Showing posts with label Jose Serrano. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jose Serrano. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 18, 2018

SCOTUS U.S. v. Department Of Commerce - Privatization Of Citizenship Question On Census For Violations Of Voting Rights Act & Administrative Procedures Act

In short, the U.S. is petitioning to take the issue of putting the citizenship question on the next 2020 Census as a mandamus to stop violations of the Voting Rights Act & Administrative Procedures Act.

It seems, Steve Bannon may have assisted Kris Kobach and Wilbur Ross, under the financial direction of private political interests, through propaganda, to have citizenship on the census, for the purposes of securing electioneering data and, dare I say, the implementation of a national absentee voting ballots scheme. involving real estate.

But hey, what do I know?

I know there are many more SCOTUS Petitions for Certiorari in the pipeline and they are all legally symbiotic.

I also know to put the citizenship question on the census is an act of privatization because policymakers, the Executive Branch, cannot make law, only the Congress makes law.

Happy National Adoption Month: SCOTUS - DHS v. States Children's Trust Funds On Trafficking Tiny Humans - DACA, DAPA Privatization Policies Of Fraud



QUESTION PRESENTED Whether, in an action seeking to set aside agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 701 et seq., a district court may order discovery outside the administrative record to probe the mental processes of the agency decisionmaker—including by compelling the testimony of high-ranking Executive Branch officials —when there is not a strong threshold showing that the decisionmaker disbelieved the objective reasons in the administrative record, irreversibly prejudged the issue, or acted on a legally forbidden basis.

SERRANO: Should political parties and campaign politics ever factor into what is asked of every household in the country on the census? 
ROSS: No political party has asked us to do anything on the census. We have had a request, as everyone is aware, from the Department of Justice, to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. 
SERRANO: * * * I was very disappointed to see yesterday that the Republican Party campaign to reelect the president put out an appalling e-mail specifically noting that the president wants a new citizenship question added to the census * * * . Do you disavow this campaign e-mail? * * *
ROSS: I’m not familiar with the e-mail. I’m not part of the Republican campaign committee. So, I have not seen it. I have heard about it, this morning. We are responding solely to the Department of Justice’s request, not to any campaign request, not to any other political party request. We are listening to stakeholders. Many have written to us. Some have come in to talk with me.

Besides, what the heck is a third party administrator going to do with all that data?

I thought it only fair to report what Tom Perez, DNC Chair is up to when it comes to his activities of securing voter data profiles, strictly for the purposes of monetization, of course.

Hey, at least Tom was open and obvious in the DNC's intentions of selling voter data profiles to private, foreign, third parties.


Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez launched an attack on his own party’s state organizations Saturday with a long and angry email over the future of the party’s most valuable asset — its voter data file.

Just days before an important Tuesday meeting in D.C. on the future of the data operation, Perez sharply criticized a new proposal from state party leaders and singled out prominent state officials by name.

“For some inexplicable reason, this proposal would tear down just about everything about our current data structure, reversing so much of the progress we made over the past decade,” Perez wrote.

The national chairman, describing his own reaction to the state proposal as “disappointed” and “dumbfounded,” accused the president of the Association of State Democratic Committees, Minnesota’s Ken Martin, of undermining the DNC by not keeping other state party officials “in the loop,” prompting withering criticism of Perez from state party leaders.

It‘s the latest fight in a quickly escalating war over the trove of Democratic voter information — a conflict that broke into the open at a gathering of the state parties and the DNC in Puerto Rico late last month. The party’s data are largely owned by the state parties, but a considerable amount of other data being collected by outside groups like labor unions and super PACs could be leveraged to benefit Democratic candidates and the eventual 2020 nominee.


COUNTDOWN TO 2020


The race for 2020 starts now. Stay in the know. Follow our presidential election coverage.

The DNC wants to gather all the data points on voters into a new, massive for-profit database but needs to convince state parties on the idea. The state parties have been wary, accusing the DNC of conducting a power grab that could financially benefit a few elite party figures.

In response to the DNC plan, Martin on Friday circulated a counterproposal designed to better integrate data from outside groups within the existing infrastructure. It was this proposal that prompted Perez’s email.

Perez’s email — with the seemingly innocuous subject line “UPDATE on data” — immediately triggered an uproar Saturday among state party leaders, who held conference calls and communicated with a flurry of emails and texts. The DNC chairman was referred to in a call as “a bull in a china shop,” according to one state party official. Another state party official called him “petulant,” via text message.

The backlash threatens to splinter the state parties and the national committee — technically separate entities — just as Democratic contenders are preparing to launch presidential campaigns.

