bipartisan narratives of what went wrong — allowing partisans to either deflect blame for the events or pin it on others.

Members of Congress want a commission to investigate the Capitol invasion. Here’s when these work.

Empowering a commission to focus on Trump — rather than Democrats — in the run-up to the midterms held little appeal for GOP leaders eager to stay on Trump’s good side and prevent a bipartisan reckoning on what caused the insurrection.

Pelosi Will Decide When To Send Impeachment Article To The Senate

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will decide when to transmit the article to the U.S. Senate, which must either dismiss the charge or hold a trial. At least 67 of the 100 senators are needed for conviction, which would require Trump’s removal from office.

USA TODAY reports Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Wednesday the chamber would take up the issue at its “first regular meeting following receipt of the article from the House.” The Senate is scheduled to return Tuesday, the day before President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration.

“Even if the Senate process were to begin this week and move promptly, no final verdict would be reached until after President Trump had left office,” he said.

Earlier Wednesday, a vote to proceed with the impeachment process — House Resolution 41 — was divided along party lines, with 221 Democrats voting in favor of a resolution: “Providing for consideration of the resolution impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Only Republicans — 203 — voted against the resolution.

Mccarthy: Trump’s Tweets Targeting Congresswomen Are Not Racist

Because she’d been found out of order, Pelosi was barred from making comments on the floor for the rest of the day — but Democrats voted to allow her to keep talking, again along party lines.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. — who’d defended the president’s tweets earlier in the day — chided Democrats for having defied decades-old precedent. “The House just voted to condone this violation of decorum,” he said.

The vote on the resolution proceeded after fiery remarks from Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., who’d marched alongside the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. “Segregationists told us to go back,” he said.

“I know racism when I see it. I know racism when I feel it,” Lewis said. “The world is watching. They are shocked and dismayed because it seems we have lost our way.”

In a closed-door meeting with House Democrats ahead of the proceeding, Pelosi said “these are our sisters” in reference to the four newly elected Democratic lawmakers: Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts.

Pelosi insisted that the resolution was about more than just “The Squad” — the nickname for the four congresswoman.

“The fact is, as offended as we are — and we are offended by what he said about our sisters — he says that about people every day, and they feel as hurt as we do about somebody in our family having this offense against them,” Pelosi said.

The 19 Gop Senators Who Voted For The $1t Infrastructure Bill

Jordain Carney

Nineteen Senate Republicans, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison Mitchell McConnellTom Cotton calls on Biden to ‘destroy every Taliban fighter’ near KabulBiden holds video conference with security team to discuss Afghanistan drawdownTaliban capture Afghan government’s last northern strongholdMORE , voted with all Democrats on Tuesday to pass a roughly $1 trillion infrastructure bill.

The bill still needs to pass the House, but gives President Biden

The passage of the bill comes just before Democrats take up a budget resolution that greenlights their ability to pass a separate $3.5 trillion spending plan, packed with the party’s top priorities, later this year without GOP votes.

No Republicans are expected to support the budget resolution or the subsequent spending package, which is unlikely to get voted on before late September.

Delivered to your inbox midday

These Four Republicans Voted To Condemn Trump’s Racist Tweets

The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday passed a symbolic Democratic-led resolution condemning Trump’s racist Tweets in which directed to a group Congresswomen Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ayanna Presley and Rashida Tlaib. In a Tweet, the President told the Congresswomen to “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime ingested places from which they came”. All Democrats, one Independent and only four Republicans voted in support of the resolution. Who are the four Republicans who joined Democrats? The Code has introduced them here.

Why Some Republicans Voted Against The Antibigotry Resolution

WASHINGTON — The House passed a resolution on Thursday that condemned anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry. The resolution, written by House Democrats, began as an implicit response to comments made by Representative Ilhan Omar, Democrat of Minnesota, that were widely deemed anti-Semitic, but when some Democrats objected to singling her out, the resolution was broadened to condemn other forms of hatred.

Earlier this year, House Republicans unanimously endorsed a resolution that condemned white nationalism and white supremacy after Representative Steve King, Republican of Iowa, asked when the term “white supremacy” had become controversial, capping years of bigoted comments that had gone unpunished.

This time, they were not so united, and some Democrats demanded to know why.

Where’s the outrage over the 23 GOP members who voted NO on a resolution condemning bigotry today?

Oh, there’s none?

