With Friends Like Vincent

While the wackos in the SC legislature are gleefully making hay out of the lies about Planned Parenthood, we were smacked in the head by a new bill from our own state senator, Vincent Sheheen.  S 1001, titled simply 'though not elegantly, "Abortion," will provide that

NO PERSON, ENTITY, OR ASSOCIATION SHALL OFFER OR ACCEPT MONEY OR ANYTHING OF VALUE FOR AN ABORTED FETUS OR ANY PORTION OF AN ABORTED FETUS; AND TO PROVIDE FOR PENALTIES.

Vincent Sheheen, who ran for governor for the second time against Nikki Haley in 2014, had a reputation for leaving the room rather than vote on abortion bills.  Many Democratic women, including those who worked hard to get him elected, confronted him on his lack of support for women's reproductive choice.  In a meeting I attending in 2014, he told the gathering that he would defend women's right to medical privacy and their right to get the best medical care available.

You might say that S 1001 really isn't an attack on a woman's right to choose to have an abortion.  Vincent comes across as a nice, even a gentle guy (which may be why Nikki was able to slice and dice him -- twice).  And many Democrats come to his defense saying that he is just being true to his Catholic faith.

Let me ask this:  if a Muslim were to propose a bill based on their faith, would Sheheen's defenders step back and make excuses?  This is very much the slippery slope that comes of allowing decisions of state to hinge on religious belief.  In fact, too many of our Christian politicians have been a party to a slew of bills that would set Muslims apart in the practice of their faith, in their right to privacy, in our judicial system.  This is because too many operate on the false assumption that our country's rule of law is actually at one with Christianity.

So, back to S 1001.  It doesn't prohibit abortion (there are quite enough bills, at least fifteen in this session, that would do that).  It merely prohibits accepting money for fetal tissue.  Except for a couple of things.

First of all, there is already a federal law that prohibits profiting from fetal tissue.  However, it is acceptable -- as it is in any business -- to receive reimbursement for the cost of the collection, storage and transportation of fetal tissue.  Once again, our legislators seek to inhibit the right of those who provide abortion services, by creating a different -- more intrusive and costly -- set of rules than they might for other businesses, say, a gun dealer.

Secondly, the bill uses the word "abortion" in its title, and twice in its heading uses "aborted fetus" rather than the more appropriate "fetal tissue."  Dog whistles, anyone?

Finally, since the hoax video that provided the red meat for sleazy pols like Carly Fiorina and Nikki Haley to attack Planned Parenthood, a bill like S 1001, which has absolutely no purpose, further enrages a base which chooses to be uninformed about the reality of Planned Parenthood's work.  The hoped-for result is likely not just organizations opting out of being reimbursed for fetal tissue (as did Planned Parenthood), but an end to the donation of fetal tissue.

And that is where Sheheen has gone beyond anti-abortion into the realm of anti-science.  There are women who decide to have an abortion and ask that the fetal tissue be donated to scientific research; in an unhappy situation, they at least will be contributing to help others.  Important research is being done with fetal stem cells in Alzheimer's Disease and spinal cord injury, and more.   And this SC legislator is joining ranks with liars like Fiorina to enrage the uninformed further.  

Which leaves so many of us asking, "What the hell is with Vincent Sheheen?"  This is not just a matter of a Catholic avoiding a controversial vote.  This is an active attack on the dignity and the privacy of a medical establishment dedicated to the care of women's reproductive health.  Further, this is an attack on established science, in an area where lives can be saved with fetal stem cell research.

Here's what I think.  I think Vincent is running for re-election in 2016.  He may be feeling a little insecure after his gubernatorial loss two years ago.  And he is indeed a conservative in a conservative district.  He may be convinced that he is not conservative enough.  So, run as a Democrat and live like a republican.

I hope that as you read about this bill, you take action to let Senator Sheheen know that his action is an affront to Democratic women, many of whom have worked for him, throughout the state, in his two bids for governor.  We had doubts because of his seeming inability to separate his religious beliefs from his political office, but we took him at his word and supported him.  And in sponsoring this bill, he has failed in his duty.  Tell him he should remove the bill, or he should decline to run as a Democrat.

Ask our party officers to confront Sheheen with this affront to the stated ideals of the Democratic Party, and to the women of South Carolina.

In a year when we stand strong in the battle to defend our legal rights to reproductive freedom, there is no excuse for being silent as a member of our party takes steps to restrict that freedom.  Further, we should have no patience with elected officials who actively seek to restrict scientific discovery, especially in medical research.

I am hoping that there is someone in the 27th District that will primary Sheheen, and that a true and unafraid Democrat will get elected in his stead.

When All Else Fails

The morning after the election, the first person I saw to speak to was my orthopedist's assistant.  As she set up the paraphernalia for the shots I was getting to renew my knees for awhile, I asked her if she had voted Tuesday.

