The Prancing Elites and Milk Mafia performing at The Order of Butterfly Maidens Mardi Gras Parade in Mobile, Alabama
*I do not own the rights to the music. NO COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT.
No Copyright Infringement intended. I do not own this music.
“Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.”
This video uses copyrighted material in a manmer that does not require approval of the copyright holder. It is a fair use under copyright law*
Around 30-31 states have this “free elections” provision in their state constitutions, usually within their respective bills of rights. They are most often written in the following way: “All elections shall be free and equal, and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage”:
This is not the same as the right to vote, which is usually detailed in a separate portion of a state constitution’s bill of rights (which we already have) as a declaration of who has the right and freedom to register and cast ballots. The right to free and equal elections, on the other hand, usually applies to the right to an election which is conducted without forced compulsion or constraints against voters, candidates or election officials in their participation in elections. In the past, this was more often applied against allegations of bribery, ballot tampering and other unlawful attempts to curtail the choices of voters.
In three of these states (Pennsylvania, Virginia and North Carolina), courts have determined that partisan gerrymandering is a violation of their respective states’ right to free elections (among other state constitutional violations, such as freedom of speech and equal protection), resulting in more proportionate maps being drawn by either their respective legislatures or by court-appointed cartographers.
It’s a shame that Georgia, which has the youngest constitution of the 50 states, does not have a free elections clause which helps to protect our right to free and fair elections. It is not detailed in Article I, Section I (Bill of Rights), nor in Article II, Section I (Method of Voting, Right to Register and Vote), the latter of which at least affirmatively details the right to vote.
The Trumpists who have wailed about how the 2020 election was not fair to them do not have a provision in the state constitution which backs up their claim. Furthermore, the United States Constitution neither positively details the right to vote nor details any right to free elections, and the U.S. Supreme Court in Rucho v. Common Cause has ruled out any future intervention by the federal judiciary in cases regarding partisan gerrymandering, mandating that only state courts could possibly decide such cases.
Meanwhile, the 1868 South Carolina Constitutional Convention, which was arguably predominantly-Black in membership, managed to introduce a free elections clause to the South Carolina State Constitution, where it remains to this day. The crafters of our past state constitutions (namely the 1867-1868 convention) seemed to have missed this, badly.
This is why I hope that Georgia can catch up to these other states in adding this provision to our state constitution, so that we have fairly-drawn district lines and better state constitutional guardrails against voter suppression.
Georgia Public Service Commission election case, arguing that the at-large election method in the state constitution for the Public Service Commission violates the Voting Rights Act. Federal judge just ruled (1/24) against the state’s motion for a summary judgment, in favor of plaintiffs’ request for partial summary judgment. Georgia law holds that candidates for PSC run statewide but must live in their home districts.
It is already well-documented that Republicans and their judicial sycophants like John Roberts despise the Voting Rights Act when it comes to its pre-Shelby federal intervention powers, i.e., U.S. DOJ preclearance of legislative and congressional maps. What is less well-known is how Republicans see the VRA’s insistence on majority-minority representation in redistricting as a tool for packing and cracking districts to minimize Democratic-preference representation and protect Republican incumbents.
I’m not prepared to say what implications could arise if SCOTUS reverses the Northern District of Alabama ruling.
VRA Implications for Georgia PSC
On the PSC issue, if the court rules for the plaintiffs (and the decision survives SCOTUS), Georgia would join Mississippi, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska and New Mexico in holding elections for PSC from voters of individual districts rather than statewide. Alabama, Arizona, Illinois, North Dakota, Oklahoma and South Dakota all hold statewide elections, but seats do not represent districts. All other PSCs in other states are appointed, usually by the governor.
A victory for the plaintiff would likely recommend that Georgia changes either Article IV, Section I of the state constitution and/or O.C.G.A. 46-2-1(a) to clarify how PSC members are elected, either removing any mention of the five PSC districts or removing any mention of statewide election for PSC members. It would also mean the return of Democratic Party representation to the PSC for the first time since 2006, when David Burgess was defeated in his re-election bid. Notably, out of those PSCs which are currently elected by district, only Montana lacks any Democrats among their membership (since 2012).