Perez argued in his Saturday email that “Ken’s new entity...amounts to having State Parties effectively going alone on technology and data.” He threatened to cut off access to campaign tech tools like VoteBuilder, an online organizing platform, if state parties go forward with their plan.

“You would have to find a replacement for VoteBuilder — either building or buying — as the DNC has sole rights to the platform,” he wrote.

“The reality is the state parties own the voter file. At the end of the day, we hope to move forward with the DNC, but if the DNC continues down this path, we’re just not interested in that,” Martin told POLITICO. “It’s clear that the DNC is not interested in any other proposals or in negotiating.”

Of the email, Martin said that “it’s highly disappointing that Tom would make it so personal.”

Party chairs in the early 2020 presidential primary states also criticized Perez for personalizing the dispute.

“I was very disappointed, and I felt we could have continued to have conversations at a better level than the tone of that email, and I find it very unfortunate,” said Ray Buckley, chairman of the New Hampshire Democratic Party. “I think that’s how negotiations are, and for [Perez] to be surprised that there would be alternative suggestions is disappointing.”

Trav Robertson, the South Carolina Democratic Party chairman, said Saturday’s email prompted him to “spit out my sweet tea.”

“His email was wholly inappropriate and wholly in the wrong spirit of our conversation,” he said. “For them to say that Ken Martin and Brad Martin [president of the state party executive directors group] have misled us and have not operated in good faith is just not true. In fact, it’s a lie.”

The fight is likely to deepen the intraparty gridlock on how best to prepare a data operation for the eventual 2020 nominee — a goal both sides share but over which they are in deep disagreement on the means.

Ken Martin added that Perez’s email could imperil future negotiations: “I don’t know how you put the genie back in the bottle at this point after Tom’s email.”

DNC officials see a chance to update their tech and pool their data quickly with cash from liberal donors and Silicon Valley tycoons. Republicans have this capability already — although in practice the Koch brothers-backed outside groups and the Republican National Committee have feuded over sharing their data — which has many Democratic leaders worried about being at a competitive disadvantage in 2020.

“It is also time to take critical steps to modernize our data infrastructure. The other side has already done this, so time is of the essence,” Perez wrote to the state parties. With several state parties staunchly opposed, DNC officials have discussed potentially integrating just some states at first, with the hope of eventually persuading all of them to sign on.


The counterproposal offered by Martin and additional state party officials — most state parties received copies on Friday, with a briefing scheduled for Monday — would largely build on the existing infrastructure utilized by the state parties and data vendor TargetSmart. Proponents argue that the goal of integrating all the progressive world’s data is achievable without creating an entirely new organization.

“TargetSmart has provided key data services to the DNC for more than a decade,” Tom Bonier, TargetSmart’s CEO, told POLITICO. “The fact is that there are no shortcuts in this work. Handing over our data to an outside entity could hurt our candidates in 2020 and put our party at a disadvantage for years to come.”

Although most state parties hadn’t publicly weighed in on the new state party-centric proposal by Saturday morning — many hadn’t even read it yet — Perez’s email caused officials to rally behind Martin, the veteran Minnesota chairman.

The executive director of the Alaska Democratic Party, Jay Parmley, emailed a response directly to Perez telling him he was being “petty.”

“To insinuate that that these individuals haven’t been completely transparent and open with the ASDC membership simply because much of the ASDC membership doesn’t trust what the DNC is ‘peddling’ when it comes to a Data Trust is just wrong,” he wrote in an email obtained by POLITICO.

Parmley, who has served in state party leadership in numerous states, confirmed he authored the email.

“I like Tom, but I think this was really poor judgment. It read like a letter from an 8th grader,” Parmley told POLITICO.

Other state party chairs also supported Martin.

“I think Ken’s doing a good job,” said Troy Price, chairman of the Iowa Democratic Party. “It’s disappointing for a fight like this to become so public. Obviously, our [2020 presidential] caucus is coming up here in 14 months, and that data conversation is very important.” 