She looked abashed, apologized and said, no, she hadn't.  She was busy, she worked all day....  "If you had voted, would you have voted Democrat or Republican?"  She hedged, saying she really didn't know who was running.  This was probably true, but given my Hillary tote-bag, my guess is she was trying to avoid telling me she would have voted Republican, because that's the way her family has always voted.  Just guessing.

Alexandra Pelosi is a documentary film maker.  She interviews people in malls and parking lots, asking them what they know and what they think about what is going on in politics.  What she does is brilliant in its simplicity.  In September, on Real Time with Bill Maher, she talked about what people didn't know about the upcoming election.  People did not know who their congressman was or who was running in various races.  What they did know was that if they voted they were going to vote "R."  Please go to the above link and watch (around minute 2'30") the interviews.  It is far more informative than anything our Democratic leaders have come up with to explain why they lost last week.

Since November 4th, we have had panels and meetings, interviews and discussions of all sorts, with different kinds of experts trying to explain why the Democrats lost.  What has been missing  -- WHAT HAS BEEN MISSING -- is asking the voters.  I don't think knocking on doors before the election does much to raise the chances of a person voting for a candidate; it seems that they usually agreeably promise to get out and vote for whoever is asking.  But now that the election is over, wouldn't it be a good time to knock on doors, stop people at the mall, have conversations at local meetings?  And this time, wouldn't it be a good idea, instead of telling people why they should vote for a Democrat, maybe it would be a good idea to not just ask them whether they voted and who they voted for, but to ask them what is important to them.

One of the things the Republicans are really good at, is pretending they are your friend.  If you didn't know better, they would really seem to be listening.  I can't get Jim Clyburn or Vincent Sheheen to answer an email, or even snail mail, but Nikki Haley not only signs her letters (typed on very nice stationery) but adds a little personal "Thanks for writing!"  We laugh at Haley and commiserate with state employees forced to answer the phone by telling the caller that "It's a great day in South Carolina!" but isn't it shrewd to even force her employees to present her personal happy face to anyone who calls.  She may not have given a hoot what a visitor had to say, but most of us know that she opened her door and met with anyone who wanted to speak with her (maybe she doesn't any more, but she sure got a lot of publicity when she did).

Our Democratic Party invites us to send money, and occasionally come to meetings and fundraisers, but send an email and ask them to give you a call.  If the Democratic Party doesn't have anybody there that wants to know what I think (and I am very free with my opinion), what about all those Democrats that don't get out to the polls because they just don't think anybody cares?

We Democrats know what is best for you, the voter, and it really pisses us off that you don't think it's as important as we think it is.  Maybe that's what we are doing wrong.  Maybe we need to spend some time, before the next election cycle, asking and listening.  And resisting the temptation to jump in and lecture and explain.

Here's one last thought.  Most of us are tired.  We work hard, we pay our bills, we do our best to be there for our families, and then we try to enjoy some of our free time.  Why would we take time to plow through all the politics -- and politics can be boring, meaningless, or just mean -- when we could be doing something that feels good?  When Barack Obama ran in 2008, he gave us something different, something special.  He really did give us hope and the promise of change.  He reached people that we are no longer reaching.  Our candidates seem to be scrabbling to promise high school graduates technical jobs rather than the opportunity to reach for the moon.  Our opponents are the ones promising the tech jobs.  Maybe we should be working harder to promise the moon.

Running with Wendy

I recently wrote about the dirty dealings in Texas by opponent Greg Abbott and his minions (I use that word reluctantly; it gives minions a bad name).  The dirt that they dug up on Wendy Davis amounts to questions about how long she actually lived in her trailer, whether her husband helped fund her Harvard education, and whether she was a good mother.  If that's not a war on women, I don't know what is.

In fact, Karl Rove did it first in Texas for George W. Bush against Governor Ann Richards when he began a rumor that Richards was a lesbian.  He was able, then, to swing a state that would have re-elected Richards on her successful record as governor.  As Rove himself said,

"Look, I don’t attack people on their weaknesses.  That usually doesn’t get the job done. Voters already perceive weaknesses. You’ve got to go after the other guy’s strengths. That’s how you win."

And that's exactly the game plan against Wendy Davis.  The attacks are on her independence and her intelligence.  Oh, and her parenting.

But, as W. himself said,

Wendy and her daughters are fighting back.  But we need to fight with her.  In my state, where the best woman we can come up with for governor is Nikki Haley, and the best democrat is Vincent Sheheen, we need Wendy Davis far more than she needs us.  But I have done what I rarely do, I have put my money where my mouth is.  I have donated to Wendy's campaign, and I hope you reach way out to Wendy in Texas and do the same.

A groundswell of financial support will do even more than words to prove to men like Greg Abbott and Mitch McConnell that baseless and -- honestly -- stupid attacks on women will not work anymore.

I'm with Wendy.

Nikki and Vincent -- The Same Old Song

It's been four years, but it might as well be yesterday.  Oh, wait, it was yesterday.  South Carolina Nikki Haley is beating Democratic contender and state senator Vincent Sheheen to a pulp, while Sheheen tries to defend himself by proving he's not really a Democrat.

