Clinton Allies Suppress the Vote in Nevada

[GaryC 7]

The Nation -- On Meet the Press on Sunday, Hillary Clinton said her campaign had nothing to do with a lawsuit--written about by Nation Editor Katrina vanden Heuvel--that threatens to prevent thousands of workers from voting in the Nevada caucus on Saturday.

Back in March, the Nevada Democratic Party agreed to set up caucus locations on the Vegas strip for low-income shift workers, many of them members of the state's influential Culinary Union, who commute long distances to work and wouldn't be able to get home in time to caucus. It was an uncontroversial idea until the Culinary Union endorsed Barack Obama and the Nevada State Education Association, whose top officials support Clinton, sued to shut down the caucus sites. The Clinton camp played dumb until yesterday, when President Clinton came out in favor of the lawsuit.

Clinton's comments drew a heated response from D. Taylor, the head of Nevada's Culinary Union, on MSNBC's Hardball. "He is in support of disenfranchising thousands upon thousands of workers, not even just our members," Taylor said of Clinton. "The teachers union is just being used here. We understand that. This is the Clinton campaign. They tried to disenfranchise students in Iowa. Now they're trying to disenfranchise people here in Nevada, who are union members and people of color and women."

Rank-and-file members of Nevada's teachers union also come out against the lawsuit filed by their leadership. "We never thought our union and Senator Clinton would put politics ahead of what's right for our students, but that's exactly what they're doing," the letter stated. "As teachers, and proud Democrats, we hope they will drop this undemocratic lawsuit and help all Nevadans caucus, no matter which candidate they support."

The lawsuit's opponents make a persuasive point. Creating obstacles to voting is what the GOP does to Democrats, not what Democrats should be doing to other Democrats.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080115...nation/45270622

[no name 1]

Let me get this straight, if I reply here - about the thread's content - it means I have 'an inordanate* amount of interest in you'?

(* I'll leave your misspelling in there, wouldn't want to be accused of misquoting you!)

[mawilson 2,133]

Let me get this straight, if I reply here - about the thread's content - it means I have 'an inordanate* amount of interest in you'?

(* I'll leave your misspelling in there, wouldn't want to be accused of misquoting you!)

Only when you post an inordinate amount of smilies when losing an argument.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

What does the lawsuit say? Does anybody have a link?

[Mags 112]

Let me get this straight, if I reply here - about the thread's content - it means I have 'an inordanate* amount of interest in you'?

(* I'll leave your misspelling in there, wouldn't want to be accused of misquoting you!)

Okay, please leave issues from other threads IN other threads. Thanks.

Edited January 15, 2008 by Mags

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Never mind...I found this... (This really looks bad for Hillary)

Since her loss in Iowa, Senator Hillary Clinton has been an outspoken critic of the caucus system, saying that the limited time allotted for voting disenfranchises too many workers who are on the job during those hours.

It seems in Nevada Clinton has had a change of heart.

Last week the powerful, 60,000 member Culinary Workers Union Local 226 chose to endorse Senator Barack Obama after "fierce lobbying" from the three frontrunners. Two days later, the Nevada State Education Association – with ties to the Clinton campaign in its leadership – filed a lawsuit asking a federal judge to shutdown nine casino caucus at-large sites created to allow both union and non-union shift workers to vote during the workday. (On any given day, it would be difficult for these workers to participate without these caucus sites. It will be even more difficult during the busy Martin Luther King, Jr. weekend.) According to the Washington Post, the system was created last March with input from the presidential campaigns and – as meeting minutes reveal – "several of the parties to the suit were there and approved of the process."

Karen Finney, Director of Communications at the Democratic National Committee, said to me, "The state party submitted their delegate selection plan last May and it was available for public comment…. They also had a thorough review process in the state and informed the campaigns months ago about their plans. A key goal is to ensure the broadest participation by eligible voters. The state party has worked hard to increase the number of caucus locations throughout the state, there are some 520 public locations statewide, and there are more caucus locations than there were polling locations in 2006. The at-large precincts are 9 percent of those locations are open to all shift- workers within a 2.5 mile radius." ......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut?bid=7&pid=270073

[no name 1]

Never mind...I found this... (This really looks bad for Hillary)

Since her loss in Iowa, Senator Hillary Clinton has been an outspoken critic of the caucus system, saying that the limited time allotted for voting disenfranchises too many workers who are on the job during those hours.

It seems in Nevada Clinton has had a change of heart.

