US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1407

On November 06 2014 10:29 JonnyBNoHo wrote:

Interesting! I never heard that before, thanks. I imagine that the reporting played a role in the politics too though. Hearing that crime has gone up, even if it hasn't really, could still illicit a 'do something about it already!' response from the public.

On November 06 2014 08:44 farvacola wrote:
I would love to see some Republicans get behind student debt reform. I don't see that as very likely though.

On November 06 2014 11:13 IgnE wrote:


We need a total debt amnesty program for federally owned student debts. Jonny is nuts. Student debt is killing an entire generation's ability to accumulate any wealth. People can't buy homes or get equity in other ways. You already have an aging baby boomer generation with no money saved for retirement, and now we have a majority of students underneath debts from the get-go. It's ludicrous.

When historians look back at the movement to end the war on drugs, they might very well point to the 2014 election as the moment when it all got real.

With marijuana legalization measures passing in Oregon, Alaska and Washington, D.C., and with groundbreaking criminal justice reforms passing in California and New Jersey, there's no longer any denying that drug policy reform is a mainstream -- and quite urgent -- political demand.

These wins will boost efforts already underway in states such as California, Massachusetts, Maine, Nevada and Arizona to end marijuana prohibition in 2016, as well as efforts in Congress and around the country to scale back the disastrous policies of mass incarceration.

And speaking of 2016, yesterday's results now mean that Presidential candidates and other prominent candidates for public office will have no choice but to take positions on these issues, which could prove to be another tipping point in national politics. While some major politicians have yet to evolve on marijuana legalization and drug policy reform, that's likely to change in the coming months and years, as drug war proponents start to pay a heftier price at the polls for their cluelessness.

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — Sen. Rand Paul and Kentucky Republicans are exploring the possibility of turning the state’s presidential primary into a caucus instead — a move that could allow him to run for both his Senate seat and president in 2016.

The preliminary discussions have begun in the wake of Kentucky Democrats retaining control of the statehouse in Tuesday’s elections. Democratic leaders of that chamber have already vowed not to change the law, hoping to force Paul to abandon his Senate seat in order to pursue the White House.

The law, as currently stated, says “no candidate’s name shall appear on any voting machine or absentee ballot more than once,” with the exception of certain special election scenarios.

So as a likely presidential candidate who also wants to run for a second Senate term, Paul is now exploring how to get around that restriction.

One new idea under consideration is to change Kentucky’s May primary into a caucus system instead. Since most caucuses do not vote by paper ballot, Paul could theoretically avoid that restriction in the law.

On Tuesday night, the man whom many political observers see as a front-runner in the 2018 race for Oregon governor, State Treasurer Ted Wheeler, suffered a setback.

Wheeler, a Democrat, wasn't on the ballot. But he wrote Measure 86, which would have allowed lawmakers to use the state's bonding authority to finance an endowment for college scholarships. Wheeler grabbed hold of the Legislature's chronic failure to provide funding for higher education and decided to make it a campaign issue.


As state treasurer, the post he's held since 2010, Wheeler does not get many opportunities to make news. He acts as the state's banker and plays a key role in investing state pension funds. Neither of those functions generates much passion among voters.


Increasing Oregon's anemic level of financial aid, however, is the kind of issue that had the potential to help Wheeler distinguish himself from other potential Democratic candidates for governor, such as Secretary of State Kate Brown, Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian and House Speaker Tina Kotek (D-Portland).


The 2013 Legislature referred Measure 86 to the ballot, so Wheeler did not have to gather signatures. Virtually every newspaper in the state, including WW, endorsed the measure, and there was no opposition campaign.


Yet as of the most recent count, Wheeler's measure is getting creamed, 59 percent to 41 percent.

Wheeler says going into last night he expected voters to reject the measure but he did not expect such a large margin of defeat.

"I was surprised at how significantly it lost," he says.


Wheeler says that in pre-election conversations around the state, he heard a variety of concerns: the measure seemed complicated; its ballot title included the word 'indebtedness,' a red flag; and the measure amended the Oregon constitution, which makers voters nervous. "If people weren't sure, it was easier to vote no," Wheeler says.

On November 06 2014 11:13 IgnE wrote:


We need a total debt amnesty program for federally owned student debts. Jonny is nuts. Student debt is killing an entire generation's ability to accumulate any wealth. People can't buy homes or get equity in other ways. You already have an aging baby boomer generation with no money saved for retirement, and now we have a majority of students underneath debts from the get-go. It's ludicrous.

On November 06 2014 12:37 Nyxisto wrote:
The last time we talked about this we kind of got stuck at college sport and it turned out to actually produce money and I still don't really know why American colleges are so terribly expensive. Where does all the money go?

On November 06 2014 12:35 JonnyBNoHo wrote:

One of the major contributors to growing inequality in this country is the growing gap between those with college degrees and those without. But we need to give those with college degrees an even better deal?

I don't have a problem with states spending more on higher ed, or encouraging people to save more but there's no way I'm getting behind the current 'OMG debt' fetish.

On November 06 2014 12:53 IgnE wrote:


Yes we need to give them a better deal. Other modern nations educate their citizens for much lower prices (or even for free). Job prospects for college grads are declining since the boom years of the 00's and just because there are no jobs left anymore for people without a college degree doesn't mean that we should ignore the trillion dollar debt of students. You can't save more when you are saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in debt that continues to grow at high interest rates right out of college. You've brought your projections here before, and no one denies that it's better to have a degree than not have one, but the shitty situation that even the degree-holders are in is a serious problem.

On November 06 2014 13:02 JonnyBNoHo wrote:

On average, degree holders in the US saddled with trillions in student debt still get a better deal than those who went to college for free in Euroland.

But yeah, best deal in the OECD just isn't good enough. Such tragic.

Keep in mind that 'for free' isn't free. They pay for their education in higher taxes, the burden of which hits their middle class pretty hard.

On November 06 2014 12:37 Nyxisto wrote:
The last time we talked about this we kind of got stuck at college sport and it turned out to actually produce money and I still don't really know why American colleges are so terribly expensive. Where does all the money go?

On November 06 2014 13:14 Nyxisto wrote:

I could basically get terribly sick, be in terrible financial trouble, have all kinds of bad stuff happening, but I'll never have to end up in the street and my kids would always be able to get a good education for free. If this results in me paying some more taxes please shut up and take my money

On November 06 2014 13:30 JonnyBNoHo wrote:

Your kids could still go to college here. What's the difference? Is sending money to the government (taxes) really that different from sending money to the government (loan repayment)?

On November 06 2014 13:30 JonnyBNoHo wrote:

Your kids could still go to college here. What's the difference? Is sending money to the government (taxes) really that different from sending money to the government (loan repayment)?

On November 06 2014 13:27 Sermokala wrote:

Ironically the same money that college football brings in tends to go right back into making the college football program more and more competitive. The incredible costs for stadiums, training facilities and the new hot thing coaches salery just keeps going up and up. One of the current powerhouse teams is Oreagon, just google the story on their obscene facilities.