Sheheen is throwing around big hard-to-understand words like "ethics" while Nikki keeps talking about "jobs."  Listen, Vincent, nobody really cares about Nikki's dirty dealings -- these are the people who voted Mark Sanford into office, and then re-elected him and then sent him back to the US House of Representatives.  Don't you get it when you get those blank looks when you talk about "ethics?"  All your talk about ethics reform got nothing but hot air from your friends across this aisle this past legislative season.  What I'm saying is, you should take that as a hint.

Meanwhile, Nikki is the expert at quick, snappy words like "jobs."  She has been selling out South Carolinians for what seems like forever, giving away millions of tax dollars to bribe businesses into town.  Boeing has been her mantra.  And Vincent doesn't seem to be there when it comes to running down the figures.  She's quick to tell you how many jobs she created, but not how many of them were good paying and upwardly mobile.  And why isn't Vincent talking about how much it's cost us in tax dollars per job?  Or why that money wouldn't have been better spent on teachers' salaries?

And as far as the cyberattack on our tax records, Nikki has had no problem turning that into a win.  She apologized (sincerely...) and we all got a year of free credit monitoring.  We got over it; maybe it's time for Sheheen to talk about the other dumb ways Haley is pinching our pennies.

The Medicaid expansion is a primo example.  Except what's sad about that is that when Sheheen brings up Haley's refusal to accept federal money to insure the thousands of uninsured, he twists himself into a pretzel to deny that by promoting this he is backing President Obama.

And Nikki has a blast blasting Vincent for his "hypocrisy on social issues."  What she means of course is that Sheheen doesn't really support gays or women's reproductive rights, but he wants our votes anyway.  Same for unions.  And because he is refusing to take a Democratic stand on these issues, she is able to slam him for hypocrisy.

And in the ultimate irony, our own Jim Clyburn says, "To me, Sheheen is as conservative as anybody else."  If this is the endorsement from one of South Carolina's most influential Democrats, well, I guess Sheheen really doesn't need any enemies.

So what we have is two anti-gay, anti-women, anti-union contenders for the governorship.  One of them knows exactly what we want to hear ("jobs") and the other keeps trying to tell us he's going to deliver something different.

And what I'd like to know is, when are we going to get a Democrat to run for governor? 

  

So You Say You Want a Revolution...

I have been getting emails from the South Carolina Democratic Party asking for my input via questionnaire, sending me the message that they want to change.  We can do it!

Well, I know they are sincere, and yes the words sound right, but I am skeptical.  Looking back on this last embarrassment of an election season, I would like to put forth a few ideas of my own.

First of all, we need to do something about the rotten primary system in this state.  The rot gets worse every election season.  The worms are in the voting system, and we can argue from here to tomorrow whether or not Alvin Greene really was nominated legitimately or not.  Fact is, we repeatedly allow people to get nominated who do not at all represent the ideals of the democratic party.

I believe that the easiest way to avoid the process called raiding is to have closed primaries.  Yes, democrats choose democratic nominees and republicans choose republican nominees.  Is that really a bad thing?  It is, after all a primary election, which purpose is to choose the best party affiliated nominees.  No, it does not give a person the freedom to go into a voting booth and choose the candidate most likely to be a laughingstock of the opposing party, which I have actually heard people admit to doing.  If you want the most honest primary possible, this is the way to do it.

Next most important move is going to be for the South Carolina Democratic Party to post, publish, advertise, disseminate, information regarding all democratic primary candidates.  It would not have taken volumes of information on candidates Vic Rawl and Alvin Greene to change the results of that primary, that is, if the primary itself was not corrupted.  If, as some say, the voters just gave it their best shot, which apparently was ABC order, we need to make their best shot a lot more informed.

Finally, after the primary is all said and done, the South Carolina Democratic Party needs to espouse democratic ideals.  We need to stop putting forth candidates that are afraid to say that businesses and the wealthy need to pay a reasonable share of taxes, and to have the data that proves that massive tax cuts for businesses neither considerably increase the number of jobs nor the quality of employment opportunities.  We need to be willing to prove that taxes do good stuff, that government jobs improve the standard of living of South Carolinians.  That good schools and libraries are a better idea than more jails.  That privatizing has cost the taxpayer more for less service.  That businesses need to act with responsibility, and their primary responsibility is to be a member of the community, and not merely to their bottom line.

And our good candidates need to unite; they need to pool resources and get in front of the people of South Carolina, with a united message, and they need to support each other.

In this last shameful election, we had good people who ran because the primary system didn't work, and they were good democrats who were abandoned by the South Carolina Democratic Party.  This is why we lost.  Because we were unable to think our way around this problem.  We could not come forward and support someone like, say, Tom Clements because he was running as a Green Party candidate.  And we couldn't have, say, Vincent Sheheen, another good candidate, form an alliance with this other good candidate.

So here we are, with Nikki Haley and Jim Demint.  Who are not afraid to do whatever it takes to convince voters that they are where the power lies.