What may become an issue is if the districts of the PSC, currently based around counties, are subsequently redrawn further for Republicans’ base benefit, even though the current map would likely go 4R-1D anyway (which would be an improvement).
Or is there a further opportunity to redraw this map for VRA compliance? But then would the basis exclusively around multiple counties rather than around equal population get in the way?
District 2 is easily the most competitive district on this map, having voted 51% Trump-46% Biden. The current District 2 is also a minority opportunity district which is 51% minority (30.25% Black, 11.94% Hispanic), anchored between Athens, Macon, Warner Robins and the eastern Metro Atlanta counties.
Richmond County being moved from District 4 to District 2 would make District 2 knife’s-edge, easily flippable for either party depending on the year.
District 5 is not as competitive, having voted 54% Trump-43% Biden, but moving Muscogee County from out of District 1 would make District 5 a little bit more competitive, shifting to 53% Trump-44% Biden.
The idea of having justices represent districts may conflict with the fact that state supreme courts usually take cases from, and deliver interpretations of the law which impact, all areas of their states. This is in contrast to legislatures and commission bodies like PSCs, which enact new policies.
Paint is not protection! That is why safe street design – in the form of new and innovative #protectedbikelanes and #protectedintersections – are becoming the new gold standards to greatly improve safety for bicycle riders of all ages and abilities.
There are MANY new designs out there, some better than others. What are their pluses and minuses? Well, watch the video to find out.
Chapters:
0:00 – Opening Titles
0:10 – If paint is not protection, what is?
0:32 – All those new designs!
0:38 – Green bike lanes
0:57 – Advisory bike lanes
1:21 – Buffered bike lanes
1:57 – Protected bike lanes
3:17 – Cycletracks
3:55 – Bike boxes
4:43 – Turn boxes
5:12 – Bike bays
5:30 – Center left turns
5:45 – Protected intersections
6:12 – Dutch roundabouts
6:24 – Ending
6:44 – Credits
The BikeSafe Program is a 501(c)(3) non-profit at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. Learn more about BikeSafe at https://www.iBikeSafe.org.
If you liked this video, please consider a small donation: kidznc.org/donate
Co-Producer – Euan Kelly
1st Assistant Camera – Shawkat Husseini
Grip – Finn Stewart
Clapper Loader – Maree Prokos
Makeup – Emily Stacey
Stills – Jamie Wdziekonski
Colourist – Ted Deacey
Title drawn by Lushsux
Title design by Jason Galea
In 1944, an American president proposed a sweeping reorganization of American life: a “second Bill of Rights” that recognized not only political rights, but economic rights as well. Franklin Roosevelt’s speech would today be regarded as far outside the political mainstream: but when it was proposed, it was overwhelmingly popular with ordinary Americans. Harvey Kaye, historian of the American left, explains.
Children of the Sea is Studio 4c’s most impressive work in the last decade , but it has a dark history.
Follow me on Twitter for Updates on Videos- https://twitter.com/the_stevem
SUPPORT ME HERE- https://ift.tt/34BbKjv
AND HERE – paypal.me/stevemmmmm
All Sources In the Pinned Comments
#childrenofthesea #studio4c
NOTE: Folks, this is not my office. I did not get Noam Chomsky to come visit me. I had to fly out to Tucson to visit him. Also, this is a BONUS clip from an interview that ran over by 15 minutes. The phone at the end is most likely Chomsky’s staff telling him his next visitors had arrived. He is a very busy man. Thank you for watching!
Enjoy this bonus segment from PRIMO NUTMEG #144 of Noam Chomsky discussing gun control!
Our YouTube channel is being held in indefinite demonetized status. Please support the show for only $1 a month at https://ift.tt/3qhCTDa
Subscribe to PRIMO NUTMEG on YouTube, SoundCloud, and iTunes!
