Thursday, August 18, 2016

Why Is The DCCC Abandoning Blue-Trending Staten Island To The Republicans Again?


New York's 11th congressional district includes all of Staten Island and the Brooklyn neighborhoods of Bay Ridge, Dyker Heights, Fort Hamilton, Bensonhurst, Bath Beach, and Gravesend. Staten Island residents make up between 70% and 75% of the district's voters. Aside from being New York City's whitest congressional district, it's also the most Italian congressional district in the country. It's a more conservative district that any other in New York City and many people point to it as the Mafia's very own congressional district. That said, Obama still beat Romney there, 110,088 (52%) to 100,811 (47%). And Kirsten Gillibrand won there by a nearly 2 to 1 landslide. When Republican/Mafia Congressman Michael Grimm went to prison, the 2015 special election saw Republican racist Daniel Donovan beat Vincent Gentile 24,797 (58%) to 17,049 (40%). The DCCC basically just gave up on NY-11. They didn't contest it then and they're not contesting it now. They simply ceded it to the GOP, which makes no sense at all. In the more conservative Staten Island part of the district, 34,067 Democrats voted for Hillary and Bernie in the primary while only 23,688 people turned out to vote for Trump, Kasich and Cruz. But the DCCC brain surgeons declared it unwindable. As usual, they're wrong.

The Democrat running for the congressional seat in November is Richard Reichard. The DCCC is basically ignoring his campaign. As of the June 30 FEC reporting deadline he had raised $14,115 compared to incumbent Dan Donovan's $1,570,735. The NRCC is already bolstering Donovan while the DCCC is nowhere to be seen. There's only one way for them to win back the House-- winning districts that have shown a willingness to vote for Democrats in recent years-- like NY-11. But the DCCC hasn't figured that out yet. Reichard is a progressive who favors a public option, removing the Social Security cap, investing in reversing climate change and in stricter gun safety laws. He told us he "wants to change Washington by reducing big money's influence." The DCCC would rather put money into more difficult New York districts where conservatives are running. Romney won both NY-22 and NY-23 and both Democrats, Kim Myers and John Plumb, are on the DCCC's Red-to-Blue list and are being helped in fundraising. UT-04 was won by Romney 68-30% and by McCain 56-42% but the DCCC is backing the right-wing Democrat there as well, Doug Owens. Districts Romney won where the DCCC has endorsed conservaDem candidates while they leave progressives on their own in districts that Obama won have something in common, namely that the "Democrats" running have been endorsed by the Blue Dogs and/or the New Dems (the Republican wing of the Democratic Party). That's how Pelosi-- who, many years ago, used to be a progressive herself-- has shaped the DCCC, which is currently attempting to re-shape the makeup of Congress-- in a very, very bad way.

One of the reasons establishment Democrats aren't doing anything to assist Reichard is because of his outspoken opposition to unfair trade policies that ship American jobs overseas. by forcing American workers to compete with laborers in Third World hellholes where workers make pennies an hour and have no on-job protections. Like most Democrats-- but unlike Obama and the Democratic Establishment's donor base-- Reichard is very concerned with American sovereignty being handed over to unaccountable corporate tribunals where they will be able to overturn laws passed by cities and states on basic environmental legislation, workers' rights rules and other essential regulations and protections that makes America the greatest country on the planet. We asked Riechard to give us a quick explanation for why he opposes the TPP.
Why I Won't Support The TPP
-by Richard Reichard

I don't support The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) in its current form and am skeptical that it would ever be modified enough to merit consideration. Multi-national corporations are its only potential beneficiaries. Although President Obama has unfortunately championed this deal, contrary to popular belief, TPP is another Bush era Frankenstein monster, proposed before Obama took office.

I'm against TPP because it will cost American jobs and weaken worker safety, consumer and environmental protection rules and enforcement. I also oppose it on historical grounds as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) resulted in a net loss of about 1 million U.S. jobs and TPP could result in even greater layoffs and outsourcing.

There is some confusion about which countries are actually TPP participants. China negotiated a relatively recent trade deal unfavorable to the United States and is not currently an agreement party. South Korea also negotiated a relatively recent deal with similar U.S. employment casualties and while not a current TPP participant, has expressed interest in joining.

  The TPP nations are Australia, Brunei (an oil producing country hat considers homosexuality a capital offense, located on the island of Borneo, with fewer people than my congressional district), Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam.  Other Countries expressing interest in being added to the agreement are Colombia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Taiwan and Thailand. The more countries involved, the greater the potential job loss and protection erosion.

While TPP has alleged safeguards protecting some of the aspects of the economic treaty that concern me, most trade regulations have been next to impossible to enforce. Currency manipulation regulations, worker protections, carbon emission benchmarks and clean air and water standards all are flushed down the proverbial toilet under typical trade agreements, which TPP doesn't appear to deviate from. It will make exporting jobs to lower wage nations cheaper and could prevent the U.S. government from negotiating drug prices to reduce medical costs.

I am in total agreement with economist Robert Reich, who refers to TPP as a race to the bottom.
You can read more about Richard's campaign here and contribute to his grassroots race here.

Labels: , , , , , ,


At 2:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Reichard is a progressive who favors a public option, removing the Social Security cap, investing in reversing climate change and in stricter gun safety laws." Well, there's your problem right there.

At 5:30 PM, Anonymous ap215 said...

It's very simple if you're an Establishment candidate & follow the corrupt money trail the New Dems & Blue Dogs will come & help. If you're a Progressive candidate who doesn't listen to them they'll leave you high & dry.

At 6:45 PM, Blogger Eric Stork said...

#1 reason Democrats cannot win here is voter turnout. For several elections, Democrats have the highest number of registered voters as seen on the New York State Board of Elections numbers yet as shown when compared to New York City's Board of Elections Board of Elections numbers for votes, there are fewer Democrats showing up to vote.

Those Democrats that won elections did so because of a number of Blank and Republican voters that voted for them.

Did not help to change the Brooklyn neighborhoods in the district back in 2010, it was said the redistricting added more Democrats but fewer people in the new Brooklyn neighborhoods showed up to vote and still did so with a near even split.

The national Democrats tried to sell a simple message of Republicans are dirty when they should ask why their voters are not showing up, that's the simple answer.


Post a Comment

<< Home