Last week the powerful, 60,000 member Culinary Workers Union Local 226 chose to endorse Senator Barack Obama after "fierce lobbying" from the three frontrunners. Two days later, the Nevada State Education Association – with ties to the Clinton campaign in its leadership – filed a lawsuit asking a federal judge to shutdown nine casino caucus at-large sites created to allow both union and non-union shift workers to vote during the workday. (On any given day, it would be difficult for these workers to participate without these caucus sites. It will be even more difficult during the busy Martin Luther King, Jr. weekend.) According to the Washington Post, the system was created last March with input from the presidential campaigns and – as meeting minutes reveal – "several of the parties to the suit were there and approved of the process."

Karen Finney, Director of Communications at the Democratic National Committee, said to me, "The state party submitted their delegate selection plan last May and it was available for public comment…. They also had a thorough review process in the state and informed the campaigns months ago about their plans. A key goal is to ensure the broadest participation by eligible voters. The state party has worked hard to increase the number of caucus locations throughout the state, there are some 520 public locations statewide, and there are more caucus locations than there were polling locations in 2006. The at-large precincts are 9 percent of those locations are open to all shift- workers within a 2.5 mile radius." ......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut?bid=7&pid=270073

The lawsuit argues that the Nevada Democratic Party’s decision, decided late last year, to create at-large precincts inside nine Las Vegas resorts on caucus day violates the state’s election laws and creates a system in which voters at the at-large precincts can elect more delegates than voters at other precincts. The lawsuit employs a complex mathematical formula to show that voters at the other 1,754 precincts would have less influence with their votes.

The at-large precincts are being established because thousands of hotel workers cannot leave work to participate in the midday caucuses in their home precincts. The Nevada State Education Association has said it would not endorse any Democrat, but some of its top officials have endorsed Mrs. Clinton. The association’s deputy executive director, Debbie Cahill, for instance, was a founding member of Senator Clinton’s Nevada Women’s Leadership Council.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The lawsuit argues that the Nevada Democratic Party’s decision, decided late last year, to create at-large precincts inside nine Las Vegas resorts on caucus day violates the state’s election laws and creates a system in which voters at the at-large precincts can elect more delegates than voters at other precincts. The lawsuit employs a complex mathematical formula to show that voters at the other 1,754 precincts would have less influence with their votes.

The at-large precincts are being established because thousands of hotel workers cannot leave work to participate in the midday caucuses in their home precincts. The Nevada State Education Association has said it would not endorse any Democrat, but some of its top officials have endorsed Mrs. Clinton. The association’s deputy executive director, Debbie Cahill, for instance, was a founding member of Senator Clinton’s Nevada Women’s Leadership Council.

I don't know...'complex mathematical formula' sounds like they're trying to talk above the voter's heads. If they can't explain why they filed the lawsuit, then their argument doesn't hold much weight, IMO. It'll be interesting to see how the court rules on it. In any case, the argument to make voting more accessible is a convincing argument. Hillary is making herself look bad....at the very least.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

The Nation -- On Meet the Press on Sunday, Hillary Clinton said her campaign had nothing to do with a lawsuit--written about by Nation Editor Katrina vanden Heuvel--that threatens to prevent thousands of workers from voting in the Nevada caucus on Saturday.

Back in March, the Nevada Democratic Party agreed to set up caucus locations on the Vegas strip for low-income shift workers, many of them members of the state's influential Culinary Union, who commute long distances to work and wouldn't be able to get home in time to caucus. It was an uncontroversial idea until the Culinary Union endorsed Barack Obama and the Nevada State Education Association, whose top officials support Clinton, sued to shut down the caucus sites. The Clinton camp played dumb until yesterday, when President Clinton came out in favor of the lawsuit.

Clinton's comments drew a heated response from D. Taylor, the head of Nevada's Culinary Union, on MSNBC's Hardball. "He is in support of disenfranchising thousands upon thousands of workers, not even just our members," Taylor said of Clinton. "The teachers union is just being used here. We understand that. This is the Clinton campaign. They tried to disenfranchise students in Iowa. Now they're trying to disenfranchise people here in Nevada, who are union members and people of color and women."

Rank-and-file members of Nevada's teachers union also come out against the lawsuit filed by their leadership. "We never thought our union and Senator Clinton would put politics ahead of what's right for our students, but that's exactly what they're doing," the letter stated. "As teachers, and proud Democrats, we hope they will drop this undemocratic lawsuit and help all Nevadans caucus, no matter which candidate they support."

The lawsuit's opponents make a persuasive point. Creating obstacles to voting is what the GOP does to Democrats, not what Democrats should be doing to other Democrats.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080115...nation/45270622

this must be the 'change' she talks about.

[no name 1]

The lawsuit argues that the Nevada Democratic Party’s decision, decided late last year, to create at-large precincts inside nine Las Vegas resorts on caucus day violates the state’s election laws and creates a system in which voters at the at-large precincts can elect more delegates than voters at other precincts. The lawsuit employs a complex mathematical formula to show that voters at the other 1,754 precincts would have less influence with their votes.