Did they get called out, raked over, ambushed in halls and relentlessly asked why not?

No? Okay. Got it.

Here is their answer:

“The frustration on the Republican side was that they watered down the amendment,” Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the Republican leader, said at a news conference on Friday.

The Latest: Democrats Plan Vote On Resolution Against Trump

WASHINGTON — The Latest on President Donald Trump’s racist tweets about four lawmakers of color :

8:35 p.m.

House Democrats plan for a vote this week on a resolution that “strongly condemns President Donald Trump’s racist comments” that four congresswomen of color should return to their native countries.

The measure says Trump’s tweets Sunday “have legitimized and increased fear and hatred of new Americans and people of color.”

The four-page resolution quotes from a 1989 speech by President Ronald Reagan that said America draws its strength “from every country and every corner of the world.” Reagan, a Republican, said that if the U.S. ever closed its doors to immigrants, “our leadership in the world would soon be lost.”

The Democrats’ measure says the House is “committed to keeping America open to those lawfully seeking refuge and asylum.”

House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy says Democrats are playing politics.

___

8:15 p.m.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy says President Donald Trump is not a racist. But he also says four Democratic congresswomen of color who Trump said should return to their native countries should not have to leave the U.S.

The California Republican told reporters on Monday: “This is their country.” Three of the four congresswomen were born in the U.S., and all are Americans.

McCarthy says, “Nobody believes somebody should leave the country. They have a right to give their opinion.”

___

6:40 p.m.

___

5:50 p.m.

___

3:45 p.m.

___

3:05 p.m.

___

No This Will Not Quell The Liberals Thirst For Impeachment

Tuesday’s debate gave liberal Democrats, who are itching to move ahead with impeachment proceedings against Mr. Trump, an opportunity to blow off some steam. Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington, who oversees the House Progressive Caucus and was born in India, was particularly animated. “Yes, I am a proud naturalized citizen born in India, a proud patriot,” she thundered on the House floor. “It’s not the first time I’ve heard, ‘go back to your country,’ but it’s the first time I heard it from the White House!”

But the condemnation resolution is unlikely to serve as a substitute for impeachment. As soon as the vote was over, the Democrats’ leading advocate of impeachment — Representative Al Green of Texas — took to the House floor to call, once again, for Mr. Trump to be impeached.

They Predicted A Trump Coup Attempt Hear What They Say Now

Thirty-five House Republican broke ranks Wednesday evening to support legislation that would establish an independent commission to investigate the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol.

GOP resistance is growing.

Liz Cheney of Wyoming

Tom Rice of South Carolina

Dan Newhouse of Washington

Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington

Peter Meijer of Michigan

John Katko of New York

David Valadao of California

Tom Reed of New York

Don Bacon of Nebraska

Andrew Garbarino of New York

Tony Gonzales of Texas

Dusty Johnson of South Dakota

David Joyce of Ohio

Chris Smith of New Jersey

Van Taylor of Texas

Chris Jacobs of New York

David McKinley of West Virginia

Jeff Fortenberry of Nebraska

Maria Elvira Salazar of Florida

Mariannette Miller-Meeks of Iowa

Senate Adopts Budget That Paves Way For $35t Spending Plan

The chamber adopted on party lines a 92-page framework for the package of climate and social initiatives Democrats hope to enact this fall.

During a floor speech Tuesday morning, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell vowed a fusillade of amendments related to national security, military funding, school reopening, federal funding for abortions and much more. | J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo

08/11/2021 04:58 AM EDT

Link Copied

Senate Democrats adopted a budget measure early Wednesday morning to deliver their next filibuster-proof ticket to passing major legislation against the will of their GOP colleagues.

After more than 14 hours of continuousamendment votes, the chamber adopted on party lines a 92-page framework for Democrats’ $3.5 trillion package of climate and social initiatives, including subsidized child care, expanded Medicare and paid family and medical leave benefits. Once both chambers have approved the budget instructions, it will unlock the reconciliation process, which empowers the majority party to eventually clear the final bill with just 51 votes in the Senate, rather than the usual 60-vote hurdle.

After the 50-49 vote Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer called the move “a massive step towards restoring the middle class” and giving “more Americans the chance to get there.”

The amendment marathon was the Senate’s third this year, after Democrats deployed the reconciliation process to pass Biden’s$1.9 trillion pandemic relief package in March.

Filed Under:

0 notes