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, June 1, 2016

CONYERS Stands For Dignity & Respect For All

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
"North Carolina's House Bill 2 prevents local governments from passing and enforcing additional anti-discrimination laws. This also undermines existing ordinances that protect LGBT Americans, disabled Americans and veterans. I join my colleagues and fellow veterans in urging the Governor of North Carolina to ‪#‎RepealHB2‬ " said Conyers.
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Conyers & Congressional Advocates Announce Creation of Full Employment Caucus

(WASHINGTON) – Today, in response to the ongoing jobs crisis in America, Representatives John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.), Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.), Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), José Serrano (D-N.Y.), and Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) announced the creation of a Congressional Full Employment Caucus. To end the unacceptably high rate of unemployment and underemployment in the United States - and achieve a truly full employment society - more than 24 million jobs need to be created. The Congressional Full Employment Caucus will serve as a platform and working group for Members dedicated to identifying solutions to our current unemployment crisis and advocating for legislative action. Ultimately, the goal of the Caucus is to realize the dream of a society in which every American who wants to work has the right to some form of employment. After the establishment of the Congressional Full Employment Caucus was finalized, the Representatives in attendance issued the following statement:


Congressman John Conyers, Jr. and Congresswoman Frederica Wilson, joined by their colleagues Congressman Charles Rangel and Congresswoman Barbara Lee, announcing the creation of a Congressional Full Employment Caucus.
Congressman John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.): “For far too long, the plight of the unemployed and underemployed in the United States has been - at best - ignored by Congress, or encouraged - at worst - by callous austerity-minded policies. When more than 24 million of our family members, friends, and neighbors are out of work, we cannot allow this to continue or become the new normal in America. It is for this reason that I have come together with a coalition of concerned Representatives from all corners of the country to form the Congressional Full Employment Caucus. Together, we will craft legislative responses to address the jobless crisis - like my ‘Humphrey Hawkins Full Employment and Training Act’ - and serve as advocates, working towards a society in which employment is recognized as a fundamental human right. As Congress shifts its attention to legitimate concerns over gaping income inequality in the United States, we must not forget about the millions of Americans who lack an income to begin with through no fault of their own. Our work with the Congressional Full Employment Caucus will ensure that the unemployment crisis never leaves Congress’s radar until millions of hardworking Americans are able to find work once again.”

Congresswoman Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.): “With nearly 30 million Americans unemployed or underemployed, Congress has a moral obligation to make full employment a reality.  We’ve formed this caucus to fight for a 21st Century New Deal. This means making sure there are no more collapsed bridges, contaminated water, or falling positions in global education rankings.  It also means restoring the dignity of work for millions of people.”

Congressman Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.): "In America, if you work hard and play by the rules, you should have the opportunity to succeed. When thousands of men and women work full time but need food stamps to put food on their tables, when they can't get health benefits, when they can't get paid sick days, then we must do whatever we can to stand up for them. In his State of the Union Address, the President has reminded the country that, with optimism for the future and action on all of our parts, we can expand economic opportunities for everyone in America. I look forward to work with Members of the Full Employment Caucus to advancing the set of concrete, practical proposals he has laid out to help more Americans find work, and more workers find the economic security they deserve."

Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-Calif.): As Congressional leaders, we must focus on long-term strategies that put every American back to work. Our country’s economic recovery will not be complete until we eradicate the chronic unemployment that plagues each and every one of our communities. Collectively, this caucus will work hard to ensure that all Americans are fully employed and set on a sustained path to economic prosperity.

Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-Calif.): “The creation of this Caucus provides a crucial platform for our colleagues in Congress and builds on the great efforts of the Humphrey-Hawkins Full Employment Act of 1977, that I had the honor of working on as a Congressional staffer decades ago. This Caucus will continue that call to justice by working with advocates and job creators, to take an active role in creating the 24 million new jobs needed to end unemployment and underemployment, to reach full employment, and ultimately to grow an economy that works for all and eliminates poverty in America. We all know that the best way to tackle the deficit is full employment, and the best way to lift folks out of poverty is a good paying job. This Caucus will join with other caucuses in Congress, the Out of Poverty Caucus, the Progressive Caucus, and others, to reignite the American dream.”

Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas): “Nearly 1.3 million long-term unemployed workers, including the 64,000 Texas residents, lost their unemployment insurance when benefits expired on December 28. I am proud to be a Member of the Congressional Full Employment Caucus – a Caucus that will work diligently and effectively to find solutions to our current unemployment crisis while advocating for any and all legislative strategies to combat the issue at hand.”

Congressman José Serrano (D-N.Y.): “I was proud to join the Full Employment Caucus, to focus on creating and sustaining good jobs. In too many of our communities – particularly the Hispanic and black communities – unemployment is at levels not seen in the rest of the nation since the Great Depression. We cannot rest until people in all communities have access to good jobs as well as the training and skills they need get them. Our nation is stronger when everyone is employed.”

Congressman Mike Quigley (D-Ill.): “Even as America’s economy is steadily improving, American workers are being left behind. Congress has a responsibility to change that, which is why I’m proud to join this effort and work towards meaningful legislation that will create jobs, grow our economy and strengthen the middle class.”



Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©