The at-large precincts are being established because thousands of hotel workers cannot leave work to participate in the midday caucuses in their home precincts. The Nevada State Education Association has said it would not endorse any Democrat, but some of its top officials have endorsed Mrs. Clinton. The association’s deputy executive director, Debbie Cahill, for instance, was a founding member of Senator Clinton’s Nevada Women’s Leadership Council.

I don't know...'complex mathematical formula' sounds like they're trying to talk above the voter's heads. If they can't explain why they filed the lawsuit, then their argument doesn't hold much weight, IMO. It'll be interesting to see how the court rules on it. In any case, the argument to make voting more accessible is a convincing argument. Hillary is making herself look bad....at the very least.

I disagree. The union says they do not endorse any Democrat. I'm sure every org has people who represent the opposite candidate. Who cares?

The crux of the suit:

The lawsuit argues that the Nevada Democratic Party’s decision, decided late last year, to create at-large precincts inside nine Las Vegas resorts on caucus day violates the state’s election laws and creates a system in which voters at the at-large precincts can elect more delegates than voters at other precincts.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I disagree. The union says they do not endorse any Democrat. I'm sure every org has people who represent the opposite candidate. Who cares?

The crux of the suit:

The lawsuit argues that the Nevada Democratic Party’s decision, decided late last year, to create at-large precincts inside nine Las Vegas resorts on caucus day violates the state’s election laws and creates a system in which voters at the at-large precincts can elect more delegates than voters at other precincts.

Why did the Nevada Democratic Party decide on creating at-large precincts then? In other words, is the lawsuit an afterthought?

[no name 1]

I disagree. The union says they do not endorse any Democrat. I'm sure every org has people who represent the opposite candidate. Who cares?

The crux of the suit:

The lawsuit argues that the Nevada Democratic Party’s decision, decided late last year, to create at-large precincts inside nine Las Vegas resorts on caucus day violates the state’s election laws and creates a system in which voters at the at-large precincts can elect more delegates than voters at other precincts.

Why did the Nevada Democratic Party decide on creating at-large precincts then? In other words, is the lawsuit an afterthought?

Dunno. I need to research it!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I disagree. The union says they do not endorse any Democrat. I'm sure every org has people who represent the opposite candidate. Who cares?

The crux of the suit:

The lawsuit argues that the Nevada Democratic Party’s decision, decided late last year, to create at-large precincts inside nine Las Vegas resorts on caucus day violates the state’s election laws and creates a system in which voters at the at-large precincts can elect more delegates than voters at other precincts.

Why did the Nevada Democratic Party decide on creating at-large precincts then? In other words, is the lawsuit an afterthought?

Dunno. I need to research it!

Here's the crux of the criticism aimed at Hillary. Before the union endorsed Obama, her position was in favor of the at-large precincts, then she changes her position after Obama gets the endorsement of the union. No matter how you dice that...that doesn't look good.

[Ban Hammer 13,349]

The Nation -- On Meet the Press on Sunday, Hillary Clinton said her campaign had nothing to do with a lawsuit--written about by Nation Editor Katrina vanden Heuvel--that threatens to prevent thousands of workers from voting in the Nevada caucus on Saturday.

Back in March, the Nevada Democratic Party agreed to set up caucus locations on the Vegas strip for low-income shift workers, many of them members of the state's influential Culinary Union, who commute long distances to work and wouldn't be able to get home in time to caucus. It was an uncontroversial idea until the Culinary Union endorsed Barack Obama and the Nevada State Education Association, whose top officials support Clinton, sued to shut down the caucus sites. The Clinton camp played dumb until yesterday, when President Clinton came out in favor of the lawsuit.

Clinton's comments drew a heated response from D. Taylor, the head of Nevada's Culinary Union, on MSNBC's Hardball. "He is in support of disenfranchising thousands upon thousands of workers, not even just our members," Taylor said of Clinton. "The teachers union is just being used here. We understand that. This is the Clinton campaign. They tried to disenfranchise students in Iowa. Now they're trying to disenfranchise people here in Nevada, who are union members and people of color and women."

Rank-and-file members of Nevada's teachers union also come out against the lawsuit filed by their leadership. "We never thought our union and Senator Clinton would put politics ahead of what's right for our students, but that's exactly what they're doing," the letter stated. "As teachers, and proud Democrats, we hope they will drop this undemocratic lawsuit and help all Nevadans caucus, no matter which candidate they support."

The lawsuit's opponents make a persuasive point. Creating obstacles to voting is what the GOP does to Democrats, not what Democrats should be doing to other Democrats.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080115...nation/45270622

this must be the 'change' she talks about.

or maybe it's these chickens coming home to roost........

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

The feds, my state, my county, my town and various insurance companies and utilities together have taken all they can take. I have no more to give to